4.5 Article

Effect of a hypocaloric diet in transaminases in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and obese patients, relation with insulin resistance

期刊

DIABETES RESEARCH AND CLINICAL PRACTICE
卷 79, 期 1, 页码 74-78

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2007.07.015

关键词

insulin resistance; hypocaloric diet; nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; obesity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of our study was to examine the changes in hypertransaminasemia after weight reduction in obese patients with and without nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and the relation with insulin resistance. Research methods: A population of 142 obesity nondiabetic was treated with a hypocaloric diet (1520 kcal) during 3 months. Patients were classified as group I (control, n = 112) when serum (alanine aminotransferase) ALT activity was normal or group II (NAFLD, n = 30) when serum ALT activity was greater than the upper limit of normal reference laboratory (>= 43 UI/L). Results: In control group, body mass index (BMI) (35.3 +/- 5.6 vs. 33.5 +/- 5.5: p < 0.05), weight (89.6 +/- 17.2 kg vs. 85.6 +/- 16.5 kg: p < 0.05) and insulin (15 +/- 7.9 mUI/L vs. 13.1 +/- 7.4 mUI/L: p < 0.05) levels decreased. In NAFLD group, BMI (37.1 +/- 4.2 vs. 35.1 +/- 4.6: p < 0.05), weight (101 +/- 22 kg vs. 96.4 +/- 11.6 kg: p < 0.05), insulin (26.8 +/- 8.9 mUI/L vs. 12.7 +/- 8.4 mUI/L: p < 0.05) and HOMA. (3.1 +/- 1.6 vs. 1.9 +/- 1.7: p < 0.05) decreased. Liver function improved in both groups (ALT; group 1 19.9 +/- 4.6 UI/L vs. 18.3 +/- 3.9 UI/L: p < 0.05 and group II 37.8 +/- 4.2 UI/L vs. 27.1 +/- 7.8 UL/L: p < 0.05), (aspartate aminotransferase activity, AST) group 122.1 +/- 8.2 UI/L vs. 19.9 +/- 7.1 UL/L: p < 0.05 and group 11 73.3 +/- 11.3 UI/L vs. 38.1 +/- 11.6 UI/L: p < 0.05). Conclusion: We showed that weight reduction secondary to a hypocaloric diet were associated with improvement in hypertransaminasemia and insulin resistance in NAFLD patients. (c) 2007 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据