Cargando…

Influence of the definition of “metabolically healthy obesity” on the progression of coronary artery calcification

OBJECTIVES: Debates whether metabolically healthy obesity (MHO) increases the cardiovascular risk might be due to the metabolic instability of MHO or the absence of a perfect definition of MHO. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the influence of the MHO phenotype on the coronary artery calcium score...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yoon, Ji Won, Jung, Chan-Hyeon, Kim, Min-Kyung, Park, Hyo Eun, Park, Kyong Soo, Jang, Hak Chul, Moon, Min Kyong, Choi, Su-Yeon, Koo, Bo Kyung
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5456095/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28575097
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178741
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: Debates whether metabolically healthy obesity (MHO) increases the cardiovascular risk might be due to the metabolic instability of MHO or the absence of a perfect definition of MHO. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the influence of the MHO phenotype on the coronary artery calcium score (CACS) progression according to definition of MHO. METHODS: We analyzed a retrospective cohort with a CACS of 0 at baseline and available serial CACS measurements taken ≥ 12 months apart (n = 1,218). Obesity was defined as BMI ≥ 25 kg/m(2), and MHO was defined as obesity accompanied by ≤ 1 (MHO class I) or 0 (MHO class II) components of metabolic syndrome (MetS). RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 45 months, 32.2% of MHO class I and 10.2% of MHO class II subjects developed MetS. Compared to non-obese/metabolically healthy subjects (reference group), hazard ratios (HR) for development of MetS were 2.174 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.513–3.124) and 1.166 (95% CI: 0.434–3.129) for MHO class I and II subjects, respectively. The MHO class I subjects showed a significantly increased risk of CACS progression as compared to the reference group (HR: 1.653; 95% CI: 1.144–2.390), whereas MHO class II subjects did not (HR: 1.195; 95% CI: 0.514–2.778). Among subjects with MHO class I, no significant CACS progression was observed in the subjects who maintained metabolic health during follow-up (HR: 1.448; 95% CI: 0.921–2.278). CONCLUSIONS: The risks of metabolic deterioration and CACS progression were significant in subjects with MHO class I, but not in those with MHO class II.