| Literature DB >> 35967818 |
Signe Vargas-Rosvik1, Nelly Lazo-Verdugo1, Samuel Escandón1, Cristina Ochoa-Avilés1, Lucy Baldeón-Rojas2, Angélica Ochoa-Avilés1.
Abstract
Cardiovascular diseases have their origins in childhood. At least 20% of children and adolescents in Latin America are overweight or obese. However, little is known regarding the cardiovascular risk of young children living in the region. This paper aims to identify associations between socio-demographics, adiposity, and dietary intake with cardiometabolic risk among children between 6- and 8-years old living in urban and rural Andean regions of Ecuador. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 267 children attending elementary schools between February and August 2018. Sociodemographic data were collected using a structured interview. Bodyweight, height, and waist circumference were measured in duplicate; blood samples were taken after overnight fasting to determine blood lipids, hepatic enzymes, and adipokines; food intake data was assessed by two 24-h recalls administered to the guardians. Associations between cardiometabolic risk (i.e., blood lipids, hepatic enzymes, and adipokines) with sociodemographic characteristics, dietary intake, and waist circumference were tested using multiple hierarchical regression models. Twenty-nine percent of the children were overweight or obese, 12% had low HDL levels, and over 18% had high levels of LDL and triglycerides. Children living in the urban region had lower levels of HDL (β-4.07 mg/dL; 95% CI: -7.00; -1.15; P = 0.007) but higher levels of LDL cholesterol (β 8.52 mg/dL; 95% CI: 1.38; 15.66; P = 0.019). Hepatic enzymes were also higher among urban children (SGOT: β% 22.13; 95% CI: 17.33; 26.93; P < 0.001; SGPT: β 0.84 U/L; 95% CI: 0.09; 1.59; P = 0.028). Leptin blood levels were higher (β% 29.27; 95% CI: 3.57; 54.97; P = 0.026), meanwhile adiponectin plasma concentrations were lower among urban children (β%-103.24; 95% CI: -58.9; -147.58; P = < 0.001). Fiber intake was inversely associated with total cholesterol (β-9.27 mg/dL; 95% CI -18.09; -0.45; P = 0.040) and LDL cholesterol blood levels (β-9.99 mg/dL; 95% CI: -18.22; -1.75; P = 0.018). Our findings demonstrate that young children are at high cardiovascular risk; if no actions are taken, the burden of non-communicable diseases will be substantial. The differences in risk between rural and urban areas are evident; urbanization might predispose children to a different reality and, in most cases, result in poor habits.Entities:
Keywords: Ecuador; anthropometry; cardiovascular risk; children; dietary intake
Year: 2022 PMID: 35967818 PMCID: PMC9366330 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.925873
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Sociodemographic characteristics of the study participants.
| Total | Urban | Rural | |||||
|
|
|
| |||||
|
| % |
| % |
| % |
| |
| Sex | 0.336 | ||||||
| Female | 126 | 47.2 | 42 | 43.3 | 84 | 49.4 | |
| Male | 141 | 52.8 | 55 | 56.7 | 86 | 50.6 | |
| Ethnicity | 0.011 | ||||||
| Mestizo (European and Indigenous ancestry) | 238 | 91.9 | 81 | 86.2 | 157 | 95.2 | |
| Other | 21 | 8.1 | 13 | 13.8 | 8 | 4.8 | |
| Educational level of the guardian | 0.109 | ||||||
| None/Primary education | 81 | 31.1 | 25 | 26.0 | 56 | 34.2 | |
| Secondary education | 138 | 53.1 | 51 | 53.1 | 87 | 53.1 | |
| Higher education/Master’s degree | 41 | 15.8 | 20 | 20.8 | 21 | 12.8 | |
* Differences were tested using the Pearson’s Chi-square non-parametric test.
a Other ethnic groups: white, Afro-descendant and Indigenous.
Blood lipid, hepatic profile and weight status of the study participants.
| Total | Urban | Rural | |||||
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Body weight (Kg) ( | 23.8 | 4.7 | 25.3 ( | 5.2 | 23.0 ( | 4.1 | <0.001 |
| Body height (cm) ( | 118.9 | 5.5 | 120.6 | 5.7 | 118.0 | 5.1 | <0.001 |
| BMI for age z-score ( | 0.5 | 1.1 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 0.4 ( | 1.0 | 0.008 |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 58.67 | 6.69 | 60.8 | 7.44 | 57.46 | 5.92 | <0.001 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 86.8 | 42.8 | 92.0 | 47.9 | 83.8 | 39.3 | 0.254 |
| Total Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 175.3 | 29.1 | 180.2 | 30.1 | 172.5 | 28.3 | 0.041 |
| HDL Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 53.0 | 11.4 | 50.2 | 11.3 | 54.6 | 11.2 | 0.003 |
| LDL Cholesterol (mg/dL) | 105.0 | 27.1 | 111.5 | 27.9 | 101.2 | 26.0 | 0.003 |
| SGOT (U/L) | 23.9 | 5.0 | 27.3 | 5.0 | 21.9 | 3.8 | <0.001 |
| SGPT (U/L) | 10.4 | 3.0 | 11.3 | 3.7 | 9.8 | 2.3 | 0.001 |
| Leptin (ng/ml) ( | 1.7 | 2.4 | 2.6 ( | 3.5 | 1.4 ( | 1.7 | 0.005 |
| Adiponectin (μg/ml) ( | 7.4 | 6.9 | 3.8 ( | 5.8 | 9.1 ( | 6.7 | <0.001 |
SD, standard deviation; HDL, high density lipid; LDL, low density lipid; SGOT, serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase; SGPT, serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase; BMI, body mass index.
