4.6 Article

Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in patients with coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease or abdominal aortic aneurysm

期刊

ATHEROSCLEROSIS
卷 173, 期 2, 页码 363-369

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2003.12.033

关键词

prevalence; metabolic syndrome; insulin resistance; ATP III; vascular disease; atherosclerosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metabolic syndrome patients are at increased risk for developing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The increasing prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in various asymptomatic populations has been well documented, however, limited information is available about the prevalence in manifest atherosclerotic vascular disease patients. The aim of this study is to determine the overall and gender-specific prevalence of the metabolic syndrome and its components in these patients. This cross-sectional survey of 1117 patients, aged 18-80 years, mean age 60 10 years, comprised patients with coronary heart disease (n = 527), cerebrovascular disease (n = 258), peripheral arterial disease (n = 232) or abdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 100). Metabolic syndrome was defined by Adult Treatment Panel III. The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in the study population was 46%: 58% in PAD patients, 41 % in CHD patients, 43% in CVD patients and 47% in AAA patients. Overall, women had a higher prevalence than men (56% versus 43%). Age did not influence the metabolic syndrome prevalence; crude odds ratios (crude OR) 1.00 (95% CI: 0.99-1.02). Our results demonstrate a high prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in patients with manifest atherosclerotic vascular disease. Screening for metabolic syndrome in patients with high risk for new vascular incidents may identify patients with even higher vascular risk and may direct anti-atherosclerotic treatment in order to prevent new vascular incidents in the same or another vascular bed. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. 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

4.6
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