(Circulation. 2000;102:2233.)
© 2000 American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports |
From the Department of Internal Medicine, University of Pisa School of Medicine, and the Metabolism Unit of the CNR Institute of Clinical Physiology, University of Pisa, Italy.
Correspondence to Dr Ele Ferrannini, CNR Institute of Clinical Physiology, Via Savi, 8, 56100 Pisa, Italy. E-mail ferranni{at}ifc.pi.cnr.it
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods and ResultsWe studied 50 nondiabetic subjects covering a
wide range of age (20 to 65 years), body mass index (BMI, 19 to 40
kg · m-2), and mean blood pressure (72
to 132 mm Hg). Plasma insulin concentrations and secretory rates
were measured at baseline and during an oral glucose tolerance test;
insulin sensitivity was measured by the insulin clamp technique. Left
ventricular mass (LVM) (by 2D M-mode
echocardiography) was distributed normally and was
higher in obese (BMI
27 kg · m-2,
n=16) or hypertensive patients (blood pressure >140/90 mm Hg,
n=21) (50±8 and 55±10 g · m-2.7,
respectively) than in 13 nonobese, normotensive subjects (40±8 g
· m-2.7, P=0.0004). In a
multivariate model adjusting for sex, age, BMI, and
blood pressure, neither insulin concentrations (fasting or postglucose)
nor insulin sensitivity or secretory rates were significant correlates
of LVM. Systolic blood pressure (P=0.003) and
BMI (P=0.01) were the only independent correlates of
LVM. From the regression, the impact of hypertension (as a
systolic pressure of 180 versus 140 mm Hg=+20%) was
twice as large as that of obesity (as a BMI of 35 versus 25 kg ·
m-2=+11%), the two factors being
additive.
ConclusionsWhen adequate account is taken of body mass and blood pressure, insulin, as concentration, secretion, or action, is not an independent determinant of LVM in nondiabetic subjects.
Key Words: hypertrophy ventricles insulin obesity hypertension
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Hemodynamic as well as nonhemodynamic factors influence the development of left ventricular hypertrophy (reviewed in Reference 8 ). A role for insulin resistance with the attendant hyperinsulinemia and/or hyperglycemia in the genesis of cardiac hypertrophy has been suggested on the basis of several observations. First, an enlarged left ventricular mass (LVM) has been described not only in obesity2 3 but in endocrine diseases such as acromegaly9 and hypothyroidism10 and rare genetic syndromes such as leprechaunism,11 which are characterized by insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia, and various degrees of glucose intolerance. Second, in vitro hyperinsulinemia can induce cardiac cell growth through the stimulation of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptors.12 Third, patients with essential hypertension or ischemic heart disease, in whom cardiac hypertrophy is prevalent, are often insulin resistant.13 14 Finally, in humans, acute insulin administration suppresses myocardial protein degradation by 80%, a physiological effect implying that chronic hyperinsulinemia has the potential to contribute to myocardial hypertrophy.15
There is evidence to indicate that plasma glucose per se could make a contribution to the left ventricular growth process. Thus, hypertensive individuals with diabetes have been found to have higher LVM than nondiabetic hypertensive patients with similar blood pressure (BP) levels.11 In Arizona Indians, impaired glucose tolerance has been related to left ventricular wall thickness.5 In vitro, glucose itself can stimulate vascular smooth muscle cell growth.16
The in vivo studies that have sought an association between insulin and
LVM have yielded conflicting results (Table 1
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 ). The
present study was therefore undertaken to assess the differential
impact of insulin (concentrations, secretory rates, and sensitivity)
and glucose tolerance status on myocardial mass in a large group of
nondiabetic subjects enriched with obese and hypertensive
individuals.
|
| Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
27 kg · m-2, 17
subjects were obese (BMI 27.1 to 40.2 kg ·
m-2). By conventional
criteria,35 21 subjects were hypertensive; on the basis of
the clinical workup, the diagnosis was essential hypertension for each
of them, and antihypertensive medication was discontinued at least 2
weeks before enrollment. Of the other study subjects, 13 were nonobese
and normotensive. All obese subjects were normotensive; 5 hypertensive
subjects had a BMI
27 kg ·
m-2. The protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board. The purpose, nature, and risks involved in the study were explained to all the patients before obtaining their consent to participate.
Echocardiography
Echocardiography was performed with an HP
Sonos 1000 system with a 2.5-MHz transducer. Echocardiograms were
obtained with the subject resting in the left lateral position.
