4.5 Article

Hyperuricemia predicts future metabolic syndrome: a 4-year follow-up study of a large screened cohort in Okinawa, Japan

Journal

HYPERTENSION RESEARCH
Volume 37, Issue 3, Pages 232-238

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/hr.2013.137

Keywords

cardiovascular risk factor; hyperuricemia; metabolic syndrome

Funding

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [23591220] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to determine whether hyperuricemia could predict future metabolic syndrome (MetS) in a large screened cohort of Japanese male and female subjects. We evaluated 5936 subjects (3144 male subjects, 2792 female subjects; mean age 48.7 years) who underwent health checkup programs in 2006 and 2010, who were MetS free in 2006. At baseline, hyperuricemia was detected in 927 male subjects (29.5%) and 276 female subjects (9.9%). Subjects with baseline hyperuricemia had significantly higher MetS prevalence in 2010 than those without (male subjects: 34.8 vs. 20.6%, P<0.0001; female subjects: 15.6 vs. 4.8%, P<0.0001). Compared with subjects in the first quintile of uric acid levels at baseline, the age-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) for MetS cumulative incidence among subjects in the third, fourth and fifth quintiles were, 1.8 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.4-2.4: P<0.0001), 2.1 (95% CI: 1.6-2.8: P<0.0001) and 3.2 (95% CI: 2.4-4.1: P<0.0001), respectively, for male subjects and 2.4 (95% CI: 1.3<4.7: P = 0.0075), 3.0 (95% CI: 1.6-5.7: P = 0.0010) and 4.8 (95% CI: 2.6-8.8: P<0.0001), respectively for female subjects. Multivariable logistic analysis revealed that hyperuricemia was significantly associated with MetS cumulative incidence in male subjects (OR 1.5: 95% CI: 1.3-1.8, P<0.0001) and female (OR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.3-3.0, P<0.0001). In conclusion, hyperuricemia is a significant and independent predictor of MetS in Japanese male and female subjects. For both genders, MetS risk increases with increased serum uric acid levels.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available