PloS one · 2022
The effect of metabolic health and obesity on lung function: A cross sectional study of 114,143 participants from Kangbuk Samsung Health Study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lee Jonghoo, Park Hye Kyeong, Kwon Min-Jung, Ham Soo-Youn, Lim Si-Young, Song Jae-Uk
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Although the role of obesity-induced metabolic abnormalities in impaired lung function is well-established, the risk of impaired lung function among obese individuals without metabolic abnormalities, referred to metabolically-healthy obesity (MHO), is largely unexplored. Therefore, we evaluated the impact of MHO on lung function in a large health-screening cohort.
METHODS: 114,143 subjects (65,342 men, mean age and BMI: 39.6 years and 23.6) with health examinations in 2019 were divided into four groups as follows: metabolically healthy non-obese (MHNO), MHO, metabolically unhealthy non-obese (MUHNO), and metabolically unhealthy obese (MUHO). Metabolic health was defined as fewer than two metabolic syndrome components. Obesity was defined as BMI ≥25 kg/m2. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs), using MHNO as a reference, were calculated to determine lung function impairment.
RESULTS: Approximately one-third (30.6%) of the study subjects were obese. The prevalence of MHO was 15.1%. Subjects with MHO had the highest FEV1% and FVC% values but the lowest FEV1/FVC ratio (p<0.001). These results persisted after controlling for covariates. Compared with MHNO, the aORs (95% confidence interval) for FEV1% < 80% in MHO, MUHNO and MUHO were 0.871 (0.775-0.978), 1.274 (1.114-1.456), and 1.176 (1.102-1.366), respectively (P for trend = 0.014). Similarly, the aORs in MHO, MUHNO, and MUHO were 0.704 (0.615-0.805), 1.241 (1.075-1.432), and 1.226 (1.043-1.441), respectively, for FVC% < 80% (p for trend = 0.013). However, the aORs for FEV1/FVC<0.7 were not significantly different between groups (p for trend = 0.173).
CONCLUSIONS: The MHO group had better lung function than other groups. However, longitudinal follow-up studies are required to validate our findings.
METHODS: 114,143 subjects (65,342 men, mean age and BMI: 39.6 years and 23.6) with health examinations in 2019 were divided into four groups as follows: metabolically healthy non-obese (MHNO), MHO, metabolically unhealthy non-obese (MUHNO), and metabolically unhealthy obese (MUHO). Metabolic health was defined as fewer than two metabolic syndrome components. Obesity was defined as BMI ≥25 kg/m2. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs), using MHNO as a reference, were calculated to determine lung function impairment.
RESULTS: Approximately one-third (30.6%) of the study subjects were obese. The prevalence of MHO was 15.1%. Subjects with MHO had the highest FEV1% and FVC% values but the lowest FEV1/FVC ratio (p<0.001). These results persisted after controlling for covariates. Compared with MHNO, the aORs (95% confidence interval) for FEV1% < 80% in MHO, MUHNO and MUHO were 0.871 (0.775-0.978), 1.274 (1.114-1.456), and 1.176 (1.102-1.366), respectively (P for trend = 0.014). Similarly, the aORs in MHO, MUHNO, and MUHO were 0.704 (0.615-0.805), 1.241 (1.075-1.432), and 1.226 (1.043-1.441), respectively, for FVC% < 80% (p for trend = 0.013). However, the aORs for FEV1/FVC<0.7 were not significantly different between groups (p for trend = 0.173).
CONCLUSIONS: The MHO group had better lung function than other groups. However, longitudinal follow-up studies are required to validate our findings.