OBJECTIVE: To correlate abdominal subcutaneous and visceral fat thickness with anthropometric data and metabolic profile in newborns. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study with 99 newborns was performed at Instituto de Medicina Integral Professor Fernando Figueira, Brazil. Abdominal subcutaneous and visceral thickness were measured by ultrasound. Glucose, insulin, homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides were determined. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated. RESULT: Abdominal subcutaneous fat thickness was positively correlated with birth weight (r=0.31; P<0.001), height (r=0.27; P<0.001) and abdominal circumference (r=0.26; P<0.001), but not with metabolic profile. Abdominal visceral fat thickness was correlated with abdominal circumference (r=0.23; P=0.01), insulin (r=0.21; P=0.04) and HOMA (r=0.24; P=0.02). The results remained the same among males and females. CONCLUSION: Abdominal fat distribution in newborns has a different correlation with anthropometric and metabolic profile. Abdominal subcutaneous fat thickness is positively correlated with anthropometric data whereas abdominal visceral fat thickness is correlated with insulin and HOMA-IR.
OBJECTIVE: To correlate abdominal subcutaneous and visceral fat thickness with anthropometric data and metabolic profile in newborns. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study with 99 newborns was performed at Instituto de Medicina Integral Professor Fernando Figueira, Brazil. Abdominal subcutaneous and visceral thickness were measured by ultrasound. Glucose, insulin, homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides were determined. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated. RESULT: Abdominal subcutaneous fat thickness was positively correlated with birth weight (r=0.31; P<0.001), height (r=0.27; P<0.001) and abdominal circumference (r=0.26; P<0.001), but not with metabolic profile. Abdominal visceral fat thickness was correlated with abdominal circumference (r=0.23; P=0.01), insulin (r=0.21; P=0.04) and HOMA (r=0.24; P=0.02). The results remained the same among males and females. CONCLUSION: Abdominal fat distribution in newborns has a different correlation with anthropometric and metabolic profile. Abdominal subcutaneous fat thickness is positively correlated with anthropometric data whereas abdominal visceral fat thickness is correlated with insulin and HOMA-IR.
Authors: Angelica Dessì; Luigi Atzori; Antonio Noto; Gerard Hille Adriaan Visser; Diego Gazzolo; Vincenzo Zanardo; Luigi Barberini; Melania Puddu; Giovanni Ottonello; Alessandra Atzei; Anna De Magistris; Milena Lussu; Federica Murgia; Vassilios Fanos Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2011-10
Authors: Maria Inês Schmidt; Bruce Bartholow Duncan; Gulnar Azevedo e Silva; Ana Maria Menezes; Carlos Augusto Monteiro; Sandhi Maria Barreto; Dora Chor; Paulo Rossi Menezes Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-05-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: R Suzuki; S Watanabe; Y Hirai; K Akiyama; T Nishide; Y Matsushima; H Murayama; H Ohshima; M Shinomiya; K Shirai Journal: Am J Med Date: 1993-09 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Susanne Holzhauer; Renate M L Zwijsen; Vincent W V Jaddoe; Guenther Boehm; Henriette A Moll; Paul G Mulder; Veronica A Kleyburg-Linkers; Albert Hofman; Jacqueline C M Witteman Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2009-07-29 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Emanuella De Lucia Rolfe; Neena Modi; Sabita Uthaya; Ieuan A Hughes; David B Dunger; Carlo Acerini; Ronald P Stolk; Ken K Ong Journal: J Obes Date: 2013-04-17
Authors: Kirsten S de Fluiter; Inge A L P van Beijsterveldt; Laura M Breij; Dennis Acton; Anita C S Hokken-Koelega Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2020-12-01 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Kirsten S de Fluiter; Veryan Codd; Matthew Denniff; Gerthe F Kerkhof; Inge A L P van Beijsterveldt; Laura M Breij; Nilesh J Samani; Marieke Abrahamse-Berkeveld; Anita C S Hokken-Koelega Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Margherita Caroli; Andrea Vania; Maria Anna Tomaselli; Immacolata Scotese; Giovanna Tezza; Maria Carmen Verga; Giuseppe Di Mauro; Angelo Antignani; Andrea Miniello; Marcello Bergamini Journal: Nutrients Date: 2021-10-24 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Alessandra Prioreschi; Ken K Ong; Emanuella De Lucia Rolfe; Kate Westgate; Lisa K Micklesfield; Soren Brage Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2022-05-25
Authors: Laura M Breij; Marieke Abrahamse-Berkeveld; Dennis Acton; Emanuella De Lucia Rolfe; Ken K Ong; Anita C S Hokken-Koelega Journal: Ann Nutr Metab Date: 2017-11-14 Impact factor: 3.374
Authors: Ling-Wei Chen; Mya-Thway Tint; Marielle V Fortier; Izzuddin M Aris; Jonathan Y Bernard; Marjorelee Colega; Peter D Gluckman; Seang-Mei Saw; Yap-Seng Chong; Fabian Yap; Keith M Godfrey; Michael S Kramer; Rob M van Dam; Mary Foong-Fong Chong; Yung Seng Lee Journal: J Nutr Date: 2016-07-06 Impact factor: 4.798