4.5 Article

Association between obesity categories with cardiovascular disease and its related risk factors in the MASHAD cohort study population

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcla.23160

关键词

cardiovascular risk factors; obesity

资金

  1. Research Council of the Mashhad University of Medical Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Obesity is an important CVD risk factor and is increasing in prevalence. Methods In this study, 3829 men and 5720 women (35-65 years) were enrolled as part of the MASHAD cohort study. Four categories were identified according to body mass index and waist circumference that was defined by the World Health Organization. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for the occurrence of CVD, and Cox regression model was used to evaluate the association of obesity with CVD incidence. Results We found that the higher risk groups defined by categories of adiposity were significantly related to a higher prevalence of a high serum total cholesterol (TC), and triglycerides (TG), and lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL), and higher fasting blood glucose (FBG) in both genders and a higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) in women (P < .001). Additionally, a high percentage of participants with dyslipidemia, high LDL, high TC, and low HDL and a high percentage of participants with metabolic syndrome, diabetes, hypertension, and a high serum TG were observed across obesity categories (P ). Moreover, women with the very high degrees of obesity had a greater risk of CVD (HR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.06-3.43, P = .03). Conclusion Obesity strongly predicts several CVD risk factors. Following 6 years of follow-up, in individuals within increasing degrees of obesity, there was a corresponding significant increase in CVD events, rising to approximately a twofold higher risk of cardiovascular events in women compared with men.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据