4.6 Article

Prevalence and characteristics of the metabolic syndrome in 2479 hypopituitary patients with adult-onset GH deficiency before GH replacement: a KIMS analysis

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 165, 期 6, 页码 881-889

出版社

BIOSCIENTIFICA LTD
DOI: 10.1530/EJE-11-0599

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: An increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in adult GH deficiency (GHD) may be related to hypopituitarism but also to the presence of the metabolic syndrome (MetS). Our objective was to investigate the characteristics and prevalence of MetS as well as its comorbidities in adult GHD. Design: In KIMS (Pfizer International Metabolic Database) 2479 patients with severe adult-onset GHD, naive to GH replacement, with complete information on all MetS components were found. MetS was defined according to the National Cholesterol Education Program's Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP) and the International Diabetes Foundation (IDF). Methods: The prevalence of MetS was calculated and compared with previously published data from the normal population. Associations were assessed between background variables, baseline variables, comorbidities, and MetS. Results: MetS was present in 43.1% (NCEP) and in 49.1% (IDF) of patients, clearly higher than data from the normal population (20-30%). MetS prevalence was related to age, GHD duration, and body mass index (BMI), but not to GHD severity, extent of hypopituitarism, or etiology of pituitary disease. Adjusted for age, gender, and BMI, patients with MetS had a higher prevalence ratio for diabetes mellitus: 4.65 (95% confidence interval (CI): 3.29-6.58), for cardiovascular morbidity: 1.91 (95% CI: 1.33-2.75), and for cerebrovascular morbidity: 1.77 (95% CI: 1.09-2.87) than patients without MetS. Conclusions: MetS is highly prevalent in GHD and is associated with a higher prevalence ratio for comorbidities. The presence of MetS in GHD may therefore contribute to the increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality found in these patients.

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