Author
Listed:
- Nayera E. Hassan
(National Research Centre, Egypt)
- Mohamed S. El Hussieny
(National Research Centre, Egypt)
- Enas Abdel Rasheed
(National Research Centre, Egypt)
- Sahar A. El-Masry
(National Research Centre, Egypt)
Abstract
Background: Visceral to subcutaneous adiposity ratio (VSR) may be more crucial than visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue per se. It reflects relative distribution of abdominal adiposity which is a better indicator of cardio-metabolic risk. Aim: to examine if the VSR has diagnostic value in identifying metabolic syndrome (MS) compared with VAT and SAT among sample of obese Egyptians. Subjects and Methods: The over here study included 456 obese Egyptian adults (106 male and 350 female), ageing across 25- 55 years. All participants subjected to blood pressure and anthropometric assessment, abdominal ultrasound, and laboratory tests. Results: Males had quite high level of triglycerides and low HDL than females, who had significantly higher frequency of wide WC than men. There was insignificant sex difference in the frequency of MS. VAT and SAT were significantly higher in presence of wide WC and hypertension among both sexes. Also, VSR was significantly higher in presence of wide WC and hypertension among women only. While presence of MS led to significantly higher value of SAT among men, and VAT among women. Area under the curves (AUCs) for VAT, SAT and VSR; to predict MS; were 0.59, 0.63 and 0.46 among men and 0.63, 0.56 and 0.55 among women. Conclusion: Visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue; not visceral/subcutaneous ratio; were significantly affected by the presence of MS in both sexes. SAT was significantly superior among men, while VAT was superior among women. VSR cannot be used as a predictor of MS.
Suggested Citation
Nayera E. Hassan & Mohamed S. El Hussieny & Enas Abdel Rasheed & Sahar A. El-Masry, 2021.
"Dispersal of Abdominal Visceral; Subcutaneous, Visceral to Subcutaneous Adiposity Ratio and Metabolic Syndrome in A Sample of Obese Egyptians,"
European Journal of Clinical Medicine, European Open Science, vol. 2(6), pages 24-29, November.
Handle:
RePEc:epw:clinic:v:2:y:2021:i:6:id:12124
DOI: 10.24018/clinicmed.2021.2.6.124
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:epw:clinic:v:2:y:2021:i:6:id:12124. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Support Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://eu-opensci.org/index.php/clinicmed .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.