4.4 Article

Adipocytokine profile of type 2 diabetics in metabolic syndrome as defined by various criteria

期刊

DIABETES-METABOLISM RESEARCH AND REVIEWS
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 52-58

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.763

关键词

adipocytokines; metabolic syndrome; type 2 DM

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background This study aims to identify which among the metabolic syndrome (MS) definitions are closely associated with pathological levels of leptin, adiponectin, resistin, tumour necrosis alpha (TNF-alpha) and C-reactive protein (CRP) among type 2 diabetics. Materials and Methods Three hundred and five (160 males; 145 females) adult type 2 diabetic Saudis participated in this cross-sectional study. Leptin, adiponectin, resistin, TNF-a and CRP were analysed, using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA). Each participant was screened for MS based on the definitions of WHO, AHA/NHLBI and IDF. Results IDF holds the most identified patients [190 (62.3%)] in both, males [107 (66.9%)], and females [83 (57.2%)]. In males, hyperleptinemia, hypoadiponectinemia and hyperresistinemia were strongest in the AHA/NHLBI-defined MS [odds ratio (95% confidence interval 'CI') of 2.03 (1.05-3.93); 1.31 (0.55-3.1); 1.63 (0.42-6.4) respectively]. The risk of elevated CRP was highest on the WHO definition [odds ratio (95% CI) of 2.04 (0.46-9.04)]. In females, the IDF-defined MS has the strongest association in all four parameters: odds ratio (95% CI), as follows: leptin [2.09 (0.14-30.71)]; adiponectin [6.00 (0.47-76.17)]; resistin [0.47 (0.18-1.23)] and CRP [3.07 (0.21-45.10)]. Conclusion Gender differences exist in assessing the risk of various adipocytokine abnormalities in relation to the various criteria. This study supports the use of IDF definition among females and AHA/NHLBI in males in studies involving MS and obesity, since these definitions hold stronger predicting powers in detecting pathological levels of key adipocytokines. Copyright (C) 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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