Cited by 42Cardiovascular Disease and AdiposityAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic DiseasesDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Increased epicardial adipose tissue in type 1 diabetes is associated with central obesity and metabolic syndrome

Momesso, Denise Prado, Bussade, Isabela, Epifanio, Marcio Antonio, Schettino, Claudio Domenico Sahione, Russo, Luis Augusto Tavares, Kupfer, Rosane·2011·Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice

Abstract

Aims The present study evaluated the relationship between metabolic syndrome (MS), body fat composition and epicardial adipose tissue (EAT) in type 1 diabetes. Epicardial adipose tissue is a new independent marker of coronary artery disease (CAD).Methods forty-five type 1 diabetic women were evaluated (age 36 ± 9 years; body mass index 24.6 ± 4.4 kg/m(2)). Metabolic syndrome was defined by the World Health Organization criteria. Body fat composition and EAT were analyzed by dual-energy-X-ray absorptiometry and echocardiogram, respectively.Results twenty patients (45%) had MS. Patients with MS had greater android (central) fat deposition than patients without MS (41.9 ± 2.0% vs. 33.7 ± 1.8%, p=0.004). Total body fat and gynoid (peripheric) fat distribution were similar between the groups. Mean EAT was higher in patients with MS (6.15 ± 0.34 mm vs. 4.96 ± 0.25 mm; p=0.006) and EAT was positively correlated with android (central) fat distribution (r=0.44; p=0.002), however no correlation was found with gynoid (peripheric) fat distribution.Conclusions there was a high incidence of MS in type 1 diabetes related to increased central adiposity, despite the absence of obesity. Metabolic syndrome and central obesity were associated with increased EAT. Thus, young non-obese type 1 diabetic women with central adiposity and/or MS may have increased EAT, what may predict CAD risk.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.diabres.2010.09.037

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 47 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Momesso, D. P., Bussade, I., Epifanio, M. A., Schettino, C. D. S., Russo, L. A. T., & Kupfer, R.
Affiliations
Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro (BR)
Corresponding author
Momesso, Denise Prado
Venue
Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-01
Volume
91
Issue
1
Pages
47-53
ISSN
0168-8227 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2081795288
Cited by
42
References
47
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
World Health Organization
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Disease and Adiposity
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Adipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
epicardial adipose tissue, type 1 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, abdominal obesity, android fat distribution, body fat content, coronary artery disease risk, non-obese women
MeSH terms
Adult, Brazil, Coronary Artery Disease, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1, Echocardiography, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Middle Aged, Pericardium, Risk Factors, Biomarkers, Absorptiometry, Photon, Body Mass Index, Incidence, Metabolic Syndrome, Intra-Abdominal Fat, Adiposity, Body Fat Distribution, Obesity, Abdominal

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review