Evaluation of Health Associations With Height‐Normalised Abdominal Body Composition Indices: A Single‐Centre Cross‐Sectional Study

IF 8.9 1区 医学 Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle Pub Date : 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1002/jcsm.13609
Yupeng Liu, Hangqian He, Keyu Qian, Yufeng Huang, Xuemei Ao, Xudong Shi, Binye Ruan, Ru Xue, Xiaoyi Fu, Shuran Wang
{"title":"Evaluation of Health Associations With Height‐Normalised Abdominal Body Composition Indices: A Single‐Centre Cross‐Sectional Study","authors":"Yupeng Liu, Hangqian He, Keyu Qian, Yufeng Huang, Xuemei Ao, Xudong Shi, Binye Ruan, Ru Xue, Xiaoyi Fu, Shuran Wang","doi":"10.1002/jcsm.13609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundTraditional metrics such as body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) fail to accurately assess the health outcomes associated with abdominal adiposity, because they neglect the intricacies of adipose tissue distribution. Notably, the variability in body composition scaled to height remains underexplored in Chinese demographics. This study introduces height‐normalised indices of abdominal adiposity using computed tomography (CT) scans and further assesses their associations with various health outcomes.MethodsIn a large, diverse Chinese population (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 1054 healthy individuals; <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 1159 with dyslipidemia; <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 803 with diabetes; <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 1289 with cardio‐cerebrovascular diseases; <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 1108 with cancers; and <jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 509 with abnormal bone mas), abdominal CT scans were performed and allometric growth model analyses were used to derive height‐normalised indices (body composition/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup>). Logistic regression models assessed the associations between these indices and health outcomes.ResultsDistinct scaling powers were observed for visceral adipose tissue (VAT), subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) and total abdominal adipose tissue (TAT), as well as for sagittal diameter (SAD), with marked sex differences. Powers for VAT were 1.786 ± 1.270 for males and 1.274 ± 0.692 for females. Powers for SAT were 2.266 ± 0.856 for males and 1.656 ± 0.497 for females. Powers for TAT were 2.141 ± 0.967 for males and 1.438 ± 0.489 for females. Powers for SAD were 0.646 ± 0.217 for males and 0.678 ± 0.141 for females. After controlling for age, BMI and WC, VAT/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup>, TAT/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup> and SAD/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup> retained their significantly positive associations with the odds of health outcomes, whereas SAT/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup> did not.ConclusionsOur findings endorse the clinical utility of height‐normalised indices, particularly VAT/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup>, TAT/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup> and SAD/height<jats:sup><jats:italic>β</jats:italic></jats:sup>, in health outcomes assessment. These indices, grounded in robust empirical data, underscore the necessity of a nuanced approach in obesity‐related health evaluations, advocating for a departure from conventional methods like BMI.","PeriodicalId":186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.13609","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundTraditional metrics such as body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) fail to accurately assess the health outcomes associated with abdominal adiposity, because they neglect the intricacies of adipose tissue distribution. Notably, the variability in body composition scaled to height remains underexplored in Chinese demographics. This study introduces height‐normalised indices of abdominal adiposity using computed tomography (CT) scans and further assesses their associations with various health outcomes.MethodsIn a large, diverse Chinese population (n = 1054 healthy individuals; n = 1159 with dyslipidemia; n = 803 with diabetes; n = 1289 with cardio‐cerebrovascular diseases; n = 1108 with cancers; and n = 509 with abnormal bone mas), abdominal CT scans were performed and allometric growth model analyses were used to derive height‐normalised indices (body composition/heightβ). Logistic regression models assessed the associations between these indices and health outcomes.ResultsDistinct scaling powers were observed for visceral adipose tissue (VAT), subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) and total abdominal adipose tissue (TAT), as well as for sagittal diameter (SAD), with marked sex differences. Powers for VAT were 1.786 ± 1.270 for males and 1.274 ± 0.692 for females. Powers for SAT were 2.266 ± 0.856 for males and 1.656 ± 0.497 for females. Powers for TAT were 2.141 ± 0.967 for males and 1.438 ± 0.489 for females. Powers for SAD were 0.646 ± 0.217 for males and 0.678 ± 0.141 for females. After controlling for age, BMI and WC, VAT/heightβ, TAT/heightβ and SAD/heightβ retained their significantly positive associations with the odds of health outcomes, whereas SAT/heightβ did not.ConclusionsOur findings endorse the clinical utility of height‐normalised indices, particularly VAT/heightβ, TAT/heightβ and SAD/heightβ, in health outcomes assessment. These indices, grounded in robust empirical data, underscore the necessity of a nuanced approach in obesity‐related health evaluations, advocating for a departure from conventional methods like BMI.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
身高归一化腹部身体成分指数的健康关联评估:单中心横断面研究
背景身体质量指数(BMI)和腰围(WC)等传统指标无法准确评估与腹部脂肪相关的健康后果,因为它们忽视了脂肪组织分布的复杂性。值得注意的是,在中国人口统计学中,按身高缩放的身体成分变异性仍未得到充分研究。本研究通过计算机断层扫描(CT)引入了身高归一化的腹部脂肪指数,并进一步评估了这些指数与各种健康结果的关系。方法 在一个大规模、多样化的中国人群(健康人 1054 人;血脂异常者 1159 人;糖尿病患者 803 人;心脑血管疾病患者 1289 人;癌症患者 1108 人;骨质异常者 509 人)中,进行腹部 CT 扫描,并使用异速生长模型分析得出身高归一化指数(身体成分/身高β)。结果观察到内脏脂肪组织(VAT)、皮下脂肪组织(SAT)和总腹部脂肪组织(TAT)以及矢状径(SAD)具有不同的缩放能力,并存在明显的性别差异。男性 VAT 的功率为 1.786 ± 1.270,女性为 1.274 ± 0.692。男性的 SAT 功率为 2.266 ± 0.856,女性为 1.656 ± 0.497。男性的 TAT 功率为 2.141 ± 0.967,女性为 1.438 ± 0.489。男性的 SAD 功率为 0.646 ± 0.217,女性为 0.678 ± 0.141。在控制了年龄、体重指数和腹围之后,VAT/身高β、TAT/身高β和 SAD/身高β仍与健康结果的几率呈显著正相关,而 SAT/身高β则没有。这些指数以可靠的实证数据为基础,强调了在与肥胖相关的健康评估中采用细致入微的方法的必要性,主张摒弃 BMI 等传统方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle
Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
自引率
12.40%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia, and Muscle is a prestigious, peer-reviewed international publication committed to disseminating research and clinical insights pertaining to cachexia, sarcopenia, body composition, and the physiological and pathophysiological alterations occurring throughout the lifespan and in various illnesses across the spectrum of life sciences. This journal serves as a valuable resource for physicians, biochemists, biologists, dieticians, pharmacologists, and students alike.
期刊最新文献
Tocilizumab for Advanced Non‐Small‐Cell Lung Cancer With Concomitant Cachexia: An Observational Study Prediction of Fragility Fractures and Mortality in a Cohort of Geriatric Patients Clinical Impact of Sarcopenia Screening on Long‐Term Mortality in Patients Undergoing Coronary Bypass Grafting An Artificial Intelligence Approach for Test‐Free Identification of Sarcopenia GABA Prevents Sarcopenia by Regulation of Muscle Protein Degradation and Inflammaging in 23‐ to 25‐Month‐Old Female Mice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1