Skip to main content

Advertisement

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

From: 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

  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
 PDFFhepatic 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
 PDFFhepatic   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 modelsa
 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
 PDFFhepatic   0.06 (0.02; 0.09) 0.001 − 3.23 (− 5.03; − 1.44) < 0.001 − 2.20 (− 3.37; − 1.04) < 0.001
  1. Separated models were fit for VAT, SAT and PDFFhepatic. 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)
  2. 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)