Abstract
Introduction: CAD may occur in absence of conventional risk factors like obesity and abnormal lipid profile. We aim to study a new parameter Visceral Fat Rating (VFR), measuring abdominal fat, and its association in CAD. Methods: 477 subjects were divided into three groups-documented CAD patients (n = 150), CAD risk group (n = 174) and control (n = 153). CAD risk: those with Metabolic Syndrome (based on NCEP-ATPIII) or with Framingham 10 year risk >10%. We measured waist circumference (WC), VFR by bioelectrical impedance using InnerScanV (TANITA Inc., Tokyo) and lipid profile; trigylcerides (TG), total cholesterol (TC), low and high density lipoprotein (LDL, HDL); in all subjects. Groups were compared by one way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test. Correlation was seen between VFR, WC and lipid profile. Results: WC was significantly higher in CAD patients and risk group in comparison to control. Mean levels of TG, TC and LDL were highest while HDL was minimum in CAD risk subjects. VFR of CAD patients was significantly higher from risk and control group. VFR was significantly correlated with WC, TG, TC and LDL (r = 0.77, 0.18, 0.19, 0.17, p < 0.001).Tabled 1VariablesControl (n = 153)CAD Risk (n = 174)CAD Patients (n = 150)WC (cm)86.08 ± 0.8096.14 ± 0.80ap<0.05 as compared to Control group.94.73 ± 0.83ap<0.05 as compared to Control group.TG (mg/dl)136.76 ± 5.37204.09 ± 6.63ap<0.05 as compared to Control group.140.63 ± 4.65bp<0.05 as compared to Risk group.TC (mg/dl)158.21 ± 3.42194.19 ± 3.84ap<0.05 as compared to Control group.160.83 ± 3.22bp<0.05 as compared to Risk group.HDL (mg/dl)39.48 ± 0.9731.28 ± 0.87ap<0.05 as compared to Control group.35.65 ± 0.64ap<0.05 as compared to Control group., bp<0.05 as compared to Risk group.LDL (mg/dl)91.38 ± 3.08122.58 ± 3.78ap<0.05 as compared to Control group.97.06 ± 2.83bp<0.05 as compared to Risk group.VFR7.77 ± 0.2610.03 ± 0.23ap<0.05 as compared to Control group.11.30 ± 0.38ap<0.05 as compared to Control group., bp<0.05 as compared to Risk group.a p < 0.05 as compared to Control group.b p < 0.05 as compared to Risk group. Open table in a new tab Conclusion: WC may estimate abdominal obesity erroneously owing to variable amount of subcutaneous fat. VFR estimates visceral fat more correctly and correlates well with abnormal lipid profile. It may be an important risk factor in relation to CAD.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call