C den Engelsen1, K J Gorter, P L Salomé, G E Rutten. 1. Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands. c.denengelsen-2@umcutrecht.nl
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of data on the progression from a healthy obese phenotype toward an unhealthy obese phenotype and the development of metabolic syndrome (MetS). Our aim was to assess the development of MetS 3 years after screening in centrally obese individuals with a healthy obese phenotype and to evaluate the usefulness of repeated screening. DESIGN AND METHODS: Eighty-eight individuals (mean age 47 years, 88% female) with central obesity as their only MetS component (ATP III criteria) at baseline screening were re-evaluated for MetS status after 3 years. RESULTS: At follow-up, the cardiometabolic risk profile in centrally obese individuals with a healthy phenotype showed a tendency toward deterioration. Thirty-two percent developed at least one additional MetS component, 7% had developed MetS. Nobody had developed type 2 diabetes. An increased triglyceride level (n = 16) and an increased blood pressure (n = 18) were the components most often present at follow-up. The people developing additional MetS components had a lower education level compared with the group that preserved the healthy centrally obese phenotype (80 vs. 71% lower educated, P = 0.35). They also had slightly worse baseline levels of the risk factors. CONCLUSION: The number of centrally obese individuals developing an unhealthy phenotype in this relatively short follow-up period emphasizes the need for a regular surveillance of cardiometabolic parameters in centrally obese individuals. However, it is questionable whether a repeated screening for type 2 diabetes every 3 years, as recommended by the American Diabetes Association, in this category of patients is appropriate.
OBJECTIVE: There is a lack of data on the progression from a healthy obese phenotype toward an unhealthy obese phenotype and the development of metabolic syndrome (MetS). Our aim was to assess the development of MetS 3 years after screening in centrally obese individuals with a healthy obese phenotype and to evaluate the usefulness of repeated screening. DESIGN AND METHODS: Eighty-eight individuals (mean age 47 years, 88% female) with central obesity as their only MetS component (ATP III criteria) at baseline screening were re-evaluated for MetS status after 3 years. RESULTS: At follow-up, the cardiometabolic risk profile in centrally obese individuals with a healthy phenotype showed a tendency toward deterioration. Thirty-two percent developed at least one additional MetS component, 7% had developed MetS. Nobody had developed type 2 diabetes. An increased triglyceride level (n = 16) and an increased blood pressure (n = 18) were the components most often present at follow-up. The people developing additional MetS components had a lower education level compared with the group that preserved the healthy centrally obese phenotype (80 vs. 71% lower educated, P = 0.35). They also had slightly worse baseline levels of the risk factors. CONCLUSION: The number of centrally obese individuals developing an unhealthy phenotype in this relatively short follow-up period emphasizes the need for a regular surveillance of cardiometabolic parameters in centrally obese individuals. However, it is questionable whether a repeated screening for type 2 diabetes every 3 years, as recommended by the American Diabetes Association, in this category of patients is appropriate.
Authors: G C Kabat; W Y-Y Wu; J W Bea; C Chen; L Qi; M L Stefanick; R T Chlebowski; D S Lane; J Wactawski-Wende; S Wassertheil-Smoller; T E Rohan Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Camille Lassale; Ioanna Tzoulaki; Karel G M Moons; Michael Sweeting; Jolanda Boer; Laura Johnson; José María Huerta; Claudia Agnoli; Heinz Freisling; Elisabete Weiderpass; Patrik Wennberg; Daphne L van der A; Larraitz Arriola; Vassiliki Benetou; Heiner Boeing; Fabrice Bonnet; Sandra M Colorado-Yohar; Gunnar Engström; Anne K Eriksen; Pietro Ferrari; Sara Grioni; Matthias Johansson; Rudolf Kaaks; Michail Katsoulis; Verena Katzke; Timothy J Key; Giuseppe Matullo; Olle Melander; Elena Molina-Portillo; Concepción Moreno-Iribas; Margareta Norberg; Kim Overvad; Salvatore Panico; J Ramón Quirós; Calogero Saieva; Guri Skeie; Annika Steffen; Magdalena Stepien; Anne Tjønneland; Antonia Trichopoulou; Rosario Tumino; Yvonne T van der Schouw; W M Monique Verschuren; Claudia Langenberg; Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Elio Riboli; Nicholas J Wareham; John Danesh; Adam S Butterworth Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Qian Feng; Liang-Jie Tang; Ding-Hai Luo; Ying Wang; Nan Wu; Hao Chen; Meng-Xia Chen; Lei Jiang; Rong Jin Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2021-11-24 Impact factor: 3.989
Authors: Zsofia Daradics; Cristian M Crecan; Mirela A Rus; Iancu A Morar; Mircea V Mircean; Adriana Florinela Cătoi; Andra Diana Cecan; Cornel Cătoi Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2021-12-16