Why the study?
Does growth hormone replacement therapy alter the effect of aerobic exercise on ectopic lipids in patients with growth hormone deficiency?
Does growth hormone replacement therapy alter the effect of aerobic exercise on ectopic lipids in patients with growth hormone deficiency?
Growth hormone replacement therapy improves exercise capacity and reduces fat mass in growth hormone-deficient patients, but does not alter the utilization of ectopic lipids during aerobic exercise.
GHRT may complement aerobic exercise for fitness and fat loss in GHD; leaves open confirmation of neutral effects on ectopic lipids in RCTs.
Growth hormone replacement therapy (GHRT) increases exercise capacity and insulin resistance while it decreases fat mass in growth hormone-deficient patients (GHD). Ectopic lipids (intramyocellular (IMCL) and intrahepatocellular lipids (IHCL) are related to insulin resistance. The effect of GHRT on ectopic lipids is unknown. It is hypothesized that exercise-induced utilization of ectopic lipids is significantly decreased in GHD patients and normalized by GHRT. GHD (4 females, 6 males) and age/gender/waist-matched control subjects (CS) were studied. VO2max was assessed on a treadmill and insulin sensitivity determined by a two-step hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp. Visceral (VAT) and subcutaneous (SAT) fat were quantified by MR-imaging. IHCL and IMCL were measured before and after a 2 h exercise at 50-60% of VO2max using MR-spectroscopy (∆IMCL, ∆IHCL). Identical investigations were performed after 6 months of GHRT. VO2max was similar in GHD and CS and significantly increased after GHRT; GHRT significantly decreased SAT and VAT. 2 h-exercise resulted in a decrease in IMCL (significant in CS and GHRT) and a significant increase in IHCL in CS and GHD pre and post GHRT. GHRT didn't significantly impact on ∆IMCL and ∆IHCL. We conclude that aerobic exercise affects ectopic lipids in patients and controls. GHRT increases exercise capacity without influencing ectopic lipids.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Christ et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: