| Literature DB >> 27645134 |
Haichen Lv1, Xiaolei Yang1, Yong Zhou2, Jing Wu3, Henghui Liu4, Youxin Wang5, Yuanming Pan4, Yunlong Xia1.
Abstract
Reproductive factors have been shown to correlate with lipid metabolism. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between parity and serum lipid levels in community-based Chinese female adults. A total of 4,217 female participants were enrolled. Parity was recorded according to questionnaire and serum lipid profile, including triglycerides (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), was measured. Logistic regression models were used to analyze the association of parity to serum lipid levels, while adjusting for demographics and metabolic risk factors. Parity in this population ranged from 0 to 7. After adjusting for potential confounders, it indicated that females with more than 2 parities appeared to be less likely to suffer from abnormal serum TC level compared with nulliparae (parity = 2, odds ratio (OR) = 0.457, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.284-0.736; parity ≥ 3, OR = 0.363, 95% CI = 0.202-0.653). These findings suggested that parity could correlate with lipid metabolism in Chinese women. Individuals with higher parity appeared to have a lower total cholesterol in blood.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27645134 PMCID: PMC5028753 DOI: 10.1038/srep33831
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Parity distribution in this study.
| Parity | Frequency | Percentage | Cumulative Frequency | Cumulative percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 543 | 12.88 | 543 | 12.88 |
| 1 | 2983 | 70.74 | 3526 | 83.61 |
| 2 | 544 | 12.90 | 4070 | 96.51 |
| 3 | 121 | 2.87 | 4191 | 99.38 |
| 4 | 21 | 0.50 | 4212 | 99.88 |
| 5 | 2 | 0.05 | 4214 | 99.93 |
| 6 | 1 | 0.02 | 4215 | 99.95 |
| 7 | 2 | 0.05 | 4217 | 100.00 |
Baseline characteristics of participants according to parity.
| Parity | P-value | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0 | 1 | 2 | ≥3 | ||
| Number, N (%) | 4217 (100) | 543 (12.88) | 2983 (70.74) | 544 (12.90) | 147 (3.48) | |
| Age, mean ± SD, years | 42.64 ± 12.89 | 28.01 ± 5.95 | 41.48 ± 10.32 | 57.84 ± 8.98 | 63.93 ± 7.11 | <0.001 |
| BMI, mean ± SD, kg/m2 | 23.46 ± 3.66 | 21.84 ± 3.65 | 23.34 ± 3.55 | 25.07 ± 3.43 | 25.60 ± 3.31 | <0.001 |
| Smoking, N (%) | 64 (1.52) | 5 (0.92) | 41 (1.37) | 16 (2.94) | 2 (1.36) | 0.028 |
| Hypertension, N (%) | 919 (21.79) | 26 (4.79) | 553 (18.54) | 257 (47.24) | 83 (56.46) | <0.001 |
| Diabetes, N (%) | 214 (5.07) | 5 (0.92) | 118 (3.96) | 71 (13.05) | 20 (13.61) | <0.001 |
| eGFR, mean ± SD, ml/min/1.73 m2 | 96.47 ± 15.84 | 107.43 ± 12.98 | 97.34 ± 14.85 | 85.36 ± 13.68 | 79.45 ± 14.21 | <0.001 |
| MI, N (%) | 12 (0.28) | 0 (0.00) | 3 (0.10) | 6 (1.10) | 3 (2.04) | <0.001 |
| Stroke, N (%) | 45 (1.07) | 0 (0.00) | 20 (0.67) | 20 (3.68) | 5 (3.4) | <0.001 |
| Dyslipidemia, N (%) | 1710 (40.55) | 144 (26.52) | 1139 (38.18) | 331 (60.85) | 96 (65.31) | <0.001 |
| Alcohol use, N (%) | 209 (4.96) | 31 (5.71) | 158 (5.30) | 19 (3.49) | 1 (0.68) | 0.023 |
| Antihypertensive medication, N (%) | 357 (8.47) | 1 (0.18) | 178 (5.97) | 139 (25.55) | 39 (26.53) | <0.001 |
| Insulin or oral hypoglycemic agent, N (%) | 116 (2.75) | 1 (0.18) | 58 (1.94) | 47 (8.64) | 10 (6.80) | <0.001 |
| Antilipemic agent, N (%) | 47 (1.11) | 0 (0.00) | 27 (0.91) | 11 (2.02) | 9 (6.12) | <0.001 |
| Estrogen replacement, N (%) | 13 (0.31) | 1 (0.18) | 8 (0.27) | 3 (0.55) | 1 (0.68) | 0.371 |
| Education level, N (%) | ||||||
| Illiteracy/primary/middle school | 814 (19.30) | 16 (2.95) | 396 (13.28) | 298 (54.78) | 104 (70.75) | <0.001 |
| High school | 1035 (24.54) | 66 (12.15) | 763 (25.58) | 176 (32.35) | 30 (20.41) | |
| College/university/above | 2368 (56.15) | 461 (84.90) | 1824 (61.15) | 70 (12.87) | 13 (8.84) | |
| Income, ¥/month†, N (%) | ||||||
| <¥3000 | 1763 (41.81) | 167 (30.76) | 1099 (36.84) | 391 (71.88) | 106 (72.11) | <0.001 |
| ¥3000 to ¥5000 | 2136 (50.65) | 324 (59.67) | 1646 (55.18) | 129 (23.71) | 37 (25.17) | |
| >¥5000 | 257 (6.09) | 34 (6.26) | 204 (6.84) | 18 (3.31) | 1 (0.68) | |
SD, standard deviation; BMI, body mass index; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; MI, myocardial infarction.
