4.6 Article

Relationship between anthropometric parameters and open angle glaucoma: The Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 12, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176894

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aims To evaluate the relationships between open-angle glaucoma (OAG) and various anthropometric measurements. Design Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES), a population-based cross-sectional study using a complex, stratified, multistage, probability-cluster survey. Methods A total of 5,255 participants including 247 glaucoma patients, aged >= 19 years were included from the KNHANES V database. Glaucoma diagnosis was based on International Society of Geographical and Epidemiological Ophthalmology criteria. Various anthropometric data regarding obesity were analyzed including body mass index (BMI), total body fat mass, total body muscle mass (lean body mass, non-bone lean body mass, and appendicular skeletal muscle (ASM) mass), and waist circumference (WC). The differences in OAG prevalence with respect to anthropometric parameter quartiles were examined. Results In males, the multivariate general linear model adjusted for age, alcohol, smoking, exercise, systemic hypertension, diabetes, and intraocular pressure (IOP) showed the quartiles for the anthropometric parameters BMI, fat mass/weight ratio and fat mass/muscle mass ratio were negatively associated with OAG. However, muscle mass parameter/BMI ratio was significantly positively associated with OAG (P for trend< 0.05). In females, height and fat mass/ BMI showed a significant relationship with the risk of OAG. (P value< 0.05) Conclusions In the present study, high fat mass was associated with low OAG risk. Body composition seemed to affect the prevalence of OAG, but further evaluation is needed.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available