Impact of Abdominal Visceral and Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors: The Jackson Heart Study
Impact of Abdominal Visceral and Subcutaneous Adipose Tissue on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors: The Jackson Heart Study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1210/jc.2010-1378
复制
发表时间：
2010-12-01
影响因子：
5.8
通讯作者：
Taylor, Herman A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Liu, Jiankang;Fox, Caroline S.;Taylor, Herman A.
目的：肥胖是心脏代谢风险的主要驱动因素。腹部内脏脂肪组织（VAT）和皮下脂肪组织（SAT）可能会产生不同的代谢风险特征。我们调查的关系，增值税和SAT与心脏代谢危险因素在杰克逊心脏研究coherent.Methods：参与者从杰克逊心脏研究（n = 2477，64%的妇女，平均年龄，58岁）进行了多探测器计算机断层扫描，增值税和SAT的体积量进行了评估2007年和2009年之间。心脏代谢的危险因素进行了检查，按性别与增值税和SAT。结果：男性有较高的平均体积增值税（873 vs。SAT的平均体积（1730 vs. 2659 cm 3）低于女性（P = 0.0001）。VAT或SAT每增加1-SD，我们观察到空腹血糖和甘油三酯水平升高，高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平降低，高血压、糖尿病和代谢综合征的比值比增加。在女性中，VAT的效应量大于SAT [空腹血糖，5.51 +/- 1.0 vs. 3.36 +/- 0.9;甘油三酯，0.17 +/- 0.01 vs. 0.05 +/- 0.01;高密度脂蛋白胆固醇，-5.36 +/- 0.4 vs. n-2.85 +/- 0.4;高血压的优势比为1.62（1.4-1.9）与1.40（1.2-1.6）;糖尿病，1.82（1.6-2.1）vs. 1.58（1.4-1.8）;代谢综合征，分别为3.34（2.8-4.0）vs. 2.06（1.8-2.4）; VAT和SAT之间的差异P < 0.0001]。在男性中也观察到类似的模式。此外，即使在考虑了体重指数后，VAT仍与大多数风险因素相关（P范围为0.006-0.0001）。增值税的关系，大多数危险因素是显着不同的女性和男性之间。结论：腹部增值税和SAT都与不利的心脏代谢危险因素，但增值税仍然更强烈地与这些危险因素。这项研究的结果表明，与心脏代谢危险因素的关系与非洲血统参与者中腹部肥胖的致病作用一致。（临床内分泌代谢杂志95：5419-5426，2010）
Objective: Obesity is a major driver of cardiometabolic risk. Abdominal visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and sc adipose tissue (SAT) may confer differential metabolic risk profiles. We investigated the relations of VAT and SAT with cardiometabolic risk factors in the Jackson Heart Study cohort.Methods: Participants from the Jackson Heart Study (n = 2477; 64% women; mean age, 58 yr) underwent multidetector computed tomography, and the volumetric amounts of VAT and SAT were assessed between 2007 and 2009. Cardiometabolic risk factors were examined by sex in relation to VAT and SAT.Results: Men had a higher mean volume of VAT(873vs. 793cm(3)) and a lower mean volume of SAT(1730 vs. 2659 cm3) than women (P = 0.0001). Per 1-SD increment in either VAT or SAT, we observed elevated levels of fasting plasma glucose and triglyceride, lower levels of high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, and increased odds ratios for hypertension, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome. The effect size of VAT in women was larger than that of SAT [fasting plasma glucose, 5.51 +/- 1.0 vs. 3.36 +/- 0.9; triglyceride, 0.17 +/- 0.01 vs. 0.05 +/- 0.01; high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, -5.36 +/- 0.4 vs. n -2.85 +/- 0.4; and odds ratio for hypertension, 1.62 (1.4-1.9) vs. 1.40 (1.2-1.6); diabetes, 1.82 (1.6-2.1) vs. 1.58 (1.4-1.8); and metabolic syndrome, 3.34 (2.8-4.0) vs. 2.06 (1.8-2.4), respectively; P < 0.0001 for difference between VAT and SAT]. Similar patterns were also observed in men. Furthermore, VAT remained associated with most risk factors even after accounting for body mass index (P ranging from 0.006-0.0001). The relationship of VAT to most risk factors was significantly different between women and men.Conclusions: Abdominal VAT and SAT are both associated with adverse cardiometabolic risk factors, but VAT remains more strongly associated with these risk factors. The results from this study suggest that relations with cardiometabolic risk factors are consistent with a pathogenic role of abdominal adiposity in participants of African ancestry. (J Clin Endocrinol Metab 95: 5419-5426, 2010)