Gómez-García Mariana, Torrado Juan, Pereira María, Bia Daniel, Zócalo Yanina
Departamento de Educación Física y Salud, Instituto Superior de Educación Física, Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay.
CUiiDARTE-Movimiento, Actividad, Salud (CUiiDARTE-MAS), Comisión Sectorial de Investigación Científica, Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Front Nutr. 2022 Apr 29;9:856198. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.856198. eCollection 2022.
Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)-derived indexes [e.g., fat (FMI) and fat-free mass indexes (FFMI), visceral fat level (VFL)] are used to characterize obesity as a cardiovascular risk factor (CRF). The BIA-derived index that better predicts arterial variability is still discussed.
To determine: (1) the association of classical [weight, height, body mass index (BMI), basal metabolic rate (BMR)] and BIA-derived indexes, with arterial properties deviations from expected values (arterial z-scores); (2) maximum arterial variations attributable to BIA-derived indexes; (3) whether the composition of total body, trunk and/or limbs is most closely associated with arterial variations.
Hemodynamic, structural, and functional parameters of different histological types of arteries were assessed ( = 538, 7-85 years). Classical and BIA-derived indexes [fat mass and percentage, FMI, VFL, muscle mass percentage (PMM), FFMI, and percentage] were measured (mono- and multi-segmental devices). Arterial z-scores were obtained using age-related equations derived from individuals not-exposed to CRFs ( = 1,688).
First, regardless of the classical index considered, the associations with the arterial properties showed a specific hierarchy order: diameters and local stiffness > aortic and brachial blood pressure (BP) > regional stiffness. Second, all the associations of FMI and FFMI with z-scores were positive. Third, FFMI exceeded the association obtained with BMI and BMR, considering structural z-scores. In contrast, FMI did not exceed the association with z-scores achieved by BMI and BMR. Fourth, regardless of CRFs and classical indexes, arterial z-scores would be mainly explained by FFMI, VFL, and PMM. Fifth, regardless of the body-segment considered, the levels of association between FMI and z-scores did not exceed those found for classic and FFMI. Total fat mass and trunk indexes showed a greater strength of association with z-scores than the FMI of limbs. Sixth, compared to lower limb FFMI indexes, total and upper limbs FFMI showed higher levels of association with z-scores.
FFMI (but not FMI) exceeded the strength of association seen between BMI or BMR and structural z-scores. Regardless of the body segment analyzed, the associations between FMI and z-scores did not exceed those found with classic and FFMI. Arterial z-scores could be independently explained by FFMI, VFL, and PMM.
生物电阻抗分析(BIA)得出的指标[如脂肪(FMI)和去脂体重指数(FFMI)、内脏脂肪水平(VFL)]被用于将肥胖表征为心血管危险因素(CRF)。能更好预测动脉变异性的BIA得出的指标仍在讨论中。
确定:(1)经典指标[体重、身高、体重指数(BMI)、基础代谢率(BMR)]和BIA得出的指标与动脉特性偏离预期值(动脉z评分)之间的关联;(2)BIA得出的指标所致的最大动脉变化;(3)全身、躯干和/或四肢的组成是否与动脉变化关系最为密切。
评估了不同组织学类型动脉的血流动力学、结构和功能参数(n = 538,7 - 85岁)。测量了经典指标和BIA得出的指标[脂肪量和百分比、FMI、VFL、肌肉量百分比(PMM)、FFMI和百分比](单段和多段设备)。使用从不暴露于CRF的个体得出的与年龄相关的方程获得动脉z评分(n = 1,688)。
首先,无论考虑哪种经典指标,其与动脉特性的关联都呈现出特定的层次顺序:直径和局部硬度 > 主动脉和肱动脉血压(BP)> 区域硬度。其次,FMI和FFMI与z评分的所有关联均为正。第三,考虑结构z评分时,FFMI超过了与BMI和BMR的关联。相比之下,FMI没有超过与BMI和BMR的z评分关联。第四,无论CRF和经典指标如何,动脉z评分主要由FFMI、VFL和PMM解释。第五,无论考虑身体的哪个部位,FMI与z评分之间的关联水平都没有超过经典指标和FFMI的关联。总脂肪量和躯干指标与z评分的关联强度大于四肢的FMI。第六,与下肢FFMI指标相比,全身和上肢FFMI与z评分的关联水平更高。
FFMI(而非FMI)超过了BMI或BMR与结构z评分之间的关联强度。无论分析身体的哪个部位,FMI与z评分之间的关联都没有超过经典指标和FFMI的关联。动脉z评分可由FFMI、VFL和PMM独立解释。