| Literature DB >> 28275071 |
Luisa C C Brant1, Na Wang2, Francisco M Ojeda3,4, Michael LaValley5, Sandhi M Barreto6, Emelia J Benjamin7,8,9, Gary F Mitchell8, Ramachandran S Vasan7,8,9, Joseph N Palmisano2, Thomas Münzel10,11, Stefan Blankenberg3,4, Philipp S Wild12,13,11, Tanja Zeller3,4, Antonio L P Ribeiro6, Renate B Schnabel3,4, Naomi M Hamburg14.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Microvascular dysfunction is a marker of early vascular disease that predicts cardiovascular events. Whether metabolically healthy obese individuals have impaired microvascular function remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation of obesity phenotypes stratified by metabolic status to microvascular function. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: body mass index; cardiovascular risk factors; cohort studies; endothelial function; metabolic syndrome
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28275071 PMCID: PMC5523995 DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.116.004199
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Am Heart Assoc ISSN: 2047-9980 Impact factor: 5.501
Clinical Characteristics and Digital Vascular Measures of Participants According to Cohort and Overall
| Characteristic | GHS (n=10 943) | FHS (n=4352) | ELSA‐Brasil (n=1535) | Overall (n=16 830) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, y | 54±11 | 54±16 | 52±9 | 53±6 |
| Sex, male, n (%) | 5639 (52) | 2166 (49) | 860 (56) | 8665 (51) |
| Systolic blood pressure, mm Hg | 131±17 | 123±17 | 122±17 | 125±10 |
| Diastolic blood pressure, mm Hg | 82±9 | 74±10 | 78±11 | 78±6 |
| Heart rate, bpm | 69±11 | 62±10 | 69±10 | 67±6 |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 27.1±4.7 | 27.7±5.5 | 26.8±4.6 | 27.1±2.8 |
| Smoking, n (%) | 2130 (19) | 600 (14) | 184 (12) | 2914 (17) |
| Total/HDL cholesterol | 4.1±1.2 | 3.6±1.2 | 4.1±1.0 | 4.0±0.7 |
| triglycerides, ln(mg/dL) | 4.7±0.5 | 4.6±0.5 | 4.8±0.5 | 4.7±0.3 |
| Glucose, mg/dL | 94±18 | 102±22 | 111±31 | 99±13 |
| Diabetes mellitus, n (%) | 766 (7) | 393 (9) | 197 (13) | 1356 (8) |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 5314 (49) | 1745 (40) | 576 (38) | 7635 (45) |
| Hypertension treatment, n (%) | 3091 (28) | 1361 (31) | 435 (28) | 4887 (29) |
| Lipid‐lowering treatment, n (%) | 1375 (13) | 1216 (28) | 197 (13) | 2788 (16) |
| Prevalent CVD, n (%) | 596 (5) | 405 (9) | 64 (4) | 1065 (6) |
| PAT ratio | 0.65±0.41 | 0.69±0.41 | 0.49±0.37 | 0.60±0.23 |
| Baseline pulse amplitude | 5.99±0.90 | 5.66±0.89 | 6.00±0.83 | 5.89±0.50 |
Combined estimate for continuous variables using inverse variance weighting. Continuous variables are given as mean±SD. BMI indicates body mass index; CVD, cardiovascular disease; ELSA‐Brasil, Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health; FHS, Framingham Heart Study; GHS, Gutenberg Heart Study; HDL, high‐density level; PAT, peripheral arterial tonometry.
P<0.005 for comparison of all characteristics between cohorts.
Triglycerides and PAT measures are natural logarithm transformed.
Figure 1Forest plots of clinical correlates of digital vascular measures across the 3 cohorts. A, Baseline pulse amplitude. B, PAT ratio. Data were age‐ and sex‐adjusted. Per SD on continuous variables. Combined estimate using DerSimonian and Laird random effects model. Q test for heterogeneity. CVD indicates cardiovascular disease; HDL, high‐density cholesterol; PAT, peripheral arterial tonometry.
Number of Participants, Baseline Pulse Amplitude, and PAT Ratio According to BMI Categories Stratified by Metabolic Status, Per Cohort and Overall
| Cohort | Metabolically Healthy | Metabolically Unhealthy | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Overweight | Obese | Normal | Overweight | Obese | |
| Number of participants | ||||||
| ELSA‐Brasil | 472 | 261 | 67 | 126 | 351 | 253 |
| FHS | 1351 | 1064 | 395 | 116 | 668 | 811 |
| GHS | 3564 | 3173 | 886 | 222 | 1275 | 1643 |
| Overall | 5387 | 4498 | 1348 | 464 | 2294 | 2707 |
| Baseline pulse amplitude | ||||||
| ELSA‐Brasil | 5.74 (0.034) | 5.90 (0.046) | 6.17 (0.091) | 6.01 (0.066) | 6.15 (0.040) | 6.36 (0.046) |
| FHS | 5.33 (0.021) | 5.62 (0.022) | 5.70 (0.037) | 5.62 (0.068) | 5.84 (0.029) | 6.09 (0.026) |
| GHS | 5.70 (0.013) | 6.01 (0.013) | 6.24 (0.020) | 5.81 (0.022) | 6.13 (0.018) | 6.35 (0.017) |
| Overall | 5.61 (0.010) | 5.91 (0.011) | 6.12 (0.017) | 5.82 (0.020) | 6.06 (0.014) | 6.28 (0.014) |
| PAT ratio | ||||||
| ELSA‐Brasil | 0.55 (0.016) | 0.51 (0.022) | 0.44 (0.043) | 0.52 (0.031) | 0.45 (0.019) | 0.38 (0.022) |
| FHS | 0.82 (0.011) | 0.72 (0.012) | 0.69 (0.019) | 0.69 (0.035) | 0.61 (0.021) | 0.53 (0.013) |
| GHS | 0.77 (0.006) | 0.65 (0.006) | 0.56 (0.010) | 0.71 (0.011) | 0.59 (0.009) | 0.49 (0.008) |
| Overall | 0.76 (0.005) | 0.66 (0.005) | 0.58 (0.008) | 0.69 (0.010) | 0.57 (0.007) | 0.49 (0.007) |
Data are presented as mean and SE. Data are age‐ and sex‐adjusted. P value for linear trend across BMI categories (within each metabolic level) <0.0001 for both baseline pulse amplitude and PAT ratio in the overall sample. P values for comparison between metabolic levels for each BMI category (normal, overweight, obese) <0.0001 for both baseline pulse amplitude and PAT ratio in the overall sample. BMI indicates body mass index; ELSA‐Brasil, Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health; FHS, Framingham Heart Study; GHS, Gutenberg Heart Study; PAT, peripheral arterial tonometry.
Figure 2Meta‐analysis of digital vascular measures by metabolic and body mass index categories. A, Baseline pulse amplitude. B, PAT ratio. Data are shown as weighted mean difference compared with metabolically healthy normal‐weight person (reference). Data were age‐ and sex‐adjusted. *P<0.0001 compared to normal weight metabolically healthy. Baseline pulse amplitude and PAT ratio are unitless. PAT indicates peripheral arterial tonometry.