Martinez-Hervas Sergio, Romero Pedro, Hevilla Enrique B, Real José T, Priego Antonia, Martin-Moreno Jose M, Carmena Rafael, Ascaso Juan F
Endocrinology Service, University Clinical Hospital, Department of Medicine-University of Valencia, Spain.
Eur J Intern Med. 2008 May;19(3):209-13. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2007.09.005. Epub 2007 Nov 8.
To compare the prevalence of classical cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) and metabolic syndrome (MetS) in our population according to fasting plasma glucose levels (FPG).
We have studied 344 subjects between 20-70 years of age, recruited in a Primary Care Clinic. Subjects were divided into four groups according to their fasting plasma glucose (FPG) values: normal plasma glucose (NG) when FPG < 5.6 mmol/L; FPG between 5.6 and 6.0 mmol/L (FPG1); FPG between 6.1-6.9 mmol/L (FPG2); and diabetes (DM) FPG > or = 7 mmol/L or previous diagnosis of diabetes. Cardiovascular risk factors (hypertension, TC/HDL-C index and Apo B values), presence of the MetS and indirect measure of insulin resistance (HOMA) were analyzed.
Subjects with FPG2 have a prevalence of classic CVRF and MetS similar to that observed in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The TC:HDL-C index > or = 5 in 56% and 57%, Apo B > or = 1.2 g/L in 59% and 57%, hypertension in 60% and 54% of FPG2 and T2DM subjects, respectively. MetS was diagnosed in 79% of FPG2 and 80% of T2DM. We found significant differences with FPG1 group who presented low CVRF and MetS proportion.
In our population FPG2 and T2DM subjects show a similar cardiovascular risk profile. On the other hand, such risk is significantly lower in subjects with FPG between 5.6-6.0 mmol/L. These results might have practical implications.
根据空腹血糖水平(FPG)比较我们人群中经典心血管危险因素(CVRF)和代谢综合征(MetS)的患病率。
我们研究了在一家初级保健诊所招募的344名年龄在20至70岁之间的受试者。根据空腹血糖(FPG)值将受试者分为四组:FPG < 5.6 mmol/L时为正常血糖(NG);FPG在5.6至6.0 mmol/L之间(FPG1);FPG在6.1 - 6.9 mmol/L之间(FPG2);糖尿病(DM)FPG≥7 mmol/L或既往有糖尿病诊断。分析心血管危险因素(高血压、TC/HDL - C指数和载脂蛋白B值)、MetS的存在情况以及胰岛素抵抗的间接测量指标(HOMA)。
FPG2组受试者的经典CVRF和MetS患病率与2型糖尿病(T2DM)受试者中观察到的患病率相似。FPG2组和T2DM受试者中,TC:HDL - C指数≥5的比例分别为56%和57%,载脂蛋白B≥1.2 g/L的比例分别为59%和57%,高血压的比例分别为60%和54%。FPG2组中79%的受试者和T2DM组中80%的受试者被诊断为MetS。我们发现FPG1组的CVRF和MetS比例较低,与其他组存在显著差异。
在我们的人群中,FPG2组和T2DM组受试者具有相似的心血管风险特征。另一方面,FPG在5.6 - 6.0 mmol/L之间的受试者的这种风险显著较低。这些结果可能具有实际意义。