Prevalence of overweight/obesity, abdominal obesity and metabolic syndrome and atypical cardiometabolic phenotypes in the adult Romanian population: PREDATORR study

Popa, Simona; Moța, Maria; Popa, A. R.; Moţa, E; Serafinceanu, Cristian; Guja, Cristian; Catrinoiu, Doina; Hâncu, Nicolae; Lichiardopol, Radu; Bala, Cornelia; Román, Gabriela; Radulian, Gabriela; Timar, Romulus; Mihai, Bogdan

doi:10.1007/s40618-016-0470-4

Cited by 58 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The prevalence of MHO in Europe varied from 1.1 to 6.6% and that of MUO from 7.2 to 21.4% [32, 39-41]. Compared to a European population, Americans had a higher prevalence of MHO, and this was consistent with a meta-analysis [42] focusing on the prevalence of MHO in adults.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Obesity-related disease risks may vary depending on whether the subject has metabolically healthy obesity (MHO) or metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO). At least 5 definitions/criteria of obesity and metabolic disorders have been documented in the literature, yielding uncertainties in a reliable international comparison of obesity phenotype prevalence. This report aims to compare differences in MHO and MUO prevalence according to the 5 most frequently used definitions. Methods: A random sample of 4,757 adults aged 35 years and older (male 51.1%) was enrolled. Obesity was defined either according to body mass index or waist circumference, and the definitions of metabolic abnormalities were derived from 5 different criteria. Results: In MHO, the highest prevalence was obtained when using the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) criteria (13.6%), followed by the Chinese Diabetes Society (11.4%), Adult Treatment Panel III (10.3%), Wildman (5.2%), and Karelis (4.2%) criteria; however, the MUO prevalence had an opposite trend to MHO prevalence. The magnitude of differences in the age-specific prevalence of MHO and MUO varied greatly and ranked in different orders. The proportion of insulin resistance for MHO and MUO individuals differed significantly regardless of which metabolic criterion was used. Conclusion: The prevalence of MHO and MUO in the Chinese population varies according to different definitions of obesity and metabolic disorders.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 67%

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, HCV infection induces hepatic steatosis through direct mechanisms (valid especially in genotype 3) and is associated with multiple metabolic abnormalities: HCADS (3). In the current study, the prevalence of MeS was 13%, with a female to male ratio of 1.4:1; lower than estimated in the general population of Romania 38.5% (13).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 74%

Metabolic Syndrome and Genotype 1 Virus C Compensated Liver Cirrhosis in the Era of Directly Acting Antiviral Therapy

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The current study aimed at evaluating the association between metabolic syndrome (MeS) in patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) liver cirrhosis (compensated, genotype, 1b) and changes after sustained viral response (SVR) following a 12-week therapy with paritaprevir, ritonavir, ombitasvir, dasabuvir, and ribavirin (PrOD+R). Methods: The current multicenter retrospective study included 809 patients diagnosed with compensated HCV cirrhosis (child class A), all 1b genotype treated for 12 weeks with direct acting antiviral agents -PrOD+R -regimen (according to the protocol practiced in Romania) and achieved SVR. The parameters of MeS (according to the definition of the International Diabetes Federation) were collected from medical records before and 12 weeks after the treatment. The results were collected in a central database and analyzed with SPSS 18.0. Statistical analysis used both descriptive and analytical methods with a significance level of 95% (CI 95%). Results: Out of the 809 patients, 105 (13%) demonstrated 3 out of the 5 criteria for MeS. Based on the MeS criteria, the commonest parameters were abnormal glycaemia (54.1%), followed by visceral obesity (38.6%), raised triglycerides (26.1%), high blood pressure (12.1%), and a low high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol (4.6%). The re-assessment of MeS parameters after SVR showed favourable changes, which were statistically significant: a siginficanttly lower serum triglyeride level (182.32 vs. 153.50 mg/dL, P = 0.001), lower systolic arterial blood pressure (130.57 vs. 124.85 mmHg; P = 0.001), lower diastolic arterial blood pressure (80.26 vs. 78.42 mmHg; P = 0.001) and lower glyceamic levels (130.06 vs. 120.71 mg/dL; P = 0.001), as well as a significant rise in HDL-cholesterol levels (48.61 vs. 50.50 mg/dL; P = 0.003). Abdominal circumference was the only parameter, which did not change after SVR. Following the changes sustained after SVR, 26.7% of the patients no longer fulfilled the minimum 3 criteria for MeS. No correlation was observed between the presence of MeS and the risk of severe adverse events, but it was noted that 37.5% of the patients who decompensated, 66.7% of the ones who developed hepatocarcinoma and 100% of the ones that died of abnormal glycaemic levels. Conclusions: Hyperglycemia, and not MeS, is associated with HCV compensated liver cirrhosis genotype 1b, and is a risk factor for severe adverse events. The attainment of SVR through PrOD+R regimen results in short-term improvements in MeS parameters.

