机构地区:[1]中国医学科学院北京协和医学院北京协和医院营养科,100730 [2]中国医学科学院北京协和医学院北京协和医院体检中心,100730
出 处:《中华老年医学杂志》2010年第2期111-114,共4页Chinese Journal of Geriatrics
摘 要:目的对老年2型糖尿病合并与未合并非酒精性脂肪性肝病患者体成分、血脂、腹型肥胖和代谢综合征发生率等进行比较,探讨合并非酒性脂肪性肝病的可能危险因素。方法将入选老年2型糖尿病患者分为合并非酒精性脂肪性肝病组(脂肪肝组)83例及未合并非酒精性脂肪性肝病组(非脂肪肝组)85例,比较两组体成分、血脂、腹型肥胖和代谢综合征发生率等临床资料。结果脂肪肝与非脂肪肝组比较,组体质指数[(26.9±2.5)kg/m^2对(24.1±2.5)kg/m^2,P=0.0003、腰臀围比(0.92±0.07对0.87±0.06,P=0.000)、总体脂肪比[(29.6±6.6)%对(25.3±5.5)%,P=0.000]、腹部脂肪[(11.0±2.5)kg对(8.7±2.3)kg,P=0.000]、内脏脂肪[(3.0±0.7)kg对(2.3±0.6)kg,P=0.000]、内脏脂肪面积[(97.6+22.2)cm^2对(75.5±21.1)cm^2,P=0.000]、三酰甘油[(1.98±0.94)mmol/L对(1.22±0.61)mmol/L,P=0.000]均升高,高密度脂蛋白胆醇[(1.23±0.32)mmol/L对(1.40±0.37)mmol/L,P=0,002]水平降低,差异均有统计学意义;体脂过高(68.7%对36.5%,P=0.000)、血脂异常(47.0%对21.2%,P=0.000)、腹型肥胖(69.9%对43.5%,P=0.001)和代谢综合征(49.4%对9.6%,P=0.000)的发病率亦明显升高,差异均有统计学意义;而总胆醇[(4.93±0.94)mmol/L对(4.73±1.07)mmol/L,P=0.219]和低密度脂蛋白胆固醇[(3.23±0.80)mmol/L对(3.07±0.89)mmol/L,P=0.229]两组比较,差异无统计学意义。Logistic回归分析显示体质指数超标(β=1.268,P=0.000,OR=3.56)、总体脂肪比过高(β=0.902,P=0.023,OR=2.47)和代谢综合征(β=1.664,P=0.000,OR=5.28)与老年2型糖尿病患者合并非酒精性脂肪性肝病相关。结论体质指数超标、总体脂肪比过Objective To investigate the probable risk factors for type 2 diabetic patients complicated nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NFLD) in elderly, through comparing the body composition, serum lipid profile, incidences of abdominal obesity and metabolic syndrome (MS) between elderly type 2 diabetic patients with and without NFLD. Methods The enrolled elderly type 2 diabetic patients were divided into NFLD group(n= 83) and non-NFLD group (n=85). Their clinical data including body composition, serum lipid profile, incidences of abdominal obesity and MS were analyzed retrospectively and compared. Results Compared with non-NFLD group, the BMI ((26.9±2.5) kg/m^2 vs. (24.1±2.5) kg/m^2, P=0.0003, waist hip ratios (WHR) [(0.92±0.07) vs. (0. 87±0.06), P=0.000), total body fat percentage [(29.6%±6.6%) vs. (25.3%±5.5%), P=0.000), abdominal fat [(11. 0±2. 5) kg vs. (8.7±2.3) kg, P=0.000), visceral fat ((3.0± 0. 7) kg vs. (2.3±0.6)kg, P=0.0002, visceral fat area [(97. 6±22. 2) cm^2 vs. (75.5±21.1) cm^2,P=0. 000], serum triglyceride [(1.98±0.94) mmol/L vs. (1.22±0.61) mmol/L, P=0. 000) were all increased, while serum HDL [(1. 23±0.32) mmol/L vs. (1.40±0.37) mmol/L, P=0. 002] was decreased in NFLD group. The incidences of over-body fat (68. 7% vs. 36.5%, P = 0. 000), dyslipidemia (47.0M vs. 21.2%, P=0.000), abdominal obesity (69.9% vs. 43.5%, P=0.001) and MS (49.4% vs. 9.6%, P = 0.000) were obviously increased. But there were no statistical differences in serumTC 〈(4. 93±0. 94) mmol/L vs. (4.73±1.07) mmol/L, P=0.2193 and LDL [(3.23±0. 80) mmol/L vs. (3.07±0.89) mmol/L, P=0. 2291 between the two groups. Logistic regression showed that high BMI (β= 1. 268, P= 0. 000, OR= 3.56), over-total body fat percentage (β=0. 902, P=0. 023, OR=2.47)and the existence of MS (β=1. 664, P=0. 000, OR=5.28) were related to elderly type 2 diabetic patients complicated NFLD. Conclusions The
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...