Body Adiposity and Type 2 Diabetes: Increased Risk With a High Body Fat Percentage Even Having a Normal BMI
Body Adiposity and Type 2 Diabetes: Increased Risk With a High Body Fat Percentage Even Having a Normal BMI
复制标题
DOI：
10.1038/oby.2011.36
复制
发表时间：
2011-07-01
期刊：
影响因子：
6.9
通讯作者：
Fruehbeck, Gema
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gomez-Ambrosi, Javier;Silva, Camilo;Fruehbeck, Gema
肥胖是糖尿病前期和2型糖尿病发展的主要危险因素。BMI被广泛用作衡量肥胖的替代指标，但它低估了肥胖的普遍程度。肥胖被定义为身体脂肪过多。我们评估了糖耐量受损或空腹血糖受损（两者都被认为是前驱糖尿病）或2型糖尿病的存在，并使用BMI与体脂百分比（BF%）进行肥胖诊断。我们进行了一项横断面研究，包括4828名年龄在18-80岁的白人受试者（587名瘦，1320名超重，2921名肥胖，根据BMI分类）（66%为女性）。测量身体质量指数（BMI）、空气置换体积描记仪（ADP）测定的BF%及常规血糖代谢和血脂指标。我们发现，根据BF%对样本进行全球分析（P < 0.0001）和瘦bmi分类的受试者（P < 0.0001），前驱糖尿病或2型糖尿病在肥胖类别中的受试者人数高于预期，但在超重或肥胖分类的个体中没有。重要的是，与血糖正常（NG）的女性相比，患有糖尿病前期或2型糖尿病的女性的BF%明显更高（35.5 +/- 7.0比30.3 +/- 7.7%,P < 0.0001），而BMI没有差异。同样，在BMI分级为瘦型糖尿病前期或2型糖尿病的男性中，BF%增加（25.2 +/- 9.0 vs. 19.9 +/- 8.0%, P = 0.008）， BMI和腰围没有差异。总之，除了BMI和腰围提供的信息外，评估BF%可能有助于诊断葡萄糖耐量紊乱，特别是对于BMI的男性受试者
Obesity is the major risk factor for the development of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. BMI is widely used as a surrogate measure of obesity, but underestimates the prevalence of obesity, defined as an excess of body fat. We assessed the presence of impaired glucose tolerance or impaired fasting glucose (both considered together as prediabetes) or type 2 diabetes in relation to the criteria used for the diagnosis of obesity using BMI as compared to body fat percentage (BF%). We performed a cross-sectional study including 4,828 (587 lean, 1,320 overweight, and 2,921 obese classified according to BMI) white subjects (66% females), aged 18-80 years. BMI, BF% determined by air-displacement plethysmography (ADP) and conventional blood markers of glucose metabolism and lipid profile were measured. We found a higher than expected number of subjects with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes in the obese category according to BF% when the sample was globally analyzed (P < 0.0001) and in the lean BMI-classified subjects (P < 0.0001), but not in the overweight or obese-classified individuals. Importantly, BF% was significantly higher in lean (by BMI) women with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes as compared to those with normoglycemia (NG) (35.5 +/- 7.0 vs. 30.3 +/- 7.7%, P < 0.0001), whereas no differences were observed for BMI. Similarly, increased BF% was found in lean BMI-classified men with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes (25.2 +/- 9.0 vs. 19.9 +/- 8.0%, P = 0.008), exhibiting no differences in BMI or waist circumference. In conclusion, assessing BF% may help to diagnose disturbed glucose tolerance beyond information provided by BMI and waist circumference in particular in male subjects with BMI