[Obesity as risk factor for metabolic disorder in Mexican adolescents, 2005]. / Obesidad como Factor de Riesgo para Trastornos Metabólicos en Adolescentes Mexicanos, 2005.

OBJECTIVE: Determining the prevalence and estimating the risk of obesity for dyslipidemia and hyperinsulinemia in adolescents. The existence of a linear association betweenanthropometric measures, lipids and insulin was also evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comparative study was carried out amongst obese (body mass index=BMI >95th percentile for age and gender; n=120) and non-obese adolescents (BMI <85th percentile for age and sex; n=120) aged 10-19. A structured questionnaire was used for collecting anthropometric and demographic data. Glucose, insulin and lipid profiles were obtained for each adolescent. RESULTS: Prevalence of at least one dyslipidemia was 56,6 % among obese adolescents and 20,8 % amongst non-obese ones (p<.001). The former registered 50 % prevalence of hyperinsulinemia, the latter 4 % (p<.001). Obesity increased hyperinsulinemia risk having a 23 odds ratio (8.3-68.9 95 % CI) and for at least one dyslipidemia (OR=5,0; 2,7-9,2 95 % CI). Insulin level significantly correlated with BMI (r=0,57), triglycerides (r=0,57), VLDL (r=0,57), HDL (-0,37), waist-hip circumference index (r=0,29), cholesterol (r=0,22), and LDL (r=0,13). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity can be considered to be a risk factor for developing metabolic disorders in adolescents. In fact, there was a linear relationship between anthropometric measurement, lipids and insulin. Prevention should focus on improving predisposing environments for obesity amongst families having children and teenagers. Emphasising life-styles and healthy behaviour is essential, as well as training and treatment options for complete care of individuals in this age-group.

Obesidad como Factor de Riesgo para Trastornos Metabólicos en Adolescentes Mexicanos, 2005 / Obesity as risk factor for metabolic disorder in Mexican adolescents, 2005

Objetivo: Determinar la prevalencia y estimar el riesgo de obesidad para dislipidemias e hiperinsulinemia en adolescentes. Asimismo, evaluar la asociación lineal de medidas antropométricas y lípidos con insulina. Material y Métodos: Se realizó un estudio transversal comparativo entre adolescentes obesos (índice de masa corporal=IMC>percentil 95 para edad y sexo; n=120) y no obesos (IMC< percentil 85 para edad y sexo; n=120) de 10-19 años. Se aplicó una encuesta estructurada con datos sociodemográficos y antropométricos y se determinaron glucosa, insulina y perfil de lípidos. Resultados: La prevalencia de una o más dislipidemias fue de 56,6 por ciento en adolescentes c/obesidad, en comparación con 20,8 por ciento en adolescentes s/obesidad (p<.001). La hiperinsulinemia se presentó en el 50 por ciento del primer grupo mientras que en el segundo, en 4 por ciento (p<.001). La obesidad incrementó el riesgo de hiperinsulinemia con una razón de momios de (RM) de 23 (IC 95 por ciento: 8,3-68,9) y de por lo menos una dislipidemia (RM=5,0; IC95 por ciento: 2,7-9,2). El nivel de insulina se correlacionó significativamente con IMC (r=0,57), triglicéridos (r=0,57), VLDL (r=0,57), HDL (-0,37), relación cintura cadera (r=0,29), colesterol (r=0,22), y LDL (r=0,13). Conclusiones: Se evidenció a la obesidad en adolescentes como factor predisponente para el desarrollo de trastornos metabólicos y la asociación lineal de medidas antropométricas y lípidos con insulina.

Objective: Determining the prevalence and estimating the risk of obesity for dyslipidemia and hyperinsulinemia in adolescents. The existence of a linear association betweenanthropometric measures, lipids and insulin was also evaluated. Material and Methods: A comparative study was carried out amongst obese (body mass index=BMI >95th percentile for age and gender; n=120) and non-obese adolescents (BMI <85th percentile for age and sex; n=120) aged 10-19. A structured questionnaire was used for collecting anthropometric and demographic data. Glucose, insulin and lipid profiles were obtained for each adolescent. Results: Prevalence of at least one dyslipidemia was 56,6 percent among obese adolescents and 20,8 percent amongst non-obese ones (p<.001). The former registered 50 percent prevalence of hyperinsulinemia, the latter 4 percent (p<.001). Obesity increased hyperinsulinemia risk having a 23 odds ratio (8.3-68.9 95 percent CI) and for at least one dyslipidemia (OR=5,0; 2,7-9,2 95 percent CI). Insulin level significantly correlated with BMI (r=0,57), triglycerides (r=0,57), VLDL (r=0,57), HDL (-0,37), waist-hip circumference index (r=0,29), cholesterol (r=0,22), and LDL (r=0,13). Conclusions: Obesity can be considered to be a risk factor for developing metabolic disorders in adolescents. In fact, there was a linear relationship between anthropometric measurement, lipids and insulin. Prevention should focus on improving predisposing environments for obesity amongst families having children and teenagers. Emphasising life-styles and healthy behaviour is essential, as well as training and treatment options for complete care of individuals in this age-group.

Gestational diabetes: Validity of ADA and WHO diagnostic criteria using NDDG as the reference test.

OBJECTIVE: Evidence is provided to clinicians and decision makers on the validity of ADA and WHO tests based on NDDG criteria for gestational diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During 18 months, all pregnant women attending a University Hospital underwent a 50-g, 1-h NDDG GCT for universal screening (n = 1092). The following appointment consisted of a 75-g, 2-h GTT (WHO test), independently of the prior result. Women with an abnormal 50-g and/or an abnormal 75-g, received a 100-g, 3-h GTT; subjects with only one abnormal 3-h GTT value were not included in the accuracy analysis. Women whose diagnosis followed NDDG criteria received treatment. Obstetricians were not aware of ADA/WHO results. RESULTS: ADA sensitivity was 100% (95%CI 98.6, 100) and specificity, 98.1% (95%CI 97.6, 98.6), whereas WHO sensitivity was 57.6% (95%CI 55.9, 59.2) and specificity, 85.1% (95%CI 84.7, 85.6). ADA results remained similar independently of obesity and age, but performed better with a family history of diabetes. Accuracy of WHO improved under selective screening, still the false negative rate ranged 40-56%. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend replicating this validation process in other health service settings. Although WHO test is easier and less expensive than NDDG or ADA, caution is needed before deciding employment of such criteria in pregnant women.