BACKGROUND: Despite the recognition that central obesity plays a critical role in chronic disease, few large-scale imaging studies have documented human variation in abdominal adipose tissue patterning. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the associations between abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue (ASAT) and visceral abdominal tissue (VAT), which were measured at different locations across the abdomen, and the presence of the metabolic syndrome (MS; National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III definition) and individual cardiometabolic risk factors. DESIGN: This study included 713 non-Hispanic whites aged 18-86 y, in whom VAT and ASAT were assessed by using multiple-image magnetic resonance imaging. The anatomical position of the magnetic resonance image containing the maximum VAT area for each subject was used as a measure of VAT patterning. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses were used to examine the relation of VAT, ASAT, and VAT patterning to cardiometabolic risk. RESULTS: VAT mass was a stronger predictor of the MS than was ASAT mass, but ASAT mass (and other measures of subcutaneous adiposity) had signification interactions with VAT mass, whereby elevated ASAT reduced the probability of MS among men with high VAT (P = 0.0008). There was variation across image locations in the association of VAT area with the MS in men, and magnetic resonance images located 4-8 cm above L4-L5 provided the strongest correlations between VAT area and cardiometabolic risk factors. Subjects whose maximum VAT area was higher in the abdomen had higher LDL-cholesterol concentrations (R(2) = 0.07, P < 0.0001), independent of age and adiposity. CONCLUSION: Further studies are needed to confirm the effects of VAT patterning on cardiometabolic risk.
BACKGROUND: Despite the recognition that central obesity plays a critical role in chronic disease, few large-scale imaging studies have documented human variation in abdominal adipose tissue patterning. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare the associations between abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue (ASAT) and visceral abdominal tissue (VAT), which were measured at different locations across the abdomen, and the presence of the metabolic syndrome (MS; National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III definition) and individual cardiometabolic risk factors. DESIGN: This study included 713 non-Hispanic whites aged 18-86 y, in whom VAT and ASAT were assessed by using multiple-image magnetic resonance imaging. The anatomical position of the magnetic resonance image containing the maximum VAT area for each subject was used as a measure of VAT patterning. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses were used to examine the relation of VAT, ASAT, and VAT patterning to cardiometabolic risk. RESULTS: VAT mass was a stronger predictor of the MS than was ASAT mass, but ASAT mass (and other measures of subcutaneous adiposity) had signification interactions with VAT mass, whereby elevated ASAT reduced the probability of MS among men with high VAT (P = 0.0008). There was variation across image locations in the association of VAT area with the MS in men, and magnetic resonance images located 4-8 cm above L4-L5 provided the strongest correlations between VAT area and cardiometabolic risk factors. Subjects whose maximum VAT area was higher in the abdomen had higher LDL-cholesterol concentrations (R(2) = 0.07, P < 0.0001), independent of age and adiposity. CONCLUSION: Further studies are needed to confirm the effects of VAT patterning on cardiometabolic risk.
Authors: O Gavrilova; B Marcus-Samuels; D Graham; J K Kim; G I Shulman; A L Castle; C Vinson; M Eckhaus; M L Reitman Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2000-02 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: W Shen; M Punyanitya; J Chen; D Gallagher; J Albu; X Pi-Sunyer; C E Lewis; C Grunfeld; S B Heymsfield; S Heshka Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2006-10-24 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Darcy B Carr; Kristina M Utzschneider; Rebecca L Hull; Keiichi Kodama; Barbara M Retzlaff; John D Brunzell; Jane B Shofer; Brian E Fish; Robert H Knopp; Steven E Kahn Journal: Diabetes Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 9.461
Authors: Barbara J Nicklas; Brenda W J H Penninx; Matteo Cesari; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Anne B Newman; Alka M Kanaya; Marco Pahor; Ding Jingzhong; Tamara B Harris Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-10-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Ellen W Demerath; Nikki L Rogers; Derek Reed; Miryoung Lee; Audrey C Choh; Roger M Siervogel; Wm Cameron Chumlea; Bradford Towne; Stefan A Czerwinski Journal: Ann Hum Biol Date: 2010-12-22 Impact factor: 1.533
Authors: Kathryn A Schlosser; Sean R Maloney; Tanushree Prasad; Paul D Colavita; Vedra A Augenstein; B Todd Heniford Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Danielle Novetsky Friedman; Patrick Hilden; Chaya S Moskowitz; Maya Suzuki; Farid Boulad; Nancy A Kernan; Suzanne L Wolden; Kevin C Oeffinger; Charles A Sklar Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2016-12-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Rachel P Wildman; Imke Janssen; Unab I Khan; Rebecca Thurston; Emma Barinas-Mitchell; Samar R El Khoudary; Susan A Everson-Rose; Rasa Kazlauskaite; Karen A Matthews; Kim Sutton-Tyrrell Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2011-02-23 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Mohammed Eslam; Shiv K Sarin; Vincent Wai-Sun Wong; Jian-Gao Fan; Takumi Kawaguchi; Sang Hoon Ahn; Ming-Hua Zheng; Gamal Shiha; Yusuf Yilmaz; Rino Gani; Shahinul Alam; Yock Young Dan; Jia-Horng Kao; Saeed Hamid; Ian Homer Cua; Wah-Kheong Chan; Diana Payawal; Soek-Siam Tan; Tawesak Tanwandee; Leon A Adams; Manoj Kumar; Masao Omata; Jacob George Journal: Hepatol Int Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 6.047
Authors: Nell A Bekiares; Andrea S Chen; Dhanansayan Shanmuganayagam; Adrienne Dardenne Meyers; Thomas D Crenshaw; Christian G Krueger; Jess D Reed Journal: Comp Med Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 0.982
Authors: Unhee Lim; Thomas Ernst; Lynne R Wilkens; Cheryl L Albright; Annette Lum-Jones; Ann Seifried; Steven D Buchthal; Rachel Novotny; Laurence N Kolonel; Linda Chang; Iona Cheng; Loïc Le Marchand Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 4.910