THE INVOLVEMENT OF VDR PROMOTER METHYLATION, CDX-2 VDR POLYMORPHISM AND VITAMIN D LEVELS IN MALE INFERTILITY

INTRODUCTION

Vitamin D (VD) levels were correlated with different health conditions, including reproductive disorders in males. Vitamin D action is mediated through vitamin D receptor (VDR), which acts as a transcription factor. VDR gene promoter is embedded in a GC-rich island. The VDR gene has been shown to have several polymorphisms that affect the receptor function.

AIM

To examine the relationship between Cdx-2 polymorphism (rs17883968), the methylation status of VDR's promoter and serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D in male infertility.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 69 infertile men and 37 age-matched controls were enrolled in this study. Vitamin D level assessments were detected using the electrochemiluminescent method. Cdx-2 VDR polymorphism identification was performed by PCR on DNA samples from blood, followed by restriction. Methylation of VDR gene promoter was assessed by qMS-PCR using bisulfite-treated DNA from fresh sperm.

RESULTS

Vitamin D levels was found to be significantly decreased in infertile groups compared the controls (p=0.0279). The GG genotype was found in a higher percentage in controls and the AA genotype was higher in infertile group (p=0.0056). Infertile homozygote (GG) and heterozygote (GA) individuals had significantly higher vitamin D levels than AA homozygote. Methylation is higher in individuals with lower vitamin D levels and AA genotype is characterized by higher methylation values.

CONCLUSION

The results provide new insights of Cdx-2 polymorphism is involved in vitamin D deficiency, highlighting the important role of epigenetic modification of vitamin D receptor and male infertility along with the genetic context.

Serotonin and the bone assessment

Introduction: Lately, the in vitro and in vivo studies on serotonin metabolism have been pointing its influence in bone health. Also, there are no particular recommendations in performing the serum serotonin assessment in order to evaluate the skeletal status.

Aim: We aimed to correlate the bone turnover markers and lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) with serotonin.

Material and methods: There is a cross-sectional study in Caucasian postmenopausal women. They were not diagnosed with carcinoid syndrome, or bone anomalies, and received no treatment (including antiresorptives). The following bone formation markers were performed: serum alkaline phosphatase (AP), serum osteocalcin (OC), and the bone resorption marker: serum CrossLaps (CL). Serum serotonin (high-pressure liquid chromatography), as well as central DXA (GE Prodigy) were assessed.

Results: 191 women of 57.1 years mean age were grouped according to DXA (WHO criteria). The linear regression analysis between serum serotonin and CL were not statistically significant (SS), between serotonin and OC was SS in the newly diagnosed osteoporosis group (N=40, r=0.4, p=0.03), between serotonin and AP SS was found in osteopenia group (N=88, r=0.24, p=0.03), with no changes when adjusting for age and BMI. The partial correlation between serotonin and BMD was not SS.

Discussion: The study raises the question of serotonin as a bone metabolism marker seeing that the results were not consistent. The main limit of our study was that we did not analyze the possible use of antidepressants to these women. Overall, this was a pilot study in clinical practice where few reports have been published, but still necessary, because the use of serum serotonin in current skeletal evaluation is still unclear.

The serotonin and the bone assessment

Introduction. Lately, the in vitro and in vivo studies on serotonin metabolism pointed their influence in bone health. In addition, there are no particular recommendations in performing the serum serotonin assessment in order to evaluate the skeletal status.

Aim. We aimed to correlate the bone turnover markers and lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) with serotonin.

Material and Methods. There is a cross-sectional study in Caucasian postmenopausal women. They were not diagnosed with carcinoid syndrome, or bone anomalies, and received no treatment (including antiresorptives). We performed the bone formation markers: serum alkaline phosphatase (AP), serum osteocalcin (OC), and the bone resorption marker: serum CrossLaps (CL). Serum serotonin (high-pressure liquid chromatography), as well as central DXA (GE Prodigy) were assessed.

Results. 191 women of 57.1 years mean age were grouped according to DXA (WHO criteria). The linear regression analysis between serum serotonin and CL was not statistically significant (SS), between serotonin and OC was SS in the newly diagnosed osteoporosis group (N=40, r=0.4, p=0.03), between serotonin and AP we found SS in osteopenia group (N=88, r=0.24, p=0.03), with no changes when adjusting for age and BMI. The partial correlation between serotonin and BMD was not SS.

Discussion. The study raises the question of serotonin as a bone metabolism marker seeing that the results were not consistent. The main limit of our study is that we did not analyze the possible use of antidepressants by these women. Overall, this is a pilot study in clinical practice in which few reports have been published yet, but still necessary because the use of serum serotonin in current skeletal evaluation is still unclear.

Adrenalectomy by laparoscopic anterolateral transperitoneal approach for patients with previous abdominal surgery

Adrenal surgery has been radically changed by laparoscopic approach and we wonder whether the increase in the number of adrenalectomies is entirely justified by better understanding of the pathology and a developed diagnosis methods. The type of approach (transabdominal/retroperitoneal) remains a matter of the surgeon's experience. Method: In the past 8 years, we have performed more than 200 laparoscopic adrenalectomies by transperitoneal approach, 24 of them having previously significant abdominal surgery (cholecistectomy, gastric surgery, colectomy, bowel obstruction, exploratory laparoscopy, and adrenalectomy). The patients had a variety of adrenal pathologies such as Cushing disease, Cushing syndrome, Conn syndrome, incidentaloma, pheochromocytoma and even carcinoma. Results: 3 cases were converted to open approach, only one because of the adhesions. Reasons for conversion were also: spleen intarctisation and a difficulty in mobilizing the tumor. Operating time was not significantly prolonged because of the adhesions (40-360 min, median time 127 min). Postoperative evolution was simple with no morbidity or mortality and a fast recovery was recorded. Conclusions: Choosing the type of approach is related to surgeon experience, although 79-94% of the surgeons prefer the transabdominal lateral approach. We believe that with an experienced surgical team, there is no difficulty in performing adrenalectomy by transabdominal approach, with no significantly prolonged operating time, even though the patient has previously had abdominal surgery.