†Average monthly income of the family member.
Analysis of serum lipid levels in different parity groups.
| Parity | P-value | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0 | 1 | 2 | ≥3 | ||
| TG ±SD, mmol/L | 1.31 ± 0.98 | 1.07 ± 0.70 | 1.27 ± 0.98 | 1.62 ± 1.11 | 1.70 ± 1.01 | <0.001 |
| TC ± SD, mmol/L | 4.42 ± 0.91 | 4.09 ± 0.77 | 4.38 ± 0.90 | 4.86 ± 0.89 | 4.91 ± 0.85 | <0.001 |
| LDL-C, mmol/L | 2.41 ± 0.63 | 2.16 ± 0.53 | 2.38 ± 0.62 | 2.71 ± 0.63 | 2.77 ± 0.60 | <0.001 |
| HDL-C, mmol/L | 1.29 ± 0.27 | 1.32 ± 0.27 | 1.29 ± 0.27 | 1.28 ± 0.27 | 1.24 ± 0.23 | 0.007 |
TG, triglycerides; SD, standard deviation; TC, total cholesterol; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein cholesteriol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol.
Association between parity and serum lipid levels.
| Type of dyslipidemia | Parity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | ≥3 | |
| TG disorder, N (%) | 67 (12.34) | 551 (18.47) | 185 (34.01) | 56 (38.10) |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.797 (0.590–1.077) | 0.853 (0.573–1.268) | 0.770 (0.462–1.285) |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.883 (0.634–1.230) | 0.858 (0.558–1.318) | 0.822 (0.475–1.421) |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.876 (0.628–1.224) | 0.823 (0.534–1.268) | 0.799 (0.460–1.391) |
| Model 4 | 1.00 | 0.871 (0.622–1.220) | 0.837 (0.540–1.296) | 0.846 (0.484–1.479) |
| TC disorder, N (%) | 42 (7.73) | 514 (17.23) | 183 (33.64) | 54 (36.73) |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.713 (0.493–1.030) | ||
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.698 (0.477–1.022) | ||
| Model 3 | 1.00 | |||
| Model 4 | 1.00 | 0.682 (0.464–1.001) | ||
| LDL–C disorder, N (%) | 11 (2.03) | 207 (6.94) | 77 (14.15) | 24 (16.33) |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 0.941 (0.486–1.820) | 0.583 (0.274–1.241) | 0.437 (0.183–1.043) |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 0.884 (0.456–1.713) | 0.529 (0.247–1.132) | 0.430 (0.179–1.030) |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 0.876 (0.452–1.700) | 0.520 (0.243–1.113) | 0.440 (0.183–1.057) |
| Model 4 | 1.00 | 0.857 (0.441–1.667) | 0.509 (0.237–1.093) | 0.433 (0.180–1.045) |
| HDL–C disorder, N (%) | 83 (15.29) | 492 (16.49) | 97 (17.83) | 23 (15.65) |
| Model 1 | 1.00 | 1.153 (0.874–1.521) | 1.350 (0.897–2.032) | 1.182 (0.656–2.128) |
| Model 2 | 1.00 | 1.247 (0.927–1.679) | 1.370 (0.893–2.103) | 1.197 (0.649–2.209) |
| Model 3 | 1.00 | 1.254 (0.928–1.694) | 1.347 (0.875–2.075) | 1.161 (0.622–2.166) |
| Model 4 | 1.00 | 1.256 (0.928–1.701) | 1.345 (0.870–2.080) | 1.209 (0.644–2.267) |
Values are expressed as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
TG, triglycerides; TC, total cholesterol; LDL-C, low density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high density lipoprotein cholesterol.
TG disorder, TG ≥ 1.7 mmol/L; TC disorder, TC ≥ 5.18 mmol/L; LDL-C disorder, LDL-C ≥ 3.37 mmol/L; HDL-C disorder, HDL-C < 1.04 mmol/L.
Model 1: adjusted for age.
Model 2: adjusted for age, BMI, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, and eGFR.
Model 3: adjusted for age, BMI, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, eGFR, education level, and income.
Model 4: adjusted for age, BMI, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, eGFR, education level, income, MI, stroke, use of alcohol, antihypertensive medication, insulin or oral hypoglycemic agent, lipid-lower therapy, and estrogen replacement.