a Differences were estimated using the parametric student’s test.
b Differences were estimated using the Wilcoxon Rank-sum non-parametric test.
FIGURE 1Body mass index classification. Percentage of children obese, overweight, normal, and underweight. Total n = 263, Urban n = 97, Rural n = 166. **P < 0.01.
FIGURE 2Blood lipid profile. (A) Percentage of children within high, marginal high, and adequate values for triglycerides. (B) Percentage of children within high, marginal high, and adequate values for total cholesterol. (C) Percentage of children within low, marginal low, and adequate values for HDL-cholesterol. (D) Percentage of children within high, marginal high, and adequate values for LDL- cholesterol. Total n = 264, Urban n = 97, Rural n = 167. *P < 0.05. NS, no significant differences.
Dietary intake of the study participants.
| Total | Urban | Rural | |||||
|
|
|
| |||||
| Dietary intake |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Total energy (kcal/day) | 1757.1 | 461.4 | 1961.5 | 378.9 | 1422.6 | 384.0 | <0.00 |
| Total fat intake (%E/day) | 26.1 | 6.4 | 26.6 | 5.9 | 25.2 | 7.2 | 0.229 |
| Total protein (%E/day) | 12.5 | 2.4 | 12.4 | 2.3 | 12.7 | 2.5 | 0.622 |
| Total carbohydrate (%E/day) | 59.8 | 7.0 | 59.5 | 6.3 | 60.3 | 8.2 | 0.542 |
| Total fiber (%E/day) | 1.6 | 0.6 | 1.5 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 0.7 | 0.037 |
|
| |||||||
| Minimally processed food (%E/day) | 49.6 | 11.7 | 48.2 | 10.6 | 51.8 | 13.2 | 0.071 |
| Culinary ingredients (%E/day) | 14.6 | 6.7 | 14.9 | 6.8 | 14.0 | 6.5 | 0.306 |
| Processed food (%E/day) | 15.3 | 7.3 | 15.0 | 7.3 | 15.6 | 7.3 | 0.646 |
| Ultra-processed food (%E/day) | 20.6 | 11.9 | 21.0 | 12.2 | 20.1 | 11.5 | 0.675 |
SD, standard deviation; %E/day, energy percentage per day.
a Differences were estimated using the parametric student’s test.
b Differences were estimated using the Wilcoxon Rank-sum non-parametric test.
c NOVA: NOVA food framework: (i) unprocessed or minimally processed foods, (ii) culinary ingredients, (iii) processed foods, and (iv) ultra-processed foods (40). The E%/day was calculated from each NOVA food group. The difference in sample size among the study variables is explained by the fact that not all parents in the rural area were able to schedule a meeting for the 24-recall.
FIGURE 3Dietary intake according to recommendation. (A) Percentage of children within high, adequate, and insufficient carbohydrate consumption category. (B) Percentage of children within the high, adequate, and insufficient total fat consumption category. (C) Percentage of children within the adequate and insufficient protein consumption category. (D) Percentage of children within the adequate and insufficient fiber consumption category. Total n = 145, Urban n = 90, Rural n = 55. The difference in sample size among the study variables is explained by the fact that not all parents in the rural area were able to schedule a meeting for the 24-recall. *P < 0.05. NS, no significant differences.
Associations between blood lipids, hepatic enzymes and adipokines with sociodemographic, anthropometrics, and nutrient intake data*.
