4.3 Article

Prevalence of metabolic syndrome among women with different PCOS phenotypes - a prospective study

期刊

GYNECOLOGICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 37, 期 1, 页码 21-25

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09513590.2020.1775193

关键词

Polycystic ovary syndrome; hirsutism; body mass index

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that PCOS patients with phenotype A have a higher risk profile for MetS, while the overall prevalence of MetS was relatively low. Therefore, it is recommended that all PCOS patients undergo metabolic risk factor screening at a young age.
Objective:To study prevalence of different polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) phenotypes in our population and to compare the anthropometric measurements and metabolic syndrome (MetS) risk factors among different phenotypes. Material and methods:Two hundred and forty-eight PCOS women were prospectively classified into four phenotypes based on Rotterdam criteria, over a period of 18 months from June 2018 to November 2019. MetS was defined as per International diabetes federation consensus held in 2009. To evaluate the prevalence of MetS, we measured serum triglyceride levels, HDL cholesterol, fasting blood glucose, blood pressure, and waist circumference. Results:The mean age group of the study population was 23.16 +/- 4.42, with maximum cases belonging to 20-25 years age group (40.72%). The prevalence of Phenotypes A, B, C, and D were 36.7%, 10.1%, 4.4%, and 48.8%, respectively. Phenotype D had the highest prevalence of MetS (14.9%). Phenotype A had significantly higher waist circumference, hip circumference, cholesterol, triglycerides, and LDL values as compared to Phenotype D (p<.05). Conclusions:Phenotype A was at higher risk of adverse MetS risk profile. The overall prevalence of MetS was quite low as compared to similar Indian studies. A substantial proportion of study cohort had higher waist circumference (almost 60%) and lower HDL levels (88.70% cases), hence all women with PCOS should be screened for metabolic profile risk factors at a young age itself.

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

4.3
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