Two-dimensional, guided M-mode measurements of left
ventricular (LV) end-diastolic dimension,
interventricular septum thickness, and posterior wall
thickness were obtained along the LV short axis at the level of the
chordae tendineae just beyond the mitral leaflet tips, as
recommended.36 Every effort was made to obtain optimal
echocardiographic images, with the M-mode cursor
perpendicular to the LV long axis. LV mass (LVM) was calculated at the
onset of the QRS complex (on a simultaneously recorded
ECG with a continuous DII derivation) according to the Penn
convention.37 An average of 2 cardiac cycles was used for
data analysis. LVM was calculated according to Devereux et
al.38 LVM was corrected for height to the 2.7 power
(g · m-2.7),
according to De Simone et al.39
Echocardiographic parameters were measured
by consensus of 2 experienced cardiologists who were blinded to the
metabolic data. Interobserver and intraobserver variation
coefficients were 6% and 4%, respectively.
Oral Glucose Tolerance Test
After at least 3 days of a 250-g carbohydrate diet and after an
overnight (10 to 12 hours) fast, glucose tolerance was assessed by a
2-hour, 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). At baseline and at
30-minute intervals during the OGTT, blood samples were obtained for
glucose and insulin determination.
Insulin Sensitivity
Insulin action was measured by the euglycemic clamp
technique40 with an insulin infusion rate of 40 mU
· min-1 ·
m-2 (280 pmol ·
min-1 ·
m-2). Briefly,
polyethylene cannulas were inserted into an antecubital vein (for the
infusion of glucose and insulin), and, retrogradely, into a wrist vein
heated at 60°C in a hot box (for intermittent sampling of
arterialized venous blood). At time zero, a primed-constant
infusion of regular insulin was begun and continued for 120 minutes.
Four minutes into the insulin infusion, an exogenous glucose infusion
was started and adjusted every 5 to 10 minutes to maintain plasma
glucose within
10% of its baseline value. Blood samples were
obtained at timed intervals in the fasting state and during the clamp
for the measurement of plasma glucose and insulin levels.
Analytical Procedures
Blood samples were kept in an ice bath, then centrifuged
at 4°C. The plasma was aliquoted and stored at -20°C until assay.
Plasma glucose concentration was immediately assayed by the glucose
oxidase method (Beckman Glucose Analyzer, Beckman Instruments).
Plasma insulin was measured by radioimmunoassay (INSKIT, Sorin). Serum
cholesterol, triglycerides, HDL
cholesterol, and its subfractions were determined as
described elsewhere.13
Data Analysis
Insulin action was expressed as the whole-body glucose disposal
during steady-state euglycemic
hyperinsulinemia. With the insulin dose used in the
current study, endogenous glucose output has been
previously shown to be fully suppressed in old as well as young
subjects.41 Therefore, glucose disposal (M
value) was calculated from the exogenous glucose infusion rate during
the last 60 minutes of the clamp after correction for changes in
glucose concentration in a total distribution volume of 250 mL ·
kg-1.42
Whole-body glucose disposal was normalized per kilogram of lean body
mass (LBM), as calculated by Humes formula in its sex-specific
version.43 Fat mass was obtained as the difference between
body weight and LBM.
The rate at which endogenous insulin is delivered to the systemic circulation after transhepatic passage (termed posthepatic insulin delivery rate) was obtained as the product of fasting systemic plasma insulin concentration and posthepatic insulin clearance rate. The latter was measured from the clamp experiment as the ratio of the exogenous insulin infusion rate to the plasma insulin concentration attained during the final 40 minutes of the clamp. The rationale for this measurement is that because of the fast metabolic clearance rate of insulin, a primed-constant infusion of exogenous hormone lasting for 120 minutes results in steady-state plasma insulin levels. Under these conditions, the ratio of infusion rate to steady-state plasma concentration equals the metabolic clearance rate of systemically administered insulin.44
Statistical Analysis
For statistical analysis, insulin concentration,
clearance rate, and posthepatic delivery rate values were
log-transformed to normalize their distribution (normality was tested
by the Shapiro-Wilk W test). Data are given as mean±SD.
Power analysis was carried out to compare independent
dichotomous outcomes as well as to test slopes of simple linear
regression lines.45 46 Group comparisons were carried
out by Kruskall-Wallis test for continuous variables and by the
2 test for proportions. Simple and multiple
regression analyses were carried out by standard
techniques.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
=0.05, the
present sample size (n=50) had 90% power to detect a minimal
difference in population means of 8 µmol ·
min-1 · kg
LBM-1 in M
value, that is, an 18% deviation from the mean value and one fifth the
range of the whole study group. The corresponding minimal detectable
difference for fasting plasma insulin concentration was 20 pmol/L.
|
|
In univariate analysis, insulin sensitivity was inversely related to indexes of body adiposity (BMI, fat mass, and percent fat mass; r=0.25 to 0.35, P=0.05 to 0.01) and to plasma insulin concentrations and delivery rates (r=0.41 to 0.53, probability values all <0.001), as expected.
