Ultrasound evaluation of metabolic syndrome patients with hepatosteatosis

Abstract

Objective: The exact incidence of hepatosteatosis in pa­tients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) is unknown; also there is no valid, simple and inexpensive method to evaluate and follow-up for patients with MetS. In our study, we aimed to demonstrate the frequency of hepatosteatosis, and wheth­er demonstrate presence and degree of steatosis using liver ultrasonography may provide additional benefit for evaluat­ing and following-up in MetS patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Methods: One hundred and twelve patients with MetS were included to the study. Patients divided into three groups; con­trol group (n= 36) consisted of patients without hepatosteato­sis, group 1 (n=43) consisted of patients with grade 1 hep­atosteatosis. Finally, group 2 (n= 33) consisted of patients with grade 2 hepatosteatosis. The relationship between the presence and degree of the hepatosteatosis and MetS pa­rameters were analyzed. Results: The incidence of hepatosteatosis was found 69.4% in patients with MetS. There were significantly differences in HOMA-IR, AST, ALT and GGT levels among control group and group 1 (p

Keywords

• Fatty Liver, metabolic syndrome X, ultrasonog­raphy

Hepatosteatozu olan metabolik sendromlu hastaların ultrasonografi ile değerlendirilmesi

Öz

Amaç: Metabolik sendrom (MetS)\'lu hastalarda hepatos­teatoz sıklığı tam olarak bilinmemektedir, ayrıca MetS\'lu hastaların izleminde ve değerlendirilmesinde kabul gör­müş etkin, basit ve ucuz bir yöntem yoktur. Çalışmamız­da, MetS\'lu hastalarda hepatosteatoz sıklığını ve karaci­ğer ultrasonografi (USG)\'si ile saptanmış steatoz varlığı ve derecesinin MetS\'lu hastaların değerlendirilmesinde ek yarar sağlayıp sağlayamayacağını ortaya koymayı amaçladık. Yöntemler: Yüz on iki MetS\'lu hasta bu çalışmaya dâhil edildi. Hastalar karaciğer USG\'sine göre; steatozu olma­yan (kontrol, n=36), grade I steatozu olan (Grup 1, n=43), ve grade II steatozu olan (Grup 2, n=33) 3 gruba ayrıldı. Hepatosteatoz varlığı ve derecesi ile MetS parametreleri arasındaki ilişki bakıldı. Bulgular: Çalışmamızda MetS\'lu hastalarda hepatostea­toz sıklığı %69,94 olarak saptandı. Kontrol grubu ve grup 1 arasında açlık insülini, HOMA-IR, AST, ALT ve GGT farklıydı (hepsi için p

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yağlı Karaciğer, metabolik sendrom X; ultrasonografi

Kaynakça

1. Arslan M. [Metabolic Syndrome: Diagnosis, pathogen- esis, diagnostic criteria and components]. Türkiye Klinikleri J Int Med Sci 2006;2:1-7.
2. Karşıdağ K. [Management Principles of Metabolic Syn- drome]. Türkiye Klinikleri J-Endocrin-Special Topics 2011;4:62-66.
3. Amasyalı E, Kılıçlı F, Acıbucu F, et al. [Association be- tween nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and hs-CRP in patients with metabolic syndrome]. Cumhuriyet Tıp Derg 2010;32:26-33.
4. Shi HB, Fu JF, Liang L, Wang et al. Prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and metabolic syn- drome in obese children. Zhonghua Er Ke Za Zhi 2009;47:114-118.
5. Alberti KG, Zimmet PZ. Definition, diagnosis and clas- sification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mel- litus provisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabet Med 1998;15:539-553.
6. Friedewald WT, Levy RI, Fredrickson DS. Estimation of the concentration of low-density lipoprotein choles- terol in plasma, without use of the preparative ultra- centrifuge. Clin Chem 1972;18:499-502.
7. Ford ES, Giles WH, Dietz WH. Prevalence of the meta- bolic syndrome among US adults: findings from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Sur- vey. JAMA 2002;287:356-359.
8. Onat A, Sansoy V. [Metabolic Syndrome, Major Cul- prit of Coronary Disease Among Turks: Its Prevalence and Impact on Coronary Risk]. Türk Kardiyol Dern Arş 2002;30:8-15.

9. Kozan O, Oguz A, Abaci A, et al. Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome among Turkish adults. Eur J Clin Nutr 2007;61:548-553.
10. Velligan DI, Castillo D, Lopez L, et al. A Case Control Study of the Implementation of Change Model Ver- sus Passive Dissemination of Practice Guidelines for Compliance in Monitoring for Metabolic Syndrome. Community Ment Health J 2012;doi:10.1007/s10597- 011-9472-z.
11. Levenson H, Greensite F, Hoefs J, et al. Fatty infil- tration of the liver: quantification with phase-contrast MR imaging at 1.5 T vs biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991;156:307-312.
12. Pilleul F, Chave G, Dumortier J, et al. Fatty infiltration of the liver. Detection and grading using dual T1 gradi- ent echo sequences on clinical MR system. Gastroen- terol Clin Biol 2005;29:1143-1147.
13. Kotronen A, Westerbacka J, Bergholm R, et al. Liv- er fat in the metabolic syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007;92:3490-3497.
14. Palmentieri B, de Sio I, La Mura V, et al. The role of bright liver echo pattern on ultrasound B-mode exami- nation in the diagnosis of liver steatosis. Dig Liver Dis 2006;38:485-489.
15. Hamaguchi M, Kojima T, Takeda N, et al. The meta- bolic syndrome as a predictor of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Ann Intern Med 2005;143:722-728.
16. Hamaguchi M, Kojima T, Itoh Y, et al. The severity of ultrasonographic findings in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease reflects the metabolic syndrome and visceral fat accumulation. Am J Gastroenterol 2007;102:2708- 2715.
17. Dixon JB, Bhathal PS, O’Brien PE. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: predictors of nonalcoholic steatohepati- tis and liver fibrosis in the severely obese. Gastroen- terology 2001;121:91-100.
18. Chitturi S, Abeygunasekera S, Farrell GC, et al. NASH and insulin resistance: Insulin hypersecretion and specific association with the insulin resistance syn- drome. Hepatology 2002;35:373-379.
19. Rogowski O, Shapira I, Bassat OK, et al. Waist circum- ference as the predominant contributor to the micro- inflammatory response in the metabolic syndrome: a cross sectional study. J Inflamm (Lond) 2010;7:35.
20. Steene-Johannessen J, Kolle E, Reseland JE, et al. Waist circumference is related to low-grade inflamma- tion in youth. Int J Pediatr Obes 2010;5:313-319.