Metabolic syndrome in middle-aged and older women: A cross-sectional study

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to compare the prevalence of metabolic syndrome between different age groups of middle-aged and older women and to assess whether these differences are independent of potential covariates. Methods: Study conducted with 510 women divided into three age groups: 45–54, 55–64 and 65–74 years. Socioeconomic, reproductive and lifestyle variables were self-reported. We defined metabolic syndrome using the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria (abdominal obesity, diabetes, reduced high-density lipoprotein, elevated triglycerides, and hypertension). Logistic regression assessed the association between age groups, and metabolic syndrome was adjusted for covariates (socioeconomic variables, age at menarche and at first childbirth, parity, menopausal status, physical activity variables and smoking). Results: Women aged 55–64 years presented higher prevalence of all metabolic syndrome criteria than the other groups, except for abdominal obesity, which was higher in the oldest group. In the fully adjusted analysis, the 55–64 years age group continues to exhibit significantly higher odds of presenting metabolic syndrome when compared to the youngest group (45–54 years) (OR = 2.257; 95% CI = 1.20:4.24). There was no statistical difference in the odds of presenting metabolic syndrome when comparing the oldest and the youngest groups (OR = 1.500; 95% CI = 0.85:2.65). Conclusion: The higher prevalence of metabolic syndrome among those aged 55–64 years may indicate that middle-aged women become unhealthy earlier in the life course and that many of them may die prematurely. This result highlights the importance of screening metabolic syndrome earlier in the midlife and the need for public health policies aimed at reducing adverse effects in later years.

The association of menopause with cardiometabolic disease risk factors in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analyses

“…Tables 1 and 2 show the characteristics of the 44 studies included in the systematic review. The studies were from the following countries: China 21-23,26,27,30,39-45 (n = 13), Brazil 15,16,28,47-50 (n = 7), Iran 25,31-38 (n = 9), India 51-54 (n = 4), Tunisia 18,20,24 (n = 3), Thailand 19,29 (n = 2), Mexico 55 (n = 1), the Democratic Republic of Congo 56 (n = 1), Ghana 57 (n = 1), South Africa 58 (n = 1), Bangladesh 17 (n = 1), and Chile 46 (n = 1). In total, the studies consisted of 353,589 participants, with sample sizes ranging from 122 to 281,319.…”

“…Table 2 presents the 44 articles included in the systematic review. In the 17 articles describing the MetS, 11 showed higher MetS in post- than premenopause 15 , 19 , 20 , 27 , 34 , 40 , 41 , 45 , 49 , 56 , and 6 showed no differences 19 , 28 , 31 , 32 , 39 , 50 . In the 14 articles focused on obesity, 3 showed higher obesity risk in post- than premenopause, 29 , 35 , 46 and 11 showed no differences 17 , 22 , 24 , 29 , 30 , 37 , 48 , 55 , 57 , 58 .…”

“…Tables 1 and 2 show the characteristics of the 44 studies included in the systematic review. The studies were from the following countries: China [21][22][23]26,27,30,[39][40][41][42][43][44][45] (n = 13), Brazil 15,16,28,[47][48][49][50] (n = 7), Iran 25,[31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] (n = 9), India [51][52][53][54] (n = 4), Tunisia 18,20,24 FIG. 1.…”

“…In the 16 articles describing the MetS, 10 showed higher MetS in postmenopause than premenopause, 17,18,23,26,35,36,41,45,50,52 and 6 showed no differences. 15,16,19,34,45,48 In the 13 articles focused on obesity, 3 showed higher obesity risk in postmenopause than premenopause, 31,47,54 and 10 showed no differences. 20,25,27,28,42,44,46,47,51,58 One of these studies 58 also measured total body fat mass, which was higher in postmenopausal than premenopausal women.…”

“…22,25,42 In the two articles describing cIMT, postmenopausal women had higher cIMT levels than their premenopausal counterparts, 29,30 and in one study, 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease was higher postmenopausally. 40 In the meta-analyses, 16 studies from the following countries, China [21][22][23]26,27,30 (n = 6), Brazil 15,16,28 (n = 3), Tunisia 18,20,24 [15][16][17][18][19][20] (n = 6), ( 2) elevated serum triglycerides (≥1.69 mmol/L) 17,18,21,26 (n = 4), (3) elevated fasting glucose (≥6.1 mmol/L), 17,18,26 (n = 3) (4) low HDL-C (<1.29 mmol/L) 17,26 (n = 2), ( 5) hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≥140 mm Hg, diastolic blood pressure [DBP] ≥90 mm Hg, and use of antihypertensives) [21][22][23][24][25] (n = 5), ( 6) hypertension (SBP ≥135 mm Hg, DBP ≥85 mm Hg, and/or use of antihypertensives) 17,18,26 (n = 3), (7) high WC (≥80 cm)…”