Abstract
Obesity has become a serious health issue worldwide. There is much evidence that obesity among adolescents contributed to worsening blood biochemical profile that leads to development of many non-communicable diseases. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the predictive value of some central obesity anthropometric indicators to metabolic risk factors in the Syrian male adolescents. A cross-sectional study of a randomly selected sample of 2064 apparently healthy Syrian males adolescents from Damascus city, Syria, aged 18 to 19 years was performed. Waist circumference (WC) and hip circumference (HC) were measured, and waist-to-hip ratio (WHpR) and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) were calculated. Blood pressure (BP) was also measured. Serum fasting blood sugar (FBS), triglyceride (TG), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol
Author Contributions
Copyright© 2018
Al-Bachir Mahfouz, et al.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Competing interests The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Funding Interests:
Citation:
Introduction
Obesity has become a serious epidemic worldwide, estimated to be the fifth leading cause of death at global level, causing approximately 64 million deaths in 2015, 64% of those result from chronic illness unless urgent action is taken There are other studies indicated that central obesity (abdominal obesity) in which fat accumulates in the abdominal cavity and around the viscera is associated with a much higher risk for CVD, stroke, and type-2 diabetes mellitus in adolescents than just excess accumulation of fat in the subcutaneous tissue
Materials And Methods
A cross-sectional study consisted of sample of 2064 healthy adolescents aged 18 to 19 years from Damascus city, Syria, was performed. All participants underwent a brief clinical examination to exclude those with clinical history of chronic diseases including cardiovascular, renal, hepatic, or any abnormalities might affect body composition. Subjects were asked to abstain completely from consuming food and drink 12 hours before visiting the testing field. All anthropometry measurements and blood sampling were completed during a single visit to the testing area. The study protocol was approved by the scientific research and the ethical committee of the Atomic Energy Commission of Syria (AECS). Each participant provided informed consent prior to participation after a detailed explanation of the study protocol. This study was performed in accordance with guidelines prescribed by Helsinki declaration of the world medical association Anthropometric measurements include weight; height, HC, and WC. Body weight was measured to the nearest 0.1 kg using a calibrated electronic scale (Seca, Model: 7671321004; Germany; D=0.05 to 0.1 kg) and height was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a well-mounted stadiometer (Seca, Model: 225 1721009; Germany). Subjects were measured barefoot in light underwear. WC was measured in midway between the lateral lower rib margin and the iliac crest. HC was measured at the levels of the trochanters, through the pubic symphysis. Measurements were performed to the nearest millimeter using a non-stretchable tape over the unclothed body. Three measurements were made and the mean expressed in cm used for analysis. WHpR was obtained by dividing WC by HC. WHtR was obtained by dividing WC by Ht. The main metabolic syndrome risk factors and some clinical important parameters were included in this study The normal range for each studied metabolic component was defined using national criterion as follows: SBP (90-135 mm Hg); DBP (60-89 mm Hg); FBS (65-110 mg/dl); TG (25-200 mg/dl); Chol (50-200 mg/dl); HDL-C (40-75 mg/dl); LDL-C (less than 155 mg/dl); Ht (40-45 mg/dl); Hb (13-18 g/dl) Statistical analyses were performed using the Statistical Package for Social Science SPSS for windows (Version 17.0.1, 2001, SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA). Continuous variables were expressed as mean±SD, whereas categorical variables were represented by frequency and percentage. Student's T test in SPSS was performed to determine the statistical significance. The P value of less than 0.05 was considered statistically. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve was drawn to determine appropriate cut-off points of the WC, WHpR, WHtR for defining overweight and obesity. The area under curve (AUC) with 95% confidence interval (CI) values provided an indication of the performance of WC, WHpR, WHtR as predictors of health risk
