RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Hyperprolactinemia has negative impacts on metabolism and musculoskeletal health. In this study, individuals with active prolactinoma were evaluated for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and musculoskeletal health, which are underemphasized in the literature. METHODS: Twelve active prolactinoma patients and twelve healthy controls matched by age, gender, and BMI were included. Magnetic resonance imaging-proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) was used to evaluate hepatic steatosis and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) to evaluate liver stiffness measurement (LSM). Abdominal muscle mass, and vertebral MRI-PDFF was also evaluated with MRI. Body compositions were evaluated by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). The skeletal muscle quality (SMQ) was classified as normal, low and weak by using "handgrip strength/appendicular skeletal muscle mass (HGS/ASM)" ratio based on the cut-off values previously stated in the literature. RESULTS: Prolactin, HbA1c and CRP levels were higher in prolactinoma patients (p<0.001, p=0.033 and p=0.035, respectively). The median MRI-PDFF and MRE-LSM were 3.0% (2.01-15.20) and 2.22 kPa (2.0-2.5) in the prolactinoma group and 2.5% (1.65-10.00) and 2.19 kPa (1.92-2.54) in the control group, respectively and similiar between groups. In prolactinoma patients, liver MRI-PDFF showed a positive and strong correlation with the duration of disease and traditional risk factors for NAFLD. Total, vertebral and pelvic bone mineral density was similar between groups, while vertebral MRI-PDFF tended to be higher in prolactinoma patients (p=0.075). Muscle mass and strength parameters were similar between groups, but HGS/ASM tended to be higher in prolactinoma patients (p=0.057). Muscle mass was low in 33.3% of prolactinoma patients and 66.6 of controls. According to SMQ, all prolactinoma patients had normal SMQ, whereas 66.6% of the controls had normal SMQ. CONCLUSION: Prolactinoma patients demonstrated similar liver MRI-PDFF and MRE-LSM to controls despite their impaired metabolic profile and lower gonadal hormone levels. Hyperprolactinemia may improve muscle quality in prolactinoma patients despite hypogonadism.
Assuntos
Absorciometria de Fóton , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Músculo Esquelético , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica , Neoplasias Hipofisárias , Prolactinoma , Humanos , Projetos Piloto , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/diagnóstico por imagem , Hepatopatia Gordurosa não Alcoólica/fisiopatologia , Masculino , Feminino , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Músculo Esquelético/diagnóstico por imagem , Músculo Esquelético/fisiopatologia , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Prolactinoma/diagnóstico por imagem , Prolactinoma/fisiopatologia , Prolactinoma/complicações , Neoplasias Hipofisárias/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Hipofisárias/complicações , Neoplasias Hipofisárias/fisiopatologia , Técnicas de Imagem por Elasticidade , Força da Mão , Fígado/diagnóstico por imagem , Fígado/patologia , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Densidade Óssea , Prolactina/sangue , Composição CorporalRESUMO
PURPOSE: In patients with acromegaly, the long-term presence of elevated GH and IGF-1 levels is associated with an unfavorable cardiovascular risk profile. We aimed to assess the relationship of four-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiographic (4DSTE) measurements with growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) levels and the Framingham Cardiovascular Risk Score (FRS) in patients with acromegaly. METHODS: A single-center, cross-sectional study was conducted. The study included 40 acromegaly and 32 age- and gender-matched controls. Anthropometric, biochemical, and echocardiographic assessments were performed. GDF-15 levels were measured using ELISA. RESULTS: In the controlled acromegaly group, global longitudinal (GLS), circumferential (GCS), area (GAS), and radial (GRS) strain measurements identified by 4DSTE were lower than those of the controls (p < 0.05). Moreover, strain parameters were lower in active acromegaly patients than in controls, but the difference was not statistically significant. The GLS was negatively correlated with age, the estimated disease duration, and FRS. Serum GDF-15 levels showed no significant difference between the acromegaly and control groups. In patients with acromegaly, serum GDF-15 levels were positively correlated with age, waist-to-hip ratio, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, FRS, fasting plasma glucose, and HbA1c, but not with strain parameters. The multiple regression analysis revealed that FRS was an independent factor associated with serum GDF-15 levels in patients with acromegaly and the overall cohort (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that while LVEF was within normal limits, global strain parameters (GLS, GCS, GAS, and GRS) measured by using a novel imaging technique, 4DSTE, were lower in patients with acromegaly, suggesting the presence of subclinical systolic dysfunction in patients with acromegaly. GDF-15 can be a potential predictor of cardiovascular risk in patients with acromegaly.