R E Van Pelt1, C M Jankowski, W S Gozansky, R S Schwartz, W M Kohrt. 1. Department of Medicine, Division of Geriatric Medicine, University of Colorado at Denver Health Sciences Center, 4200 East Ninth Avenue, Campus Box B-179, Denver, Colorado 80262, USA. rachael.vanpelt@uchsc.edu
Abstract
CONTEXT: It has been suggested that the propensity to store fat in the gluteal-femoral region may be cardioprotective. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to test whether the favorable associations of leg fat with risk factors for cardiovascular disease persist after controlling for the highly unfavorable effects of abdominal (visceral or sc) adiposity in postmenopausal women. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: The study included 95 postmenopausal women [age, 60 +/- 8 yr (mean +/- SD)]. MAIN OUTCOMES: Whole-body and regional fat distribution was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and abdominal computed tomography. Markers of insulin resistance and dyslipidemia were determined from oral glucose tolerance tests and fasted lipid and lipoprotein measurements, respectively. Primary outcomes were: fasting insulin (INS0), area under the insulin curve (INS(AUC)), product of the oral glucose tolerance test insulin and glucose AUC (INS(AUC) - GLU(AUC)), serum triglycerides (TG), and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. RESULTS: Controlling for trunk fat revealed a favorable effect of leg fat on INS0, INS(AUC), INS(AUC) x GLU(AUC), TG, and HDL. However, after controlling for either visceral or sc abdominal adiposity, TG was the only risk factor for which the favorable effect of leg fat persisted. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of an association between leg fat and most of the risk factors, after adjusting for abdominal visceral or sc fat, suggests an overriding deleterious influence of abdominal adiposity on cardiovascular risk. Nevertheless, our finding that regional adipose tissue depots have apparent independent and opposing effects on serum TG supports the need for further research into the physiological mechanisms governing these effects.
CONTEXT: It has been suggested that the propensity to store fat in the gluteal-femoral region may be cardioprotective. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to test whether the favorable associations of leg fat with risk factors for cardiovascular disease persist after controlling for the highly unfavorable effects of abdominal (visceral or sc) adiposity in postmenopausal women. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: The study included 95 postmenopausal women [age, 60 +/- 8 yr (mean +/- SD)]. MAIN OUTCOMES: Whole-body and regional fat distribution was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and abdominal computed tomography. Markers of insulin resistance and dyslipidemia were determined from oral glucose tolerance tests and fasted lipid and lipoprotein measurements, respectively. Primary outcomes were: fasting insulin (INS0), area under the insulin curve (INS(AUC)), product of the oral glucose tolerance test insulin and glucose AUC (INS(AUC) - GLU(AUC)), serum triglycerides (TG), and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. RESULTS: Controlling for trunk fat revealed a favorable effect of leg fat on INS0, INS(AUC), INS(AUC) x GLU(AUC), TG, and HDL. However, after controlling for either visceral or sc abdominal adiposity, TG was the only risk factor for which the favorable effect of leg fat persisted. CONCLUSIONS: The lack of an association between leg fat and most of the risk factors, after adjusting for abdominal visceral or sc fat, suggests an overriding deleterious influence of abdominal adiposity on cardiovascular risk. Nevertheless, our finding that regional adipose tissue depots have apparent independent and opposing effects on serum TG supports the need for further research into the physiological mechanisms governing these effects.
Authors: László B Tankó; Yu Z Bagger; Peter Alexandersen; Philip J Larsen; Claus Christiansen Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-03-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Marieke B Snijder; Jacqueline M Dekker; Marjolein Visser; Lex M Bouter; Coen D A Stehouwer; John S Yudkin; Robert J Heine; Giel Nijpels; Jacob C Seidell Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Yourka D Tchoukalova; Susanne B Votruba; Tamara Tchkonia; Nino Giorgadze; James L Kirkland; Michael D Jensen Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2010-10-04 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: M Sánchez-López; F B Ortega; P Moya-Martínez; S López-Martínez; I Ortiz-Galeano; M A Gómez-Marcos; M Sjöström; V Martínez-Vizcaíno Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2012-04-07 Impact factor: 5.614
Authors: Nevin Ajluni; Rasimcan Meral; Adam H Neidert; Graham F Brady; Eric Buras; Barbara McKenna; Frank DiPaola; Thomas L Chenevert; Jeffrey F Horowitz; Colleen Buggs-Saxton; Amit R Rupani; Peedikayil E Thomas; Marwan K Tayeh; Jeffrey W Innis; M Bishr Omary; Hari Conjeevaram; Elif A Oral Journal: Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) Date: 2017-03-27 Impact factor: 3.478
Authors: Elisabeth Wehr; Reinhard Möller; Renate Horejsi; Albrecht Giuliani; Daisy Kopera; Natascha Schweighofer; Andrea Groselj-Strele; Thomas R Pieber; Barbara Obermayer-Pietsch Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2009 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Catherine A Sullivan; Steven E Kahn; Wilfred Y Fujimoto; Tomoshige Hayashi; Donna L Leonetti; Edward J Boyko Journal: Hypertension Date: 2015-05-11 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Young-Min Park; Amy C Keller; Shauna S Runchey; Benjamin F Miller; Wendy M Kohrt; Rachael E Van Pelt; Chounghun Kang; Catherine M Jankowski; Kerrie L Moreau Journal: Steroids Date: 2019-03-27 Impact factor: 2.668
Authors: Rachel A Murphy; Ilse Reinders; Thomas C Register; Hilsa N Ayonayon; Anne B Newman; Suzanne Satterfield; Bret H Goodpaster; Eleanor M Simonsick; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Tamara B Harris Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Rebecca C Thurston; MaryFran R Sowers; Kim Sutton-Tyrrell; Susan A Everson-Rose; Tené T Lewis; Daniel Edmundowicz; Karen A Matthews Journal: Menopause Date: 2008 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.953