LVM was normally distributed (W=0.97, P=NS)
(Table 4
and Figure 1
) and was higher in obese and
hypertensive individuals (50±8 and 55±10 g ·
m-2.7, respectively) than
in control subjects (40±8 g ·
m-2.7,
P=0.0004) (Figure 2
). In
univariate analysis, a larger LVM was significantly
associated with older age (r=0.41, P<0.005), a
larger glucose area-under-the-curve (r=0.31,
P=0.03), and a higher systolic (r=0.49,
P<0.001), diastolic (r=0.30,
P=0.03), mean (r=0.40, P=0.004), and
pulse BP (r=0.50, P=0.0002). LVM was only weakly
related to BMI (r=0.23, P=0.1). In contrast, LVM
was not related to any insulin parameter, namely, insulin
concentrations (fasting, any time point during the OGTT, area under the
OGTT curve), insulin clearance and delivery rates (fasting or
postglucose), or insulin sensitivity (Figure 3
). The latter result was unchanged when
LVM was normalized by height or LBM or was used as the absolute value.
This pattern of correlations was essentially unchanged when LVM was
replaced by the interventricular septum or posterior wall
thickness. Power analysis indicated that at a level of
=0.05, the present sample size (n=50) had 70% power to detect
an association between M and LVM with a slope of
0.25, or
between fasting plasma insulin and LVM with a slope of
0.15.
|
|
|
|
In a multiple regression model adjusting for age and sex,
systolic BP (P=0.003) and BMI (P=0.01)
were the only independent correlates of LVM, together explaining 33%
of its observed variability. No statistically significant interaction
between the independent variables tested was found. From the
regression equation and by using the mean population data, the
estimated effect of a BMI of 35 versus 25 kg ·
m-2 and that of a
systolic BP of 180 versus 140 mm Hg were calculated
(Figure 4
). With these values,
hypertension had twice the impact of obesity on LVM, the two effects
being additive.
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Our results demonstrate that when accounting for body size and BP,
insulin, as plasma level, secretion rate, or action, is not related to
LVM (within the probability boundaries set by our sample size). The
associations between age or the glucose area and LVM, emerging from
univariate analysis, were lost in the
multivariate analysis, suggesting that they
were driven by each other or confounded by the main factors. Of the
latter, BP (particularly, the systolic value) was a stronger
correlate than obesity, both statistically and in terms of size of
effect. In fact, we calculated that in a middle-aged subject with a BMI
of 35 kg · m-2
(
27 kg heavier than the norm), LVM is expected to be increased by
11% if BP is 140 mm Hg. In a middle-aged subject with a
systolic BP of 180 mm Hg, (ie, 40 mm Hg higher than
the norm), LVM is expected to be increased by 20% if body size is
unchanged (BMI=25 kg ·
m-2). The effect of a
combined increase in BMI and BP is additive (no statistically
significant interaction) (Figure 4
). Clearly, these estimates
neglect associated circumstances, such as the duration of obesity and
hypertension, which must play role of their own in increasing cardiac
muscle work load. Nevertheless, they do establish that hypertension
alone has a stronger impact on heart mass than obesity per se. By
applying the definition of LV hypertrophy (LVH) suggested
by De Simone et al3 (LVM >47 g ·
m-2.7 in women and >50
g · m-2.7 in men),
LVH was present in 1 of 12 (8%) control subjects, 7 of 17 (41%)
obese subjects, and 14 of 21 (67%) hypertensive subjects
(
2=10.6, P=0.005). Our series,
therefore, reproduced the high prevalence of LVH in obesity and the
still higher prevalence in hypertension reported by
others.3 47 48 Nevertheless, the M value
averaged 41 µmol ·
min-1 · kg
LBM-1 in subjects with LVH
(mean LVM=60 g ·
m-2.7) and 45
µmol · min-1
· kg LBM-1 in subjects
without LVH (mean LVM=42 g ·
m-2.7). Among the
unmeasured nonhemodynamic factors are the presence of
microalbuminuria (which in hypertensive patients clusters
with LVH49 ), the distribution, visceral versus
peripheral, of excess body fat,20 32 50 the
activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone
and the adrenergic nervous systems,8 and genetic
predisposition.51
A number of studies have examined the relation between insulin and LVM
with conflicting results (Table 1
). Number and kind of patients
studied (healthy, obese, hypertensive, diabetic, and combinations
thereof), index measurement (fasting plasma insulin, plasma insulin at
various times after a glucose load, intravenous glucose
tolerance test, insulin clamp), and adjustment for confounders have
been quite variable, probably contributing to the discrepant
outcome. For example, in the report by Sasson et al,17
only obese subjects were studied, and only insulin at time 90 minutes
after intravenous glucose was found to correlate with LVM
independent of BMI. The lack of a control group of lean individuals may
have caused an underestimation of the influence of body size on LVM. By
contrast, in a group of obese women also investigated with by
intravenous glucose, Avignon et al18 found no
relation of plasma insulin (or insulin sensitivity) to LVM independent
of BMI, but arterial BP also failed to associate with LVM.
