Obesity Research Center, Research Institute for Endocrine Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 20;168(1):369-74. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.09.037. Epub 2012 Oct 2.
The applicability of different definitions of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in predicting cardiovascular diseases (CVD) remains questionable. The aim of this study was to compare predictive ability of different definitions of MetS for CVD in non-diabetic subjects.
In this community-based study, 5198 non-diabetic subjects aged ≥ 30 years (mean age 45.6 years, 45% men) free of CVD at baseline were followed for a median of 9.3 years to assess risk for CVD. We assessed the predictability of definitions of the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III), the International Diabetes Federation (IDF), the American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (AHA/NHLBI), and the joint interim statement (JIS) on development of CVD. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using Cox proportional-hazards models. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was also used to compare discriminative power of these MetS definitions in predicting CVD events.
Compared to other definitions, the JIS identified more participants (41.8%) having MetS. First CVD events occurred in 311 subjects. After adjustment for potential confounders, the HRs of the NCEP-ATP III, AHA/NHLBI, IDF and JIS definitions for incident CVD were 1.55 (1.21-2.00), 1.73 (1.35-2.20), 1.54 (1.22-1.94) and 1.70 (1.34-2.17), respectively. All definitions showed higher HRs for females in comparison to males (P<0.05). ROC analysis showed no significant difference in the discriminative power of different MetS definitions in predicting CVD events (P>0.05).
In the current study, compared to each other none of the definitions showed a superior discriminative power in predicting CVD; although, all definitions were more predictive in females than in males.
代谢综合征(MetS)的不同定义在预测心血管疾病(CVD)方面的适用性仍存在疑问。本研究旨在比较非糖尿病患者中不同 MetS 定义对 CVD 的预测能力。
在这项基于社区的研究中,对 5198 名年龄≥30 岁(平均年龄 45.6 岁,45%为男性)且基线时无 CVD 的非糖尿病患者进行中位 9.3 年的随访,以评估 CVD 风险。我们评估了美国国家胆固醇教育计划成人治疗专家组第三版(NCEP-ATP III)、国际糖尿病联合会(IDF)、美国心脏协会/美国国立心肺血液研究所(AHA/NHLBI)和 CVD 发展联合临时声明(JIS)的定义的预测能力。使用 Cox 比例风险模型计算危险比(HRs)。还使用接收者操作特征(ROC)曲线比较这些 MetS 定义预测 CVD 事件的区分能力。
与其他定义相比,JIS 确定了更多患有 MetS 的参与者(41.8%)。311 名受试者发生了首次 CVD 事件。调整潜在混杂因素后,NCEP-ATP III、AHA/NHLBI、IDF 和 JIS 定义的 CVD 事件发生率 HR 分别为 1.55(1.21-2.00)、1.73(1.35-2.20)、1.54(1.22-1.94)和 1.70(1.34-2.17)。与男性相比,所有定义均显示女性的 HR 更高(P<0.05)。ROC 分析显示,不同 MetS 定义在预测 CVD 事件方面的判别能力无显著差异(P>0.05)。
在本研究中,与其他定义相比,没有一种定义在预测 CVD 方面表现出更高的判别能力;尽管所有定义在女性中的预测能力均高于男性。