Cited 16 times since 2005 (0.9 per year) source: EuropePMC European journal of endocrinology, Volume 153, Issue 2, 1 1 2005, Pages 231-238 Persistent diastolic dysfunction despite successful long-term octreotide treatment in acromegaly. van Thiel SW, Bax JJ, Biermasz NR, Holman ER, Poldermans D, Roelfsema F, Lamb HJ, van der Wall EE, Smit JW, Romijn JA, Pereira AM

Introduction

This study was designed to evaluate potential reversibility of left-ventricular (LV) dysfunction in patients with acromegaly following long-term control of disease. It is unknown whether the cardiac changes induced by acromegaly can be reversed completely by long-term strict control of growth hormone excess by octreotide.

Patients and methods

We compared LV systolic and diastolic function in inactive patients with acromegaly (n = 22), who were divided into patients with long-term control by octreotide (n = 14) and patients with long-term cure by surgery/radiotherapy (n = 8). We also assessed these parameters in patients with active acromegaly (n = 17).

Results

In patients with active acromegaly, systolic function at rest was decreased by 18% (P < 0.01), LV mass index increased by 40% (P < 0.04) and isovolumetric relaxation time increased by 19% (P < 0.01), compared with patients with inactive acromegaly. These parameters were not different between well-controlled and cured patients. Using tissue Doppler imaging, the ratio between early and late diastolic velocity (E'/A' ratio) was decreased in active, compared with inactive acromegaly (0.75+/-0.07 versus 1.24+/-0.15; P < 0.01). This E'/A' ratio was considerably higher in cured, compared with octreotide-treated, patients (1.75+/-0.41 versus 1.05+/-0.1; P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Diastolic function is persistently and significantly more impaired in acromegalic patients with long-term control by octreotide than in surgically cured patients, which points to biological effects of subtle abnormalities in growth hormone secretion. Criteria for strict biochemical control of acromegaly should thus be reconsidered.

Eur J Endocrinol. 2005 8;153(2):231-238