OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare para- and perirenal fat (PFT) and subcutaneous abdominal fat (SFT) measurements between patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and control subjects and to assess the possible relation with metabolic disorders. METHODS: This study included 68 patients with PCOS and 40 age- and body mass index (BMI)-matched healthy controls. We evaluated anthropometric, hormonal, and metabolic parameters, and abdominal ultrasonography was performed to measure PFT and SFT. RESULTS: The mean PFT values were 6.1 ± 2.9 mm in patients with PCOS and 4.3 ± 2.3 mm in healthy controls (P = .002). SFT values were also higher in the patient group (9.6 ± 5 mm) compared to healthy subjects (3.5 ± 0.5 mm) (P = .017). A significant positive correlation was found between PFT and BMI (r = 0.368), waist circumference (WC) (r = 0.441), Ferriman-Gallwey (FG) score (r = 0.313), blood pressure (systolic, SBP, r = 0.213; diastolic, DBP, r = 0.215), plasma glucose (r = 0.195), homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR, r = 0.273), SFT (r = 0.555). Conversely, negative correlations were found between PFT and estradiol (r = -0.218) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG, r = -0.304). Nonobese PCOS patients (6.1 ± 3.07 mm) had higher PFT values than nonobese controls (3.47 ± 1.5 mm); however, SFT measurements did not differ (P = .086). In multiple linear regression analysis, SFT (P = .006) was a significant and independent predictor for PFT, along with WC (P = .023). In a stepwise model, SFT was the predictor of PFT (P = .001). CONCLUSION: PFT values were higher particularly in nonobese PCOS patients compared to nonobese control subjects. There was a significant interaction between PCOS and obesity on PFT.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare para- and perirenal fat (PFT) and subcutaneous abdominal fat (SFT) measurements between patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) and control subjects and to assess the possible relation with metabolic disorders. METHODS: This study included 68 patients with PCOS and 40 age- and body mass index (BMI)-matched healthy controls. We evaluated anthropometric, hormonal, and metabolic parameters, and abdominal ultrasonography was performed to measure PFT and SFT. RESULTS: The mean PFT values were 6.1 ± 2.9 mm in patients with PCOS and 4.3 ± 2.3 mm in healthy controls (P = .002). SFT values were also higher in the patient group (9.6 ± 5 mm) compared to healthy subjects (3.5 ± 0.5 mm) (P = .017). A significant positive correlation was found between PFT and BMI (r = 0.368), waist circumference (WC) (r = 0.441), Ferriman-Gallwey (FG) score (r = 0.313), blood pressure (systolic, SBP, r = 0.213; diastolic, DBP, r = 0.215), plasma glucose (r = 0.195), homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR, r = 0.273), SFT (r = 0.555). Conversely, negative correlations were found between PFT and estradiol (r = -0.218) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG, r = -0.304). Nonobese PCOSpatients (6.1 ± 3.07 mm) had higher PFT values than nonobese controls (3.47 ± 1.5 mm); however, SFT measurements did not differ (P = .086). In multiple linear regression analysis, SFT (P = .006) was a significant and independent predictor for PFT, along with WC (P = .023). In a stepwise model, SFT was the predictor of PFT (P = .001). CONCLUSION: PFT values were higher particularly in nonobese PCOSpatients compared to nonobese control subjects. There was a significant interaction between PCOS and obesity on PFT.
Authors: Safaa H Hammoud; Ibrahim AlZaim; Yusra Al-Dhaheri; Ali H Eid; Ahmed F El-Yazbi Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: María L Sánchez-Ferrer; Ernesto De La Cruz-Sánchez; Julián J Arense-Gonzalo; María T Prieto-Sánchez; Itziar Bernabeu-González; Ana Carmona-Barnosi; Jaime Mendiola; Alberto M Torres-Cantero Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-14 Impact factor: 3.390