Dynapenic Abdominal Obesity as a Risk Factor for Metabolic Syndrome in Individual 50 Years of Age or Older: English Longitudinal Study of Ageing.

OBJECTIVES: To analyse whether dynapenic abdominal obesity is a risk factor for Metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its components in individuals 50 years of age or older. DESIGN: A longitudinal study was conducted with an eight-year follow-up. SETTING: Representative sample of community-dwelling participants of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA). PARTICIPANTS: 3,952 individuals free of MetS at baseline. MEASUREMENTS: Dynapenic abdominal obesity was defined based on waist circumference (> 102 cm for men and > 88 cm for women) and grip strength (< 26 kg for men and < 16 kg for women). The participants were classified as non-abdominally obese/non-dynapenic (NAO/ND - reference group), abdominally obese/non-dynapenic (AO/ND), non-abdominally obese/dynapenic (NAO/D) and abdominally obese/dynapenic (AO/D). The outcome was the incidence of MetS based on the presence of three or more of the following criteria: hypertriglyceridemia, hyperglycaemia, low HDL cholesterol, arterial hypertension or body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2 throughout eight-year follow-up. Additionally, the incidence of each component of MetS was also analyzed. Poisson regression models were run and controlled for sociodemographic, behavioural and clinical variables. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 65 years and 55% were women. The prevalence of AO/ND, NAO/D and AO/D were 35.3, 4.3 and 2.2%, respectively. At the end of follow-up 558 incident cases of MetS were recorded. The adjusted model demonstrated that although abdominal obesity was a risk factor for MetS (IRR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.87 - 2.73), the IRR was greater in AO/D individuals (IRR: 3.34; 95% CI: 2.03 - 5.50) compared with ND/NAO group. Furthermore, ND/AO was a risk factor for incidence of hypertriglyceridemia (IRR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.06 - 1.52), hyperglycaemia (IRR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.18 - 1.69), low HDL cholesterol (IRR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.32 - 2.19) and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (IRR: 2.58; 95% CI: 2.04 - 3.26) while D/AO was a risk factor for hyperglycaemia (IRR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.02 - 3.10), low HDL cholesterol (IRR: 2.36; 95% CI: 1.10 - 5.08), and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 (IRR: 2.79; 95% CI: 1.38 - 5.62). CONCLUSIONS: Dynapenic abdominal obesity increases the risk of MetS, with a higher IRR compared to obesity alone. The understanding of this synergic action could guide specific clinical strategies, enabling the prevention of metabolic changes that can lead to cardiovascular disease, disability and death.

Dynapenic Abdominal Obesity Increases Mortality Risk among English and Brazilian Older Adults: A 10-Year Follow-Up of the ELSA and SABE Studies.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: There is little epidemiological evidence demonstrating that dynapenic abdominal obesity has higher mortality risk than dynapenia and abdominal obesity alone. Our main aim was to investigate whether dynapenia combined with abdominal obesity increases mortality risk among English and Brazilian older adults over ten-year follow-up. DESIGN: Cohort study. SETTING: United Kingdom and Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: Data came from 4,683 individuals from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) and 1,490 from the Brazilian Health, Well-being and Aging study (SABE), hence the final sample of this study was 6,173 older adults. MEASUREMENTS: The study population was categorized into the following groups: non-dynapenic/non-abdominal obese, abdominal obese, dynapenic, and dynapenic abdominal obese according to their handgrip strength (< 26 kg for men and < 16 kg for women) and waist circumference (> 102 cm for men and > 88 cm for women). The outcome was all-cause mortality over a ten-year follow-up. Adjusted hazard ratios by sociodemographic, behavioural and clinical characteristics were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: The fully adjusted model showed that dynapenic abdominal obesity has a higher mortality risk among the groups. The hazard ratios (HR) were 1.37 for dynapenic abdominal obesity (95% CI = 1.12 - 1.68), 1.15 for abdominal obesity (95% CI = 0.98 - 1.35), and 1.23 for dynapenia (95% CI = 1.04 - 1.45). CONCLUSIONS: Dynapenia is an important risk factor for mortality but dynapenic abdominal obesity has the highest mortality risk among English and Brazilian older adults.

Sarcopenia according to the european working group on sarcopenia in older people (EWGSOP) versus Dynapenia as a risk factor for disability in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia, defined as low muscle mass (LMM), and dynapenia have been associated with adverse outcomes in elderly. OBJECTIVE: Contrast the association of sarcopenia versus dynapenia with incidence of disability. DESIGN: A four-year prospective study (2006-2010). SETTING: São Paulo, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: 478 individuals aged 60 and older from the Saúde, Bem-Estar e Envelhecimento (SABE) study who were non-disabled at baseline. MEASUREMENTS: Sarcopenia, measured according to the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP), includes: LMM assessed by skeletal muscle mass index ≤8.90kg/m2 (men) and ≤6.37kg/m2 (women); low muscle strength (LMS) assessed by handgrip strength <30kg (men) and <20kg (women); and low physical performance (LPP) assessed by gait speed ≤0.8m/s. Diagnosis of sarcopenia required LMM plus LMS or LPP. Dynapenia was defined as handgrip strength <30kg (men) and <20kg (women). Covariates included socio-demographic and behavioral variables, medical conditions, hospitalization, depressive symptoms, cognition, perception of vision, hearing and body mass index. OUTCOMES: Disability in mobility or instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) or disability in activities of daily living (ADL) and IADL. RESULTS: The incidence density of mobility or IADL disability was 43.4/1000 person/year and 22.6/1000 person/year for IADL and ADL disability. There was no significant difference in incidence density according sarcopenia or dynapenia status. After controlling for all covariates, sarcopenia was associated with mobility or IADL disability (relative risk ratio = 2.23, 95%Confidence Interval: 1.03-4.85). Dynapenia was not associated with disability. CONCLUSIONS: Sarcopenia according to the EWGSOP definition can be used in clinical practice as a screening tool for early functional decline (mobility or IADL disability).