Results
The mean values (mean ± SD) of measured MetS components for 2064 adolescents participated in the current study were as follows: SBP (123.43±14.55 mm Hg), DBP (74.40±10.72 mm Hg), FBS (89.49±8.53 mg/100 ml), TG (91.84±44.06 mg/100 ml), Chol (136.36±33.04 mg/100 ml), HDL-C (57.11±5.63 mg/100 ml), LDL-C (62.04±29.34 mg/100 ml), and TG/HDL-C (1.61±0.78). The mean values of MetS risk factors in the studied group of Syrian adolescents by WC categories classified according to the weight status values are illustrated in (MetS): metabolic syndrome; (WC): Waist circumference; (N): number of subjects; (LSD): lower slandered deviation; (SBP): Systolic blood pressure; (DBP) diastolic blood pressure; (FBS): fasting blood sugar; (TG): triglycerides; (Chol): cholesterol; (HDL-C): high density lipoprotein cholesterol; (LDL-C): low density lipoprotein cholesterol. (MetS): metabolic syndrome; (WHpR) waist-to-hip ratio; (WHtR) waist-to-height ratio; (N): number of subjects; (SBP): Systolic blood pressure; (DBP) diastolic blood pressure; (FBS): fasting blood sugar; (TG): triglycerides; (Chol): cholesterol; (HDL-C): high density lipoprotein cholesterol; (LDL-C): low density lipoprotein cholesterol. ROC curves analysis of the WC, HC, WHpR and WHtR were performed for all studied MetS components. Regarding WC, AUC predicting metabolic abnormalities ranged between 0.37 and 0.69 and it was statistically significant (p>0.05) for SBP, DBP, Chol, TG, LDL-C and TG/HDL-C. The best WC cut-offs for the studied group were 73.15, 75.25, 79.90, 75.40, 75.40 and 76.83 cm for SBP, DBP, TG, Chol, LDL-C and TG/HDL-C, respectively, as illustrated in (AUC): area under curve; (WC): Waist circumference; (MetS): metabolic syndrome; (SBP): Systolic blood pressure; (DBP) diastolic blood pressure; (FBS): fasting blood sugar; (TG): triglycerides; (Chol): cholesterol; (HDL-C): high density lipoprotein cholesterol; (LDL-C): low density lipoprotein cholesterol (AUC): area under curve; (HC): hip circumference; (MetS): metabolic syndrome; (SBP): Systolic blood pressure; (DBP) diastolic blood pressure; (FBS): fasting blood sugar; (TG): triglycerides; (Chol) cholesterol; (HDL-C): high density lipoprotein cholesterol; (LDL-C): low density lipoprotein cholesterol (AUC): area under curve; (WHpR) waist-to-hip ratio; (MetS): metabolic syndrome; (SBP): Systolic blood pressure; (DBP) diastolic blood pressure; (FBS): fasting blood sugar; (TG): triglycerides; (Chol): cholesterol; (HDL-C): high density lipoprotein cholesterol; (LDL-C): low density lipoprotein cholesterol. (AUC): area under curve; (WHtR) waist-to-height ratio; (MetS): metabolic syndrome; (SBP): Systolic blood pressure; (DBP) diastolic blood pressure; (FBS): fasting blood sugar; (TG): triglycerides; (Chol): cholesterol; (HDL-C): high density lipoprotein cholesterol; (LDL-C): low density lipoprotein cholesterol
14.55
128.3±13.6 b
125.8±14.0 ab
123.1±14.6a
SBP (mm Hg)
10.72
80.0±9.1 c
77.4±11.4bc
74.2±10.7 a
DBP (mm Hg)
8.53
93.8±7.4 b
91.0±7.8 ab
89.3±8.5 a
FBS (mg/100ml)
44.06
142.1±77.7 c
118.9±55.9 b
89.6±41.5 a
TG (mg/100ml)
33.04
145.8±31.4bc
151.4±36.7 c
135.5±32.7 a
Chol (mg/100ml)
5.63
57.2±5.7 a
56.8±5.6 a
57.1±5.6 a
HDL-C (mg/100ml)
29.34
61.7±30.4 ab
71.7±29.5 b
61.6±29.3 a
LDL -C (mg/100ml)
0.78
2.50±1.40 c
2.13±1.07 b
1.57±0.13 a
TG/HDL
0.000
126.7
122.8
0.004
127.6
123.1
SBP (mm Hg)
0.000
77.8
73.9
0.002
77.8
74.3
DBP (mm Hg)
0.002
91.0
89.3
0.242
90.8
89.5
FBS (mg/100ml)
0.000
112.9
88.5
0.000
120.8
90.5
TG (mg/100ml)
0.000
147.8
134.6
0.043
143.2
136.0
Chol (mg/100ml)
0.400
57.4
57.1
0.124
58.0
57.1
HDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.000
68.5
61.0
0.805
62.8
62
LDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.000
1.98
1.56
0.000
2.12
1.60
TG/HDL
0.017
0.53
51.3
54.3
73.15
> 135 mm Hg
SBP (mm Hg)
0.000
0.60
62.5
53.8
75.25
> 89 mm Hg
DBP (mm Hg)
0.738
0.48
61.3
45.8
75.75
> 89 mg/100ml
FBS (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.70
76.1
56.9
79.90
> 200 mg/100ml
TG (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.66
61.6
64.0
75.40
> 200 mg/100ml
Chol (mg/100ml)
0.143
0.37
71.3
30.0
78.05
< 75 mg/100ml
HDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.038
0.69
60.9
80.0
75.40
< 155 mg/100ml
LDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.66
66.7
57.9
76.85
> 3 mg/100ml
TG/HDL-C
0.333
0.52
59.9
44.9
94.05
> 135 mm Hg
SBP (mm Hg)
0.000
0.61
56.9
60.3
93.75
> 89 mm Hg
DBP (mm Hg)
0.312
0.44
60.3
37.5
94.90
> 89 mg/100ml
FBS (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.68
