| Literature DB >> 34852773 |
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Increased waist circumference (WC) is one of the cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors used to predict cardiovascular events. Waist circumference cut-off values for predicting metabolic syndrome and other cardiovascular risks have been previously studied. Carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) is one of the cardiovascular risk factor recently described and reported to be suitable as it is a direct measurement of vascular quality. Hence the aim of the present study was to determine the optimal WC cut-off point for the prediction of subclinical CVD.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiovascular diseases; Carotid intima-media thickness; Cut-off points; Obesity; Visceral obesity; Waist circumference
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34852773 PMCID: PMC8638118 DOI: 10.1186/s12872-021-02389-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord ISSN: 1471-2261 Impact factor: 2.174
Baseline characteristics of the study population by gender
| Variables | Total population | Gender | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Women | Men | |||
| N | 1318 | 910(69%) | 408(31%) | |
| Age (years) | 52 ± 8 | 52 ± 8.00 | 51 ± 8.32 | 0.699 |
| BMI (Kg/m2) | 27.73 ± 8.00 | 30.44 ± 7.84 | 21.70 ± 4.05 | ≤ 0.001** |
| Overweight %(N) | 307(23.3%) | 236(25.9%) | 71(17%) | 0.142 |
| Obese %(N) | 461(35.0%) | 448(49.2%) | 13(3.2%) | ≤ 0.001** |
| Overweight/Obese %(N) | 65%(166) | 85.5%(141) | 27.2%(25) | 0.001** |
| WC(cm) | 89.60 ± 16.03 | 93.67 ± 16.07 | 80.36 ± 11.59 | ≤ 0.001** |
| High WC %(N) | 766(58.1%) | 709(77.9%) | 57 (14%) | 0.001** |
| Right CIMT (mm) | 0.65 ± 0.14 | 0.65 ± 0.14 | 0.65 ± 0.14 | 0.946 |
| Left CIMT (mm) | 0.64 ± 0.13 | 0.63 ± 0.13 | 0.64 ± 0.13 | 0.339 |
| CIMT (mm) | 0.65 ± 0.12 | 0.64 ± 0.12 | 0.65 ± 0.13 | 0.587 |
| High CIMT %(N) | 129 (9.7%) | 86 (9.5%) | 43(10.5%) | 0.301 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 126 ± 22.00 | 126 ± 22 | 126 ± 21 | 0.741 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 81 ± 13.00 | 81 ± 13 | 79. ± 13 | ≤ 0.001** |
| Hypertensive %(N) | 33%(85) | 40.0%(66) | 20.7%(19) | 0.001** |
| TRIG (mmol/L) | 1.11 ± 0.62 | 1.11 ± 0.60 | 1.10 ± 0.65 | 0.875 |
| High TRIG %(N) | 14%(37) | 14.9%(24) | 14.4%(13) | 0.539 |
| LDLc (mmol/L) | 2.41 ± 0.93 | 2.53 ± 0.94 | 2.16 ± 0.84 | ≤ 0.001** |
| High LDL c %(N) | 29%(74) | 31.5%(52) | 24.2%(22) | 0.136 |
| HDLc (mmol/L) | 1.21 ± 0.40 | 1.18 ± 0.36 | 1.26 ± 0.48 | 0.001** |
| Low HDL c %(N) | 68%(175) | 77.6%(128) | 51.1%(47) | 0.001** |
| CHOL (mmol/L) | 4.12 ± 1.10 | 4.21 ± 1.12 | 3.93 ± 1.00 | ≤ 0.001** |
| High CHOL %(N) | 35%(90) | 37.0%(61) | 31.5%(29) | 0.230 |
| Glucose (mmol/L) | 5.22 ± 2.24 | 5.31 ± 2.44 | 5.04 ± 2.10 | 0.054* |
| High glucose %(N) | 11%(27) | 9.1%(15) | 13.0%(12) | 0.216 |
*Significant at p value ≤ 0.05, **Significant at p value ≤ 0.001
Backward linear regression for assessment of the association of WC with an increased CIMT
| Variables | CIMT 1st model | CIMT last model | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Odds ratio | Odds ratio | |||
| Age | 0.385 | ≤ 0.001** | 0.380 | ≤ 0.001** |
| BMI | 0.998 | 0.997 | ||
| WC | 1.76 | 0.032* | 1.78 | 0.007* |
| Hypertension | 1.99 | 0.005* | 1.97 | 0.005* |
| Glucose | 1.96 | 0.003* | 1.99 | 0.001** |
| Insulin | 0.45 | 0.194 | ||
| Cholesterol | 1.01 | 0.984 | ||
| Triglyceride | 1.22 | 0.471 | ||
| LDL-C | 0.947 | 0.890 | ||
| Dyslipidaemia | 0.901 | 0.652 | ||
| R2 | 0.405 | 0.546 | ||
| LR chi2(4) | 59.20 | 37.86 | ||
| Prob > chi2 | ≤ 0.001 | ≤ 0.001 | ||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.0583 | 0.0448 | ||
