4.4 Article

Prevalence of Metabolic Syndrome and its Components in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

期刊

REVISTA ESPANOLA DE CARDIOLOGIA
卷 64, 期 7, 页码 579-586

出版社

EDICIONES DOYMA S A
DOI: 10.1016/j.rec.2011.03.009

关键词

Metabolic syndrome X; Coronary disease; High-density lipoproteins; Diabetes mellitus; Obesity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction and objectives: A large proportion of patients with coronary disease have metabolic syndrome, although the frequency and association of its different components are not well understood. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of metabolic syndrome and the combination of its components in a Spanish cohort of patients with acute coronary syndrome. Methods: Clinical histories of 574 inpatients with acute coronary syndrome in 6 tertiary hospitals were reviewed and the presence of metabolic syndrome and its components determined by applying Adult Treatment Panel III criteria. In a second step, the components of the metabolic syndrome were analyzed, excluding those patients with diabetes mellitus. Results: The metabolic syndrome was present in 50.9% of patients and was more frequent in women than in men (66.3% vs. 47.3%; P < .001). The most prevalent component was carbohydrate metabolism disorder (85.3%), followed by low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLc) levels (80.5%). In nondiabetic patients, 34.6% had metabolic syndrome and the most prevalent component was low HDLc levels (86%), followed by high blood pressure and hypertriglyceridemia and, in fourth place, impaired fasting serum glucose levels. Conclusions: The metabolic syndrome has a high prevalence in patients with an acute coronary syndrome, especially in women. The most frequent components are hyperglycemia and low HDLc levels. After excluding diabetic patients, the most prevalent diagnostic criterion of metabolic syndrome was low HDLc levels. (C) 2011 Sociedad Espanola de Cardiologia. Published by Elsevier Espana, S. L. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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