Mechanisms of insulin resistance following injury

P R Black, D C Brooks, P Q Bessey, R R Wolfe, D W Wilmore, P R Black, D C Brooks, P Q Bessey, R R Wolfe, D W Wilmore

Abstract

To assess the mechanisms of insulin resistance following injury, we examined the relationship between insulin levels and glucose disposal in nine nonseptic, multiple trauma patients (average age 32 years, Injury Severity Score 22) five to 13 days postinjury. Fourteen age-matched normals served as controls. Using a modification of the euglycemic insulin clamp technique, insulin was infused in 35 two-hour studies using at least one of four infusions rates (0.5, 1.0, 2.0 or 5.0 mU/kg min). Basal glucose levels were maintained by a variable infusion of 20% dextrose using bedside glucose monitoring and a servo-control algorithm. The amount of glucose infused reflected glucose disposal (M, mg/kg.min). Tracer doses of (6,6,2D2) glucose were administered in selected subjects to determine endogenous glucose production. At plasma insulin concentrations less than 100 microU/ml, responses in both groups were similar. However, maximal glucose disposal rates were significantly less in the patients than in the controls (9.17 +/- 0.87 mg/kg . min vs. 14.3 +/- 0.78, mean +/- SEM, p less than 0.01). Insulin clearance rates in the patients were almost twice that seen in controls. To further characterize this decrease in insulin responsiveness, we studied six additional patients and 12 controls following the acute elevation of glucose 125 mg/dl above basal (hyperglycemic glucose clamp). In spite of exaggerated endogenous insulin production in the patients (80-200 microU/ml vs. 30--70 in controls), M was significantly lower (6.23 +/- 0.59 vs. 9.46 +/- 0.79, p less than 0.02). In conclusion, this study demonstrated that (1) the maximal rate of glucose disposal is reduced in trauma patients; (2) the metabolic clearance rate of insulin in the injured patients is almost twice normal and; (3) insulin resistance following injury appears to occur in peripheral tissues, probably skeletal muscle, and is consistent with a postreceptor defect.

References

    1. Diabetes. 1965 Dec;14(12):771-9
    1. Lancet. 1968 Nov 23;2(7578):1113-6
    1. Surg Clin North Am. 1976 Oct;56(5):999-1018
    1. J Appl Physiol. 1976 Oct;41(4):565-73
    1. Diabetes. 1976 Dec;25(12):1154-62
    1. Ann Surg. 1977 Oct;186(4):444-58
    1. Biochem J. 1978 Jun 15;172(3):407-16
    1. Metabolism. 1978 Dec;27(12 Suppl 2):1853-65
    1. Metabolism. 1978 Dec;27(12 Suppl 2):1893-902
    1. Metabolism. 1979 Mar;28(3):210-20
    1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1978 Oct;75(10):5173-7
    1. Am J Physiol. 1979 Sep;237(3):E214-23
    1. Metabolism. 1979 Oct;28(10):1031-9
    1. JAMA. 1980 Apr 11;243(14):1444-7
    1. Surgery. 1980 May;87(5):596-8
    1. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1980 Mar-Apr;4(2):147-51
    1. J Clin Invest. 1980 Jun;65(6):1272-84
    1. Ann Surg. 1980;192(4):491-504
    1. Acta Chir Scand Suppl. 1980;498:43-7
    1. Metabolism. 1981 May;30(5):457-61
    1. Am J Physiol. 1981 May;240(5):E539-43
    1. Am J Physiol. 1981 Jun;240(6):E630-9
    1. J Clin Invest. 1981 Oct;68(4):957-69
    1. Surg Forum. 1978;29:98-100
    1. Lancet. 1963 Apr 13;1(7285):785-9
    1. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1959 Sep 25;82:420-30
    1. Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 1968 May;46(3):383-90
    1. Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 1968 May;46(3):391-8
    1. J Clin Invest. 1970 Apr;49(4):837-48
    1. N Engl J Med. 1970 Mar 19;282(12):668-75
    1. Ann Surg. 1970 Sep;172(3):342-50
    1. J Appl Physiol. 1971 Jul;31(1):110-6
    1. Eur J Clin Invest. 1971 Sep;1(6):480-5
    1. N Engl J Med. 1973 Sep 20;289(12):618-21
    1. J Trauma. 1974 Mar;14(3):187-96
    1. J Trauma. 1974 May;14(5):378-88
    1. J Clin Invest. 1974 May;53(5):1481-92
    1. Am J Physiol. 1974 Dec;227(6):1314-22
    1. Surg Forum. 1975;26:81-3
    1. Ann Surg. 1976 Mar;183(3):314-20

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj