| Literature DB >> 35672353 |
Weijie Cao1, Yiting Xu1, Yun Shen1, Tingting Hu1, Yunfeng Xiao2, Yufei Wang1, Xiaojing Ma3, Yuqian Bao4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35672353 PMCID: PMC9395262 DOI: 10.1038/s41366-022-01160-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) ISSN: 0307-0565 Impact factor: 5.551
Clinical characteristics of subjects at baseline and follow-up.
| Characteristics | Baseline | Follow up |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 57.8 ± 7.1 | 59.9 ± 7.1 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 24.2 ± 3.2 | 24.4 ± 3.3 |
| NC (cm) Men | 38.1 ± 2.3 | 38.2 ± 2.8 |
| Women | 33.8 ± 2.0 | 33.7 ± 2.4 |
| WC (cm) Men | 87.8 ± 8.9 | 88.1 ± 8.8 |
| Women | 81.9 ± 8.8 | 82.0 ± 8.9 |
| VFA (cm2) | 82.43 (58.27–113.10) | 84.55 (59.83–113.50)** |
| SFA (cm2) | 175.33 (133.71–219.72) | 174.75 (133.40–221.65) |
| SBP (mmHg) | 133 ± 18 | 133 ± 18 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 80 ± 11 | 79 ± 10 |
| FPG (mmol/l) | 5.3 (4.9–5.8) | 5.8 (5.4–6.5)** |
| 2hPG (mmol/l) | 7.3 (5.9–9.4) | 7.6 (6.1–9.9)** |
| HbA1c (%) | 5.6 (5.4–5.9) | 5.8 (5.5–6.1)** |
| FINS (uU/ml) | 8.1 (5.8–11.7) | 9.0 (6.5–13.2)** |
| HOMA-IR | 2.0 (1.3–3.0) | 2.4 (1.7–3.7)** |
| TC (mmol/l) | 5.1 ± 0.9 | 5.4 ± 0.9** |
| TG (mmol/l) | 1.4 (0.9–1.9) | 1.5 (1.0–2.1) |
| HDL-C (mmol/l) | 1.3 (1.1–1.6) | 1.5 (1.0–2.1)** |
| LDL-C (mmol/l) | 3.2 ± 0.8 | 3.3 ± 0.9 |
| CRP (mg/l) | 0.89 (0.46–1.74) | 0.84 (0.46–1.62) |
| Abdominal obesity, n(%) | 785 (55.2%) | 848 (59.6%) |
Continuous variables are expressed as means ± standard deviation or medians with interquartile range. Categorical variables are expressed as numbers with percentages.
BMI body mass index, SFA subcutaneous fat area, VFA visceral fat area, NC neck circumference, WC waist circumference, SBP systolic blood pressure, DBP diastolic blood pressure, FPG fasting plasma glucose, 2hPG 2-h plasma glucose, FINS fasting insulin, HbA glycated hemoglobin A1c, HOMA-IR homeostasis model assessment-insulin resistance index, TC total cholesterol, TG triglyceride, HDL-C high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL-C low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
**p < 0.05.
Fig. 1VFA and SFA at follow-up.
VFA (A) and SFA (B) according NC change (%) group (NC change groups are categorized as follows: < –2.5%, ≥ –2.5% to < 2.5%, ≥ 2.5% to < 5% and ≥ 5%) at follow-up. Results are presented as median and interquartile range. The median VFAs (A) showed a significant difference in each two groups (all P < 0.05) while the median SFAs (B) showed no difference between the groups (all P > 0.05).
Ratios with 95% confidence intervals in measures of VFA and SFA at follow-up by categories of neck circumference change compared with neck circumference maintenance.
| Characteristics neck circumference change categories | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <–2.5% | ≥ –2.5% to <2.5% | ≥2.5% to <5% | ≥5% | ||||
| Ratio | 95% CI | Reference | Ratio | 95% CI | Ratio | 95% CI | |
| VFA at follow-up | |||||||
| Model 1 | 0.91 | 0.86–0.97 | 1 | 1.28 | 1.08–1.54 | 1.63 | 1.24–1.82 |
| Model 2 | 0.94 | 0.90–0.99 | 1 | 1.26 | 1.12–1.45 | 1.42 | 1.22–1.60 |
| Model 3 | 0.97 | 0.94–1.03 | 1 | 1.10 | 1.03–1.25 | 1.26 | 1.05–1.49 |
| SFA at follow-up | |||||||
| Model 1 | 0.96 | 0.91–1.02 | 1 | 1.14 | 0.95–1.19 | 1.14 | 1.02–1.29 |
| Model 2 | 0.95 | 0.91–1.01 | 1 | 1.05 | 0.98–1.09 | 1.08 | 1.00–1.17 |
| Model 3 | 1.02 | 0.98–1.06 | 1 | 1.03 | 0.99–1.07 | 1.07 | 0.96–1.12 |
Model 1 was adjusted for age and sex. Model 2 was adjusted for model 1 + SBP, DBP, HbA1c, HOMA-IR, TG, HDL-C and LDL-C at baseline. Model 3 was adjusted for model 2 + BMI and WC at baseline.
Fig. 2Risk ratio for abdominal obesity.
Subgroup analyses by sex (men vs. women), age (<65 vs. ≥65 years), body mass index (BMI < 25 vs. ≥25 kg/m2) and waist circumference (WC < 90 cm in men and 85 cm in women vs. WC ≥ 90 cm in men and 85 cm in women using multivariable logistic regression. The model was adjusted for age, sex, BMI, WC, blood pressure, lipid profiles and HbA1c. The data are shown as the adjusted odd ratio (95% confidence interval).