|
|
| Triglycerides | Total cholesterol | LDL cholesterol | HDL cholesterol | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
| β | 95 |
| β | 95 |
| β | 95 |
| β | 95 |
| ||
|
| Age | 2.87 | −3.70; 9.44 | 0.390 | 4.05 | −1.09; 9.20 | 0.122 | 1.31 | −3.45; 6.07 | 0.589 | 1.93 | −0.06; 3.93 | 0.058 |
| Sex | 4.82 | −2.27; 11.92 | 0.182 | 1.86 | −4.72; 8.44 | 0.579 | −1.73 | −4.49; 1.03 | 0.218 | ||||
| Residence |
|
|
| 5.08 | −2.42; 12.57 | 0.184 | − | − | |||||
| Educational level of the guardian | – | – | – | 4.49 | −0.90; 9.87 | 0.102 | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
|
| Age | −2.24 | −9.49; 5.00 | 0.543 | 4.45 | −1.16; 10.05 | 0.120 | 1.72 | −3.48; 6.92 | 0.516 | |||
| Sex | 4.28 | −2.81; 11.38 | 0.236 | 1.43 | −5.16; 8.03 | 0.669 | −1.85 | −4.55; 0.86 | 0.180 | ||||
| Residence | – | – | – | 3.48 | −4.19; 11.15 | 0.372 | − | − | |||||
| Educational level of the guardian |
|
|
| 4.08 | −1.29; 9.45 | 0.136 |
|
|
| – | – | – | |
| BMI Z-score | −0.90 | −10.78; 8.98 | 0.857 | 1.70 | −5.67; 9.06 | 0.651 | 1.60 | −5.32; 8.51 | 0.650 | 0.14 | −2.69; 2.98 | 0.921 | |
| Waist circumference (cm) | 0.12 | −1.15; 1.39 | 0.855 | 0.07 | −1.12; 1.27 | 0.904 | −0.46 | −0.95; 0.03 | 0.064 | ||||
|
| Age |
|
|
| 2.86 | −5.02; 10.75 | 0.474 | 0.62 | −6.67; 7.91 | 0.866 |
|
|
|
| Sex |
|
|
| 9.06 | −0.76; 18.89 | 0.070 | 5.96 | −3.21; 15.13 | 0.201 |
|
|
| |
| Residence |
|
|
| −0.26 | −10.94; 10.42 | 0.961 | 4.72 | −5.14; 14.58 | 0.345 |
|
|
| |
| Educational level of the guardian |
|
|
| 5.44 | −1.89; 12.78 | 0.144 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| BMI Z-score |
|
|
| 2.02 | −8.43; 12.48 | 0.702 | 2.72 | −7.03; 12.48 | 0.582 |
|
|
| |
| Waist circumference (cm) |
|
|
| 0.18 | −1.57; 1.92 | 0.841 | 0.13 | −1.50; 1.76 | 0.874 |
|
|
| |
| Fiber | – | – | – | − | − | − | − | – | – | – | |||
|
| |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| |||||||||||||
|
| Age | −0.74 | −3.93; 2.45 | 0.648 | 0.44 | −0.04; 0.92 | 0.070 | 4.13 | −17.36; 25.62 | 0.705 | 14.12 | −15.76; 44.00 | 0.351 |
| Sex | −0.65 | −5.05; 3.75 | 0.773 | 0.19 | −0.54; 0.92 | 0.607 | −0.77 | −40.39; 38.85 | 0.969 | ||||
| Residence | − | − | |||||||||||
| Educational level of the guardian | 3.01 | −0.33; 6.35 | 0.077 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
|
| Age | −0.68 | −4.19; 2.84 | 0.705 | 0.14 | −0.37; 0.65 | 0.586 | −5.98 | −24.89; 12.93 | 0.533 | 23.18 | −9.72; 56.08 | 0.166 |
| Sex | −0.64 | −5.08; 3.80 | 0.777 | 0.22 | −0.45; 0.90 | 0.517 | −0.05 | −39.75; 39.66 | 0.998 | ||||
| Residence | − | − | |||||||||||
| Educational level of the guardian | 3.03 | −0.33; 6.40 | 0.077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| BMI Z-score | 0.92 | −3.70; 5.53 | 0.695 | 0.16 | −0.44; 0.77 | 0.594 | 7.66 | −17.71; 33.03 | 0.551 | 18.85 | −24.64; 62.35 | 0.393 | |
| Waist circumference (cm) | −0.07 | −0.87; 0.72 | 0.858 | −5.82 | −13.63; 2.00 | 0.143 | |||||||
|
| Age |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Sex |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Residence |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Educational level of the guardian |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| BMI Z-score |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Waist circumference (cm) | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Fiber | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |
*Analysis performed using hierarchical regression models with blood lipids, hepatic enzymes and adipokines as dependent variables; Age, Sex, Place of residence and Education level of the guardian as independent variables in the first step; BMI Z-score and waist circumference in step 2; and nutrients in Step 3. Only variables significantly associated with the dependent variables in bivariate linear regression models were included in the hierarchical regressions.
a Education level of the guardian: 0 = None/primary education, 1 = Secondary education, 2 = Higher education/Master’s degree.
b Step 3 is not shown as no significant association was found in the bivariate analysis with any nutrient.
c Dependent variables log-transformed, the results are presented as B% to enhance interpretability. –Variables not significantly associated with the dependent variables in bivariate linear regression models.
Bold: Significant associations in the hierarchical models.