Association between abdominal adiposity and subclinical measures of left-ventricular remodeling in diabetics, prediabetics and normal controls without history of cardiovascular disease as measured by magnetic resonance imaging: results from the KORA-FF4 Study

Table 2 Association of local abdominal fat depots with LV mass, volumes and function

	LVM		LVCI		LVEDV		LVSV
	β (95% CI)	p	β (95% CI)	p	β (95% CI)	p	β (95% CI)	p
Separate models adjusted for age, sex
VAT	0.78 (− 0.68; 2.23)	0.29	0.14 (0.11; 0.17)	< 0.001	− 6.79 (− 8.36; − 5.21)	< 0.001	− 4.26 (− 5.30; − 3.22)	< 0.001
SAT	0.83 (− 0.45; 2.10)	0.21	0.07 (0.04; 0.10)	< 0.001	− 2.98 (− 4.45; -1.50)	< 0.001	− 2.02 (− 2.99; − 1.05)	< 0.001
PDFF_hepatic	0.37 (− 0.98; 1.71)	0.59	0.10 (0.07; 0.13)	< 0.001	− 4.75 (− 6.26; − 3.24)	< 0.001	− 3.15 (− 4.14; − 2.16)	< 0.001
Separate models adjusted for age, sex, BMI
VAT	–		0.15 (0.11; 0.19)	< 0.001	− 7.92 (− 9.93; − 5.91)	< 0.001	− 4.8 (− 6.13; − 3.47)	< 0.001
SAT	–		0.01 (− 0.05; 0.06)	0.83	− 1.69 (− 4.72; 1.34)	0.28	− 1.42 (− 3.41; 0.58)	< 0.001
PDFF_hepatic	–		0.09 (0.06; 0.12)	< 0.001	− 4.43 (− 6.10; − 2.76)	< 0.001	− 2.91 (− 4.00; − 1.81)	< 0.001
Separate, fully adjusted models^a
VAT	–		0.11 (0.07; 0.15)	< 0.001	− 6.70 (− 8.84; − 4.55)	< 0.001	− 3.91 (− 5.32; − 2.50)	< 0.001
SAT	–		–		–		− 1.75 (− 3.66; 0.16)	0.07
PDFF_hepatic	–		0.06 (0.02; 0.09)	0.001	− 3.23 (− 5.03; − 1.44)	< 0.001	− 2.20 (− 3.37; − 1.04)	< 0.001

Separated models were fit for VAT, SAT and PDFF_hepatic. β-coefficients represent change in LV parameters for standard deviation increment in abdominal fat measurements estimated by linear regression; ^a the fully adjusted model included age, sex, BMI, hypertension, diabetes, triglycerides, HDL (for all LV parameters), additionally LDL (for LVCI, LVEDV, and LVSV) and lipid lowering medication (for LVM, and LVCI). The selection of potential confounders for the fully adjusted model was done in univariate analyses for each of the different LV measurements (Appendix Table 4) to allow appropriate comparisons of the associations of the three fat depots to a particular LV measurement, but may limit the comparison between different LV measurements. To address this issue, sub-analyses were performed with a fixed set of common cardiovascular risk factors as potential confounders, no substantial differences were found (Appendix Table 5)
VAT visceral adipose tissue, SAT subcutaneous adipose tissue, PDFF_hepatic hepatic proton-density fat fraction, LV left-ventricular, LVM left-ventricular mass (in g/m²); LVCI left-ventricular concentricity index (in g/mL), LVEDV left-ventricular end-diastolic volume (in mL/m²), LVSC left ventricular stroke volume (in mL/m²)

ISSN: 1475-2840