BACKGROUND: Indexing left ventricular mass to body surface area or height2.7 leads to inaccuracies in diagnosing left ventricular hypertrophy in obese children. Lean body mass predictive equations provide the opportunity to determine the utility of lean body mass in indexing left ventricular mass. Our objectives were to compare the diagnostic accuracy of predicted lean body mass, body surface area, and height in detecting abnormal left ventricle mass in obese children. METHODS: Obese non-hypertensive patients aged 4-21 years were recruited prospectively. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was used to measure lean body mass. Height, weight, sex, race, and body mass index z-score were used to calculate predicted lean body mass. RESULTS: We enrolled 328 patients. Average age was 12.6 ± 3.8 years. Measured lean body mass had the strongest relationship with left ventricular mass (R2 = 0.84, p < 0.01) compared to predicted lean body mass (R2 = 0.82, p < 0.01), body surface area (R2 = 0.80, p < 0.01), and height2.7 (R2 = 0.65, p < 0.01). Of the clinically derived variables, predicted lean body mass was the only measure to have an independent association with left ventricular mass (β = 0.90, p < 0.01). Predicted lean body mass was the most accurate scaling variable in detecting left ventricular hypertrophy (positive predictive value = 88%, negative predictive value = 99%). CONCLUSIONS: Lean body mass is the strongest predictor of left ventricular mass in obese children. Predicted lean body mass is the most accurate anthropometric scaling variable for left ventricular mass in left ventricular hypertrophy detection. Predicted lean body mass should be considered for clinical use as the body size correcting variable for left ventricular mass in obese children.
BACKGROUND: Indexing left ventricular mass to body surface area or height2.7 leads to inaccuracies in diagnosing left ventricular hypertrophy in obesechildren. Lean body mass predictive equations provide the opportunity to determine the utility of lean body mass in indexing left ventricular mass. Our objectives were to compare the diagnostic accuracy of predicted lean body mass, body surface area, and height in detecting abnormal left ventricle mass in obesechildren. METHODS:Obese non-hypertensivepatients aged 4-21 years were recruited prospectively. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry was used to measure lean body mass. Height, weight, sex, race, and body mass index z-score were used to calculate predicted lean body mass. RESULTS: We enrolled 328 patients. Average age was 12.6 ± 3.8 years. Measured lean body mass had the strongest relationship with left ventricular mass (R2 = 0.84, p < 0.01) compared to predicted lean body mass (R2 = 0.82, p < 0.01), body surface area (R2 = 0.80, p < 0.01), and height2.7 (R2 = 0.65, p < 0.01). Of the clinically derived variables, predicted lean body mass was the only measure to have an independent association with left ventricular mass (β = 0.90, p < 0.01). Predicted lean body mass was the most accurate scaling variable in detecting left ventricular hypertrophy (positive predictive value = 88%, negative predictive value = 99%). CONCLUSIONS: Lean body mass is the strongest predictor of left ventricular mass in obesechildren. Predicted lean body mass is the most accurate anthropometric scaling variable for left ventricular mass in left ventricular hypertrophy detection. Predicted lean body mass should be considered for clinical use as the body size correcting variable for left ventricular mass in obesechildren.
Entities:
Keywords:
Lean body mass; echocardiography; obesity
Authors: Irene D Lytrivi; Puneet Bhatla; H Helen Ko; Jen Yau; Miwa K Geiger; Rowan Walsh; Ira A Parness; Shubhika Srivastava; James C Nielsen Journal: J Am Soc Echocardiogr Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 5.251
Authors: Paul D Chantler; R E Clements; L Sharp; K P George; L-B Tan; D F Goldspink Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2005-06-17 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Mariska Kemna; Erin Albers; Miranda C Bradford; Sabrina Law; Lester Permut; D Mike McMullan; Yuk Law Journal: Pediatr Transplant Date: 2015-12-22
Authors: Giovanni de Simone; Jorge R Kizer; Marcello Chinali; Mary J Roman; Jonathan N Bella; Lyle G Best; Elisa T Lee; Richard B Devereux Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: J N Bella; R B Devereux; M J Roman; M J O'Grady; T K Welty; E T Lee; R R Fabsitz; B V Howard Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-12-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: G de Simone; S R Daniels; R B Devereux; R A Meyer; M J Roman; O de Divitiis; M H Alderman Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1992-11-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: María Moreno; Josep Puig; José María Moreno-Navarrete; Gemma Xifra; Francisco Ortega; Wifredo Ricart; José Manuel Fernández-Real Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2015-09-09 Impact factor: 5.162