show abstract

“…According to recently defined criteria, the metabolic syndrome is prevalent and associated with a greater risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease than any of its individual components [29]. In Popa et al’s study, CKD prevalence and Framingham 10-year CVD risk score were higher in participants with unhealthy metabolic profile [31]. So, we further compared the ability of adiposity indices to predict MetS, and to determine optimal cutoff values for these indices in the diagnoses of MetS among AGHD.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensitivity of various body indices and visceral adiposity index in predicting metabolic syndrome among Chinese patients with adult growth hormone deficiency

Liu

Ren

Chan

et al. 2017

J Endocrinol Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimAdult growth hormone deficiency (AGHD) refers to decreased secretion of growth hormones in the adults, which is associated with increased clustering of conventional cardiovascular risk factors such as central obesity, insulin resistance and dyslipidemia. Metabolic syndrome (MetS), a recognized risk factor of cardiovascluar diseases, shares some clinical features. Given that the prevalence of MetS is on the rise in patients with AGHD, and that cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in that population, the alternative, simple, non-invasive methods of assessing MetS among this population are needed. This study aims to determine the sensitivity of five anthropometric indices [Body mass index (BMI), Waist circumference (WC), Waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), Waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) and Visceral adiposity index (VAI)] in predicting metabolic syndrome in Chinese population-based patients with adult growth hormone deficiency.Materials and methodsA total of 96 Chinese patients with adult growth hormone deficiency were included in this study. They were compared with equal number of apparently healthy persons with similar characteristics (matched with age and gender) to the previous group. Anthropometric measurements including weight, height, serum lipids indices, blood pressure (BP), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), WC were measured. BMI, WHR, WHtR, and VAI were calculated.Results and discussionAGHD patients with MetS had higher WC (91.00 ± 8.28 vs 78.01 ± 7.12), BMI (24.95 ± 2.91 VS 23.30 ± 2.80), WHR (0.92 ± 0.06 VS 0.87 ± 0.07), WHtR (0.53 ± 0.06 VS 0.47 ± 0.05), VAI [(5.59 (4.02, 7.55) VS 1.69 (0.87, 3.05)] levels in comparison to those without MetS. Meantime WC, BMI, WHR, WHtR, VAI was positively correlated to MetS components. ROC curve for participants with AGHD showed that VAI had the highest SS of 92% (BMI 0.812; WHR 0.706; WHtR 0.902; VAI 0.920, respectively) for prediction of MetS in AGHD. The optimal cutoff values for different adiposity markers in predicting MetS were as follows: WC (79.65), BMI (23.46); WHR (0.89); WHtR (0.54); VAI (2.29).ConclusionIn conclusion, our study showed all adiposity measures of interest present themselves as easy and practical tools for use in population studies and clinical practice for evaluating MetS in AGDH and VAI was identified as the best in Chinese AGHD patients among them.

show abstract

Prevalence of overweight/obesity, abdominal obesity and metabolic syndrome and atypical cardiometabolic phenotypes in the adult Romanian population: PREDATORR study

Abstract: PREDATORR study showed a high prevalence of obesity/overweight, abdominal obesity and MetS in the adult Romanian population, and their association with kidney function and several cardiometabolic factors.

Cited by 58 publications

References 32 publications

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

Metabolic Syndrome and Genotype 1 Virus C Compensated Liver Cirrhosis in the Era of Directly Acting Antiviral Therapy

Sensitivity of various body indices and visceral adiposity index in predicting metabolic syndrome among Chinese patients with adult growth hormone deficiency

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About