Characterization of metabolically healthy obese Brazilians and cardiovascular risk prediction

Pimentel, Aline de Castro; Scorsatto, Mauara; Oliveira, Gláucia Maria Moraes de; Rosa, Glorimar; Luiz, Ronir Raggio

doi:10.1016/j.nut.2014.12.024

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the current study, the presence of IR was defined as above the upper quartile of the distribution of the calculated HOMA index among nondiabetic subjects. The definition was also widely used in most studies focusing on IR and diabetes [34, 35]. In our study, the proportions of IR in MHO defined by BMI in combination with ATPIII, Karelis, Wildman, or CDS were 30.5, 16.5, 22.5, and 30.6%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Obesity-related disease risks may vary depending on whether the subject has metabolically healthy obesity (MHO) or metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO). At least 5 definitions/criteria of obesity and metabolic disorders have been documented in the literature, yielding uncertainties in a reliable international comparison of obesity phenotype prevalence. This report aims to compare differences in MHO and MUO prevalence according to the 5 most frequently used definitions. Methods: A random sample of 4,757 adults aged 35 years and older (male 51.1%) was enrolled. Obesity was defined either according to body mass index or waist circumference, and the definitions of metabolic abnormalities were derived from 5 different criteria. Results: In MHO, the highest prevalence was obtained when using the homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) criteria (13.6%), followed by the Chinese Diabetes Society (11.4%), Adult Treatment Panel III (10.3%), Wildman (5.2%), and Karelis (4.2%) criteria; however, the MUO prevalence had an opposite trend to MHO prevalence. The magnitude of differences in the age-specific prevalence of MHO and MUO varied greatly and ranked in different orders. The proportion of insulin resistance for MHO and MUO individuals differed significantly regardless of which metabolic criterion was used. Conclusion: The prevalence of MHO and MUO in the Chinese population varies according to different definitions of obesity and metabolic disorders.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 51%

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To evaluate cardiovascular risk, Pimentel et al [55] applied the well validated Framingham Risk Score (FRS) in a Brazilian population, and found that there was some indication that metabolically unhealthy obese patients were at increased cardiovascular risk as compared to MHO patients. However, this was specifically noted to hold true when ATP III criteria (alone or in conjunction with HOMA), but not with HOMA model alone [55].…”

Section: Metabolic Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this was specifically noted to hold true when ATP III criteria (alone or in conjunction with HOMA), but not with HOMA model alone [55]. This was in opposition to data gleaned from the London based Whitehall II cohort, which showed decreased when development of T2DM in MHO patients, but also demonstrated an increased risk of cardiovascular disease compared to their metabolically unhealthy counterparts [56].…”

Section: Metabolic Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metabolic health and weight: Understanding metabolically unhealthy normal weight or metabolically healthy obese patients

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…After that, several studies also published their results with large sample size, [ 13 – 15 ] especially for the investigations conducted in Cameroon, Australia, and Brazil. [ 16 – 18 ] Additionally, no meta-analysis has been conducted on the transition from MHO to MAO status based on available evidence. There is still no convincing evidence regarding the effects of interventions on the metabolic profile for MHO subjects as well.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prevalence, metabolic risk and effects of lifestyle intervention for metabolically healthy obesity

Lin¹,

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Characterization of metabolically healthy obese Brazilians and cardiovascular risk prediction

Cited by 21 publications

References 32 publications

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

The Prevalence of Metabolically Healthy and Unhealthy Obesity according to Different Criteria

Metabolic health and weight: Understanding metabolically unhealthy normal weight or metabolically healthy obese patients

The prevalence, metabolic risk and effects of lifestyle intervention for metabolically healthy obesity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About