4.3 Article

Sarcopenic obesity is closely associated with metabolic syndrome

Journal

OBESITY RESEARCH & CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 7, Issue 4, Pages E301-E307

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.orcp.2012.02.003

Keywords

Metabolic syndrome; Sarcopenia; Obesity; Bioelectrical impedance analysis

Funding

  1. National Health Institute of Taiwan [GE-096-PP-08]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Obesity is a risk factor for metabolic syndrome (MetS). We aimed to investigate whether sarcopenic obesity (SO) was associated with MetS. Methods: A total of 600 community-dwelling males and females aged 63.6 +/- 10.1 years in Northern Taiwan were enrolled in this study. Sarcopenia was defined by the percentage of total skeletal mass (total skeletal muscle mass (kg)/weight (kg) x 100). Cut-offs were established at <37% in men and <27.6% in women using the bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) method. Obesity was defined as body mass index (BMI) >= 25 kg/m(2). MetS was defined by the consensus of National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III modified for Asians. The association between MetS and SO was examined using multivariate logistic regression analyses after controlling potential confounders. Results: The SO group demonstrated a higher risk for MetS (odds ratio [OR] 11.59 [95% confidence interval [CI] 6.72-19.98]) than the obese group (7.53 [4.01-14.14]) and sarcopenic group (1.98 [1.25-3.16]). The individual components including waist circumference, serum triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and fasting serum glucose were independently associated with SO. Conclusion: SO is a major risk factor for MetS. The BIA method and BMI can easily identify subjects at high risk for MetS. The underlying mechanism for the relationship between SO and MetS warrants further research. (C) 2012 Asian Oceanian Association for the Study of Obesity. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available