| Literature DB >> 36053052 |
Ying Xu1, Haoyu Dong1, Boya Zhang1, Jiayu Zhang1, Qinghua Ma2, Hongpeng Sun1,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite abundant evidence linking dyslipidaemia to an increased risk of hyperuricaemia, the exact association between each component of dyslipidaemia and hyperuricaemia remains controversial. Thus, the objective of this research was to examine the correlation between dyslipidaemia and its components, as well as hyperuricaemia in Chinese people over the age of 60.Entities:
Keywords: Dyslipidaemia; dose-response relationship; hyperuricaemia; longitudinal cohort study; stratification analyses
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36053052 PMCID: PMC9448407 DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2022.2118368
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Med ISSN: 0785-3890 Impact factor: 5.348
Figure 1.Flow chart of subject selection for the present study.
Baseline characteristics of subjects participants by the group of blood lipid.
| Characteristics | Dyslipidaemia | Non-Dyslipidaemia | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, years, mean ± SD | 67.30 ± 6.10 | 67.80 ± 6.52 | .12 |
| Gender, n (%) | .21 | ||
| man | 382 (45.26) | 1513 (47.67) | |
| woman | 462 (54.74) | 1661 (52.33) | |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 24.31 ± 3.27 | 22.77 ± 3.06 | <.01 |
| Smoking status, n (%) | .81 | ||
| yes | 291 (34.48) | 1080 (34.03) | |
| no | 553 (65.52) | 2094 (65.97) | |
| Alcohol intake, n (%) | <.01 | ||
| yes | 145 (17.18) | 718 (22.62) | |
| no | 699 (82.82) | 2456 (77.38) | |
| Physical activity, n (%) | .35 | ||
| yes | 368 (43.60) | 1327 (41.81) | |
| no | 476 (56.40) | 1847 (58.19) | |
| SBP, mmHg | 146.22 ± 19.80 | 142.72 ± 19.00 | <.01 |
| DBP, mmHg | 86.57 ± 11.19 | 85.13 ± 11.20 | <.01 |
| FPG, mmol/L | 5.74 ± 1.31 | 5.52 ± 1.16 | <.01 |
| ALT, U/L | 21.30 ± 13.56 | 18.33 ± 10.82 | <.01 |
| AST, U/L | 24.14 ± 10.05 | 24.06 ± 8.07 | .05 |
| Creatinine,μmol/L | 68.24 ± 14.79 | 67.73 ± 15.12 | .23 |
| BUN, mmol/L | 4.94 ± 1.27 | 5.29 ± 1.42 | <.01 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | <.01 | ||
| yes | 569 (67.42) | 1936 (61.00) | |
| no | 275 (32.58) | 1238 (39.00) | |
| Diabetes, n (%) | <.01 | ||
| yes | 93 (11.02) | 206 (6.49) | |
| no | 751 (88.98) | 2968 (93.51) |
Hazard ratio for the incidence of HUA by dyslipidaemia and its components.
| Normal group | Exposure group | For each SD | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Incident rate 10000 person-years | 1840.74/10000 | 1981.61/10000 | – |
| model1a | 1.0 (ref) | 1.52 (1.33–1.73) | – |
| model2b | 1.0 (ref) | 1.40 (1.23–1.60) | – |
| model3c | 1.0 (ref) | 1.28 (1.12–1.47) | – |
|
| |||
| Incident rate 10000 person-years | 2001.89/10000 | 2019.54/10000 | – |
| model1a | 1.0 (ref) | 1.18 (0.94–1.47) | 1.06 (1.00–1.14) |
| model2b | 1.0 (ref) | 1.06 (0.84–1.32) | 1.06 (0.99–1.16) |
| model3c1 | 1.0 (ref) | 0.99 (0.72–1.37) | 0.88 (0.64–1.19) |
|
| |||
| Incident rate 10000 person-years | 2004.03/10000 | 1992.06/10000 | – |
| model1a | 1.0 (ref) | 1.66 (1.39–1.98) | 1.24 (1.17–1.31) |
| model2b | 1.0 (ref) | 1.48 (1.24–1.78) | 1.18 (1.12–1.26) |
| model3c2 | 1.0 (ref) | 1.30 (1.07–1.57) | 1.15 (1.00–1.32) |
|
| |||
| Incident rate 10000 person-years | 2003.00/10000 | 2002.92/10000 | – |
| model1a | 1.0 (ref) | 1.17 (0.90–1.53) | 1.14 (1.05–1.23) |
| model2b | 1.0 (ref) | 1.07 (0.82–1.40) | 1.05 (0.96–1.15) |
| model3c3 | 1.0 (ref) | 1.02 (0.70–1.50) | 1.15 (0.76–1.73) |
|
| |||
| Incident rate 10000 person-years | 1851.33/10000 | 1945.95/10000 | – |
| model1a | 1.0 (ref) | 1.52 (1.29–1.79) | 0.56 (0.48–0.66) |
| model2b | 1.0 (ref) | 1.44 (1.22–1.71) | 0.59 (0.50–0.70) |
| model3c4 | 1.0 (ref) | 1.20 (1.00–1.44) | 0.84 (0.60–1.19) |
model 1a: adjusted for age and gender;.
model 2b: model1a+ smoking status, alcohol intake, physical activity, hypertension, diabetes, CRE, BUN, AST, and ALT.
model 3c: model 2b+BMI; model 3c1: model 3c+TG, LDL-C, and HDL-C; model 3c2: model 3c+ TC, LDL-C, and HDL-C; model 3c3: model 3c+TG, TC, and HDL-C; model 3c4: model 3c+TG, TC, and LDL-C.
Figure 2.Risk of incident HUA associated with different dyslipidaemia types during the 6 years.
Multivariable Cox regression analysis of between number of dyslipidaemia components and HUA.
| Number of dyslipidaemia components | Case(n) | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 3174 | 1(ref) | 1(ref) | 1(ref) |
| 1 | 540 | 1.49 (1.28–1.75) | 1.40(1.21–1.65) | 1.27 (1.08–1.49) |
| 2 and more | 304 | 1.54 (1.27–1.87) | 1.39 (1.14–1.69) | 1.30 (1.07–1.58) |
Model 1: adjusted for age and gender.
Model 2: adjusted for age, gender, smoking status, alcohol intake, physical activity, hypertension, diabetes, CRE, BUN, AST, and ALT.
Model 3: adjusted for age, gender, smoking status, alcohol intake, physical activity, hypertension, diabetes, CRE, BUN, AST, ALT, and BMI.
Figure 3.Stratified analyses for the association between dyslipidaemia and HUA.
Sensitivity analyses for the association between dyslipidaemia and HUA.
| Model | Number | HRs (95% CIs) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Non-dyslipidaemia | Dyslipidaemia | ||
| Model 3, excluding the first 2 years’ incident HUA | 3694 | 1.0 (ref) | 1.30 (1.11–1.52) |
| Model 3, excluding baseline cardiovascular cases | 3728 | 1.0 (ref) | 1.29 (1.12–1.48) |
| Model 3, excluding baseline hypertension cases | 1513 | 1.0 (ref) | 1.12 (0.86–1.45) |
| Model 3, excluding baseline diabetes cases | 3719 | 1.0 (ref) | 1.29 (1.12–1.48) |
Model 3: adjusted for age, gender, smoking status, alcohol intake, physical activity, hypertension, diabetes, CRE, BUN, AST, ALT, and BMI.