Here, the lack of a control group of hypertensive individuals may have
downplayed the impact of BP on LVM. In a recent study in hypertensive
individuals,33 plasma insulin levels measured 2 hours
after a glucose load but not fasting plasma insulin levels or indexes
of insulin resistance were positively related to LVM but not to
relative wall thickness. In the 3 previous studies19 27 30
that have used the insulin clamp technique to measure insulin
sensitivity, only hypertensive patients were included. The relatively
high prevalence of insulin resistance and the attendant
hyperinsulinemia among obese, hypertensive, and
diabetic patients52 makes it difficult to dissect their
separate roles in cardiac hypertrophy compared with the
effect of body size, BP, and hyperglycemia. Furthermore, even in
otherwise healthy individuals, insulin
resistance/hyperinsulinemia tend to aggregate with
small, subclinical changes in BMI, BP, and glucose
level.52 Because of this clustering, we adopted the
conservative approach of examining associations multidimensionally,
over wide ranges, and in a sufficiently large series of subjects.
Moreover, we tested all possible insulin variables as well as
interactions among them. Our results, while confirming expected
associations (eg, insulin resistance and obesity), rule out a major
effect of insulin per se on LVM. In a recent study by Takala et
al,53 LVM was measured in 8 endurance-trained
(long-distance runners) and 8 resistance-trained (weight lifters)
athletes, in whom insulin sensitivity was measured by the clamp
technique. The results showed that cardiac hypertrophy was
similar in the 2 groups (as compared with sedentary control subjects)
despite the fact that whole-body insulin sensitivity was twice as high
in endurance as in resistance-trained athletes or sedentary control
subjects. The dissociation observed in these subjects is in full
agreement with our results that hemodynamic factors
dominate in the genesis of cardiac hypertrophy.
It should be emphasized that a biological effect of chronic hyperinsulinemia and/or insulin resistance on cardiac muscle growth and remodeling is fully plausible and may mediate, at least in part, the effect of body size and BP on LVM. Our analysis only shows that a separate influence of insulin beyond the measurable effects of obesity and hypertension does not emerge from in vivo data.
That the impact of insulin may be different in hyperglycemic individuals deserves further attention. Hyperglycemia per se can induce proliferation and hypertrophy of vascular smooth muscle cells, possibly through the activation of the phospholipase D and protein kinase C pathways,54 and a potential interference of insulin in these pathways remains possible.
Received March 8, 2000; revision received May 22, 2000; accepted June 8, 2000.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. Ferrannini, A. M. Sironi, P. Iozzo, and A. Gastaldelli Intra-abdominal adiposity, abdominal obesity, and cardiometabolic risk Eur. Heart J. Suppl., March 1, 2008; 10(suppl_B): B4 - B10. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Y. Fang, J. B. Prins, and T. H. Marwick Diabetic Cardiomyopathy: Evidence, Mechanisms, and Therapeutic Implications Endocr. Rev., August 1, 2004; 25(4): 543 - 567. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Karason, L. Sjostrom, I. Wallentin, and M. Peltonen Impact of blood pressure and insulin on the relationship between body fat and left ventricular structure Eur. Heart J., August 2, 2003; 24(16): 1500 - 1505. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. K. Rutter, H. Parise, E. J. Benjamin, D. Levy, M. G. Larson, J. B. Meigs, R. W. Nesto, P. W.F. Wilson, and R. S. Vasan Impact of Glucose Intolerance and Insulin Resistance on Cardiac Structure and Function: Sex-Related Differences in the Framingham Heart Study Circulation, January 28, 2003; 107(3): 448 - 454. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Circulation Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 2000 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |