OBJECTIVE: Limited data are available on the metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its components in elderly people (aged 70 years and over) at population level in Northern Europe. A study was undertaken to investigate the prevalence of MetS and its components in an aging population by using different definitions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND SUBJECTS: A cross-sectional study of 539 inhabitants from Northern Finland (mean age 71.9 years) was conducted to investigate the prevalence of MetS, by using the definitions of MetS by the National Cholesterol Education Panel (NCEP), the modified NCEP (NCEPm), and the International Diabetes Federation (IDF). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of MetS by the NCEP, NCEP modified, and IDF criteria. RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of MetS was 24.7%, 35.2%, and 37.2% in men, by NCEP, modified NCEP, and IDF-definitions, respectively. In women the corresponding figures were 20.9%, 33.1%, and 47.8%. Hypertension was the most common component in both men (91.8%) and women (89.0%) by the IDF criteria. Glucose abnormalities were particularly prevalent in men (53.2% by NCEP and 78.4% by IDF criteria). CONCLUSIONS: The most common component was hypertension in both genders. Lower waist-circumference cut-off points of the IDF criteria led to a higher prevalence of MetS particularly in women. Prevalence of MetS varied significantly when measured by different definitions. Nearly half of older women met the IDF definition of MetS, which was more than twofold when compared with NCEP. Clinical practitioners should be aware of the limitations when using set criteria of MetS, in contrast to identifying the individual cardiovascular risk factors and the accumulation of these.
OBJECTIVE: Limited data are available on the metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its components in elderly people (aged 70 years and over) at population level in Northern Europe. A study was undertaken to investigate the prevalence of MetS and its components in an aging population by using different definitions. DESIGN, SETTING, AND SUBJECTS: A cross-sectional study of 539 inhabitants from Northern Finland (mean age 71.9 years) was conducted to investigate the prevalence of MetS, by using the definitions of MetS by the National Cholesterol Education Panel (NCEP), the modified NCEP (NCEPm), and the International Diabetes Federation (IDF). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of MetS by the NCEP, NCEP modified, and IDF criteria. RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of MetS was 24.7%, 35.2%, and 37.2% in men, by NCEP, modified NCEP, and IDF-definitions, respectively. In women the corresponding figures were 20.9%, 33.1%, and 47.8%. Hypertension was the most common component in both men (91.8%) and women (89.0%) by the IDF criteria. Glucose abnormalities were particularly prevalent in men (53.2% by NCEP and 78.4% by IDF criteria). CONCLUSIONS: The most common component was hypertension in both genders. Lower waist-circumference cut-off points of the IDF criteria led to a higher prevalence of MetS particularly in women. Prevalence of MetS varied significantly when measured by different definitions. Nearly half of older women met the IDF definition of MetS, which was more than twofold when compared with NCEP. Clinical practitioners should be aware of the limitations when using set criteria of MetS, in contrast to identifying the individual cardiovascular risk factors and the accumulation of these.
Authors: S Phelan; T A Wadden; R I Berkowitz; D B Sarwer; L G Womble; R K Cato; R Rothman Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2007-03-13 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Ruth Peters; Sevil Yasar; Craig S Anderson; Shea Andrews; Riitta Antikainen; Hisatomi Arima; Nigel Beckett; Joanne C Beer; Anne Suzanne Bertens; Andrew Booth; Martin van Boxtel; Carol Brayne; Henry Brodaty; Michelle C Carlson; John Chalmers; Maria Corrada; Steven DeKosky; Carol Derby; Roger A Dixon; Françoise Forette; Mary Ganguli; Willem A van Gool; Antonio Guaita; Ann M Hever; David B Hogan; Carol Jagger; Mindy Katz; Claudia Kawas; Patrick G Kehoe; Sirkka Keinanen-Kiukaanniemi; Rose Ann Kenny; Sebastian Köhler; Setor K Kunutsor; Jari Laukkanen; Colleen Maxwell; G Peggy McFall; Tessa van Middelaar; Eric P Moll van Charante; Tze-Pin Ng; Jean Peters; Iris Rawtaer; Edo Richard; Kenneth Rockwood; Lina Rydén; Perminder S Sachdev; Ingmar Skoog; Johan Skoog; Jan A Staessen; Blossom C M Stephan; Sylvain Sebert; Lutgarde Thijs; Stella Trompet; Phillip J Tully; Christophe Tzourio; Roberta Vaccaro; Eeva Vaaramo; Erin Walsh; Jane Warwick; Kaarin J Anstey Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Maria Auxiliadora Nogueira Saad; Gilberto Perez Cardoso; Wolney de Andrade Martins; Luis Guillermo Coca Velarde; Rubens Antunes da Cruz Filho Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2014-02-10 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Sandra N Slagter; Robert P van Waateringe; André P van Beek; Melanie M van der Klauw; Bruce H R Wolffenbuttel; Jana V van Vliet-Ostaptchouk Journal: Endocr Connect Date: 2017-04-18 Impact factor: 3.335
Authors: Gloria Cubas-Basterrechea; Iñaki Elío; Sandra Sumalla-Cano; Silvia Aparicio-Obregón; Carolina Teresa González-Antón; Pedro Muñoz-Cacho Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Shaoyong Xu; Bin Gao; Ying Xing; Jie Ming; Junxiang Bao; Qiang Zhang; Yi Wan; Qiuhe Ji Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jeanine M Van Ancum; Nini H Jonkman; Natasja M van Schoor; Emily Tressel; Carel G M Meskers; Mirjam Pijnappels; Andrea B Maier Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 3.240