Relationship between altered postprandial lipemia and insulin resistance in normolipidemic and normoglucose tolerant obese patients

Citation
B. Guerci et al., Relationship between altered postprandial lipemia and insulin resistance in normolipidemic and normoglucose tolerant obese patients, INT J OBES, 24(4), 2000, pp. 468-478
Citations number
57
Categorie Soggetti
Endocrynology, Metabolism & Nutrition","Endocrinology, Nutrition & Metabolism
Journal title
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY
ISSN journal
03070565 → ACNP
Volume
24
Issue
4
Year of publication
2000
Pages
468 - 478
Database
ISI
SICI code
0307-0565(200004)24:4<468:RBAPLA>2.0.ZU;2-C
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although there are changes in the postprandial lipid responses o f obese patients, these are closely associated with high fasting triglyceri des (TG). This study of 17 normotriglyceridemic, normglucose-tolerant andro id obese subjects (body mass index, BMI = 34.3 +/- 3.1 kg/m(2)) and 33 norm al-weight controls (BMI = 21.8 +/- 1.6 kg/m(2)) was done to examine their p ostprandial responses to an oral fat loading test containing retinol (890 c alories, 85% fat) and to evaluate the possible association between clinical and biological features of obesity and/or insulin resistance and postprand ial lipemia. SUBJECTS AND MEASUREMENTS: Blood samples were taken before giving the fat l oad and at 2,3,4,5,6 and 8 h after it. Insulin sensitivity was assessed usi ng HOMA, and TG and retinyl palmitate (RP) in the plasma, chylomicrons and non-chylomicron fractions were measured each time. RESULTS: The areas under the curves (AUC) of chylomicron TG for the obese a nd controls were not different, indicating adequate lipolytic activity. By contrast, the AUC for non-chylomicron TG was significantly greater in the o bese than in the controls (512 +/- 135 vs 429 +/- 141 mmol/l min, P < 0.01) . In addition, the AUC for RP in this same fraction was significantly lower in the obese than in the controls (103 +/- 55 vs 157 +/- 88 mg/l min, P < 0.05), suggesting that the TG from endogenous lipoproteins accounted for mo st of the increase in TG in the non chylomicron fraction. Parameters relate d to obesity showed no relationship with these postprandial abnormalities, whereas HOMA, which discriminated between the groups, partly explained (r(2 ) = 23%, P < 0.01) the significant increase in non-chylomicron TG. CONCLUSIONS: Android obese patients with a fasting TG in the normal range a nd not different from the Fasting TG of lean controls had an abnormal postp randial lipemia response, indicated by a significantly greater TG in the no nchylomicron subfraction than in controls. These alterations may be partly due to postprandial changes in endogenous lipoproteins as a consequence of insulin resistance.