The correlation of abdominal adipose tissue distribution and insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes mellitus
10.3969/j.issn.1006-6187.2015.07.003
- VernacularTitle:腹部脂肪组织分布与2型糖尿病患者胰岛素抵抗的相关性研究
- Author:
Dantong WANG
;
Dingqiong PENG
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Diabetes mellitus,type 2;
Visceral fat area (VA );
Subcutaneous fat area (SA );
Insulin resistance (IR)
- From:
Chinese Journal of Diabetes
2015;(7):587-591
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To investigate correlation of abdominal adipose tissue distribution and insulin resistance in T2DM. Methods A total of 128 T2DM patients were divided into two groups :obese (OG) group (n=66) and non‐obese (NOG) group (n=62). Spiral CT was used for the measurement of adipose tissue of the total area (TA) and visceral fat area (VA) at abdominal umbilical level lumbar vertebrae 4 ,5 plane in T2DM patients. Subcutaneous fat area (SA ) was calculated. General and biochemical characteristics were measured in both groups. Results WC [male(73.52 ± 0.88) vs (70.66 ± 0.92)cm ;female(83.22 ± 0.96) vs (78.98 ± 0.98)cm] ,BMI [male(28.85 ± 3.45) vs (25.11 ± 4.36)kg/m2 ;female (28.23 ± 3.48) vs (25.05 ± 3.89)kg/m2 ] ,SBP [male(158.23 ± 8.25) vs (112.25 ± 7.25)mmHg ;female (154.25 ± 6.32) vs (109.68 ± 8.02)mmHg] ,DBP [male(95.36 ± 5.26) vs (80.69 ± 7.25)mmHg ;female (92.45 ± 4.36) vs (80.26 ± 6.48)mmHg] ,FPG [male(9.85 ± 2.89) vs (7.03 ± 2.88)mmol/L ;female (9.75 ± 2.65) vs (7.39 ± 2.98)mmol/L] ,FIns [male(11.25 ± 3.45) vs (7.02 ± 2.43)mIU/L ;female (11.02 ± 3.58) vs (7.18 ± 2.69)mIU/L] ,HbA1c [male(7.36 ± 1.36)% vs (5.21 ± 0.37)% ;female(7.68 ± 1.22)% vs (5.32 ± 0.42)% ] ,TG [male(5.98 ± 1.52) vs (3.02 ± 0.89)mmol/L ;female(5.78 ± 1.26) vs (2.98 ± 0.92)mmol/L] ,TC [male(8.02 ± 1.28) vs (4.39 ± 0.98)mmol/L ;female(7.98 ± 1.13) vs (4.23 ± 0.89)mmol/L] ,LDL‐C [male(9.12 ± 0.58) vs (4.21 ± 0.86)mmol/L ;female(8.96 ± 0.78) vs (4.18 ± 0.92)mmol/L] ,SUA [male(83.63 ± 21.64) vs (72.98 ± 12.25)μmol/L ;female(83.98 ± 19.78) vs (71.98 ± 11.98)μmol/L] ,C‐RP [male(5.96 ± 1.25) vs (2.32 ± 0.42)mg/L ;female(5.05 ± 1.32) vs (2.52 ± 0.56)mg/L] ,HOMA‐IR [male(4.25 ± 1.12) vs (2.25 ± 1.12);female(4.36 ± 1.42) vs (2.12 ± 1.02)] ,TA [male(50.68 ± 9.12) vs (30.96 ± 3.26)cm2 ;female(47.23 ± 4.23) vs (26.98 ± 3.02)cm2 ] , VA [male(19.78 ± 5.42) vs (10.59 ± 4.69)cm2 ;female(17.02 ± 3.96) vs (8.45 ± 3.78)cm2 ] ,SA [male (30.91 ± 6.02) vs (18.96 ± 5.78)mm2 ;female(28.25 ± 4.23) vs (17.25 ± 4.62)mm2 ]and VA/SA [male (0.72 ± 0.22)% vs (0.42 ± 0.18)% ;female(0.58 ± 0.17)% vs (0.32 ± 0.12)% ] were significantly higher in OG group than in NOG group. T2DM course [male(2.36 ± 0.58) vs (2.62 ± 0.78)years ;female (2.38 ± 0.62) vs (2.82 ± 0.82)years] ,HDL‐C [male(0.98 ± 0.21) vs (2.28 ± 0.78)mmol/L ;female(0.96 ± 0.32) vs (2.19 ± 0.82)mmol/L] and HOMA‐β[male(28.22 ± 9.34) vs (82.22 ± 31.25);female(28.02 ±8.02) vs (81.36 ± 28.36)] were lower in OG group than in NOG group(P< 0.05). Spearson correlation analysis showed that HOMA‐IR was positively associated with TG ,SUA ,TA ,VA ,SA ,VA/TA ,SA/TA and VA/SA. Logistic multiple regression analysis showed that TG ,SA ,TA and VA/TA were risk factors for insulin resistance in T2DM patients. Conclusion Abdominal fat distribution is closely related to IR in T2DM patients.