61.1
65.5
94.75
> 200 mg/100ml
TG (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.67
61.3
65.3
94.90
> 200 mg/100ml
Chol (mg/100ml)
0.167
0.37
83.0
30.0
101.10
< 75 mg/100ml
HDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.025
0.71
64.6
70.0
95.95
< 155 mg/100ml
LDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.64
61.5
60.5
94.75
> 3 mg/100ml
TG/HDL-C
0.002
0.55
50.7
57.7
0.80
> 135 mm Hg
SBP (mm Hg)
0.001
0.57
59.7
51.1
0.81
> 89 mm Hg
DBP (mm Hg)
0.553
0.54
58.4
54.2
0.81
> 89 mg/100ml
FBS (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.66
58.8
60.3
0.81
> 200 mg/100ml
TG (mg/100ml)
0.001
0.61
58.9
57.3
0.81
> 200 mg/100ml
Chol (mg/100ml)
0.461
0.43
24.1
90.0
0.77
< 75 mg/100ml
HDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.231
0.61
58.4
70.0
0.81
< 155 mg/100ml
LDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.65
59.5
63.2
0.81
> 3 mg/100ml
TG/HDL-C
0.017
0.54
47.7
58.3
0.43
> 135 mm Hg
SBP (mm Hg)
0.000
0.60
57.0
57.3
0.44
> 89 mm Hg
DBP (mm Hg)
0.664
0.47
68.5
41.7
0.46
> 89 mg/100ml
FBS (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.70
63.3
69.0
0.46
> 200 mg/100ml
TG (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.68
63.4
64.0
0.46
> 200 mg/100ml
Chol (mg/100ml)
0.499
0.44
75.0
30.0
0.47
< 75 mg/100ml
HDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.047
0.68
68.5
60.0
0.46
< 155 mg/100ml
LDL-C (mg/100ml)
0.000
0.68
63.9
63.2
0.45
> 3 mg/100ml
TG/HDL-C
Discussion
In this cross-sectional study of Syrian adolescents aged 18-19 years a significantly higher values of anthropometric parameters of central obesity as measured by WC (≥94 cm), WHpR (≥0.9), and WHtR (≥0.5) were reported in those with high values of the Mets components. These values tended to increase as WC increased. These findings are in agreement with other studies which showed a strong correlation of WC with most of Mets components. The association of WC with a number of cardio metabolic risk factors, reported in this study and in a number of previous reports, encourage to propose to use this parameter as a simple method of identifying those who are at risk of developing CVD and type II diabetes mellitus In the current criteria for metabolic syndrome, we used a common cut-off value for the WC for Syrian adolescents. When using this cut-off threshold, it raises a problem in that the visceral fat area (VFA) for the adolescents is underestimated. Therefore, different cut-off values for the WC, WHpR and WHtR according to the age should be considered. The results of this study suggest that all used anthropometric indicators (WC, HC, WHpR and WHtR) are associated with one or more metabolic risk factors in adolescents. ROC curve analysis indicated that, among the indicators used to predict the presence of metabolic syndrome, DBP, TG, Chol, LDL-C, and TG/HDL-C have showed a great area under the ROC curve, but the TG was the index that showed the greatest area under the ROC curve. Based on the sensitivity, specificity, and ROC calculation, we found that WC, HC, WHpR and WHtR have a good accuracy for identifying adolescents with some metabolic risks including DBP, TG, Chol, LDL-C, and TG/HDL-C. This data suggest that, the best WC, HC, WHpR, WHtR cut-offs ranged between 73.15-79.90 cm, 93.75-101.10 cm, 0.80-0.81 cm, and 0.43 cm and 0.47 cm, respectively. These cut-off values of were lower than the current definitions recommended by the WHO However, the absolute risk currently determined by the multiple risk factors associated with body fat and its distribution may well reflect the phase of disease transition in a population. Hence, the thresholds for risk associated with WC or WHpR may vary with time. These considerations make it difficult to specify cut-off points on the basis of ethnicity Males who have WC greater than 102 cm are considered to be at increased risk for CVD. This cut-off point was derived from a regression curve that identified the WC value associated with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m
Conclusion
Our findings indicate that central obesity as determined by the main anthropometric indicators WC, WHpR and WHtR have a significant association with the major components of MetS suggesting that visceral fat accessed by these indicators can be good predictors of this syndrome in Syrian adolescents. Based on ROC calculation for WC, HC, WHpR, and WHtR and some metabolic risk factors, the best cut-offs of these parameters were defined in this study. These cut-off values were lower than the values recommended by the WHO.