| Log likelihood | − 397.67413 | − 403.34468 | ||
| Likelihood-ratio test | LR chi2(1) | 21.34 | ||
| Prob > chi2 | 0.00159 | |||
*Significant at p value ≤ 0.05, **Significant at p value ≤ 0.001
Backward linear regression for assessment of the association of WC with an increased CIMT women
| Variables | CIMT 1st model | CIMT last model | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef | Coeff | |||
| Age | 0.385 | ≤ 0.001** | 0.380 | ≤ 0.001** |
| BMI | 0.998 | 0.997 | ||
| WC | 0.160 | 0.032* | 0.169 | 0.006* |
| Hypertension | 0.099 | 0.005* | 0.137 | ≤ 0.001** |
| Glucose | 0.102 | 0.003* | 0.120 | 0.003* |
| Insulin | − 0.453 | 0.025 | − 0.330 | 0.035* |
| Cholesterol | 0.014 | 0.764 | ||
| Triglyceride | 0.022 | 0.371 | ||
| LDL-C | 0.045 | 0.569 | ||
| Dyslipidaemia | 0.019 | 0.681 | ||
| R2 | 0.400 | 0.512 | ||
| LR chi2(4) | 54.10 | 35.16 | ||
| Prob > chi2 | ≤ 0.001 | ≤ 0.001 | ||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.0583 | 0.0448 | ||
| Log likelihood | −396.35413 | − 408.26468 | ||
| Likelihood-ratio test | LR chi2(1) | 18.94 | ||
| Prob > chi2 | 0.00197 | |||
*Significant at p value ≤ 0.05, **Significant at p value ≤ 0.001
Backward linear regression for assessment of the association of WC with an increased CIMT men
| Variables | CIMT 1st model | CIMT last model | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coef | Coeff | |||
| Age | 0.450 | ≤ 0.001** | 0.444 | ≤ 0.001** |
| BMI | 0.034 | 0.733 | ||
| WC | 0.216 | ≤ 0.032* | 0.265 | ≤ 0.001** |
| Hypertension | 0.118 | ≤ 0.005* | 0.117 | 0.005* |
| Glucose | 0.128 | ≤ 0.003* | 0.136 | ≤ 0.001** |
| Insulin | 0.045 | 0.135 | ||
| Cholesterol | 0.114 | 0.523 | ||
| Triglyceride | 0.035 | 0.241 | ||
| LDL-C | 0.137 | 0.149 | ||
| Dyslipidaemia | 0.031 | 0.454 | ||
| R2 | 0.473 | 0.534 | ||
| LR chi2(4) | 56.13 | 38.23 | ||
| Prob > chi2 | ≤ 0.001 | ≤ 0.001 | ||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.0613 | 0.0540 | ||
| Log likelihood | − 390.41345 | − 405.68264 | ||
| Likelihood-ratio test | LR chi2(1) | 17.90 | ||
| Prob > chi2 | 0.00648 | |||
*Significant at p value ≤ 0.05, **Significant at p value ≤ 0.001
Fig. 1Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) curve for waist circumference to predict the risk of an increased CIMT (> 0.80 mm) in women
Fig. 2ROC curve for waist circumference as a predictor of an increased CIMT (> 0.80 mm) in men
Coordinates of the curve
| CIMT | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OCP (cm) | SEN (%) | SPE (%) | AUC | 95% CI | YI | PLR | PPV% | ||
| Female | |||||||||
| WC | 95 | 57 | 55 | 0.588 | 0.526–0.650 | 0.12 | 1.3 | 56 | 0.007* |
| 90 | 70 | 43 | 0.588 | 0.526–0.650 | 0.13 | 1.2 | 55 | ||
| WC | 82 | 72 | 70 | 0.767 | 0.685–0.848 | 0.417 | 2.4 | 71 | ≤ 0.001** |
OCP optimum cut-off point, SEN sensitivity, SPE specificity, AUC area under curve, YI Youden index, CI confidence interval
*Significant at p value ≤ 0.05, **Significant at p value ≤ 0.001
Comparison of the optimal cut-off point of waist circumference (WC) for the diagnosis of metabolic syndrome in African countries with the present study
| Author | Country | Participants | Outcome variable | Cut-off point for men (cm) | Cut-off point for women (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Motala et al. [ | South Africa | 189 | MS | ≥ 86 | ≥ 92 |
| Crowther et al. [ | South Africa | 1251 | MS | – | ≥ 91 |
| Hoebel et al. [ | South Africa | 152 | MS | ≥ 92 | ≥ 94 |
| Owolabi et al. [ | South Africa | 998 | MS | ≥ 95 | ≥ 90 |
| Murphy et al. [ | Uganda | 6136 | MS | ≥ 78 to ≥ 80 | ≥ 82 to ≥ 85 |
| Present study | South Africa | 1318 | CIMT | ≥ 82 | ≥ 95 |