scholarly journals Discordance between Body-Mass Index and Body Adiposity Index in the Classification of Weight Status of Elderly Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 943
Author(s):  
Bartosz Hudzik ◽  
Justyna Nowak ◽  
Janusz Szkodzinski ◽  
Aleksander Danikiewicz ◽  
Ilona Korzonek-Szlacheta ◽  
...  

Background and Aims: Body-mass index (BMI) is a popular method implemented to define weight status. However, describing obesity by BMI may result in inaccurate assessment of adiposity. The Body Adiposity Index (BAI) is intended to be a directly validated method of estimating body fat percentage. We set out to compare body weight status assessment by BMI and BAI in a cohort of elderly patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: A total of 169 patients with stable CAD were enrolled in an out-patient cardiology clinic. The National Research Council (US) Committee on Diet and Health classification was used for individuals older than 65 years as underweight BMI < 24 kg/m2, normal weight BMI 24–29 kg/m2, overweight BMI 29–35 kg/m2, and obesity BMI > 35 kg/m2. In case of BAI, we used sex- and age-specific classification of weight status. In addition, body fat was estimated by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BImpA). Results: Only 72 out of 169 patients (42.6%) had concordant classification of weight status by both BMI and BAI. The majority of the patients had their weight status either underestimated or overestimated. There were strong positive correlations between BMI and BImpA (FAT%) (R = 0.78 p < 0.001); BAI and BImpA (FAT%) (R = 0.79 p < 0.001); and BMI and BAI (R = 0.67 p < 0.001). BMI tended to overestimate the rate of underweight, normal weight or overweight, meanwhile underestimating the rate of obesity. Third, BMI exhibited an average positive bias of 14.4% compared to the reference method (BImpA), whereas BAI exhibited an average negative bias of −8.3% compared to the reference method (BImpA). Multivariate logistic regression identified independent predictors of discordance in assessing weight status by BMI and BAI: BImpA (FAT%) odds ratio (OR) 1.29, total body water (%) OR 1.61, fat mass index OR 2.62, and Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) score OR 1.25. Conclusions: There is substantial rate of misclassification of weight status between BMI and BAI. These findings have significant implications for clinical practice as the boundary between health and disease in malnutrition is crucial to accurately define criteria for intervention. Perhaps BMI cut-offs for classifying weight status in the elderly should be revisited.

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 719-726 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anan Younis ◽  
Arwa Younis ◽  
Ronen Goldkorn ◽  
Ilan Goldenberg ◽  
Yael Peled ◽  
...  

KYAMC Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-42
Author(s):  
Md. Saiful Islam ◽  
Ranjan Talukder ◽  
Annaz Mus Sakib ◽  
AKM Mokhlesuzzaman

Background: Increased body mass index (BMI) is known to be related to ischaemic heart disease (IHD) in populations where many are overweight (BMI ? 25 kg/m2) or obese (BMI ? 30). Substantial uncertainty remains, however, about the relationship between BMI and severity of Coronary artery disease. Methods and Results: Total 152 patients undergoing coronary angiography for clinical indication (eg; stable angina, unstable angina, STEMI, NSTEMI). Among them 88.15% male and 11.84% female.6.57% were under weight, 69.07% were normal weight, 20.39% were over weight and 3.94% were obese or morbid obese. Normal & minimal coronary artery disease more common in under weight & normal weight patient ( 60% in underweight patient, 21.88% in normal weight patient compare to 16.12% in over weight & obese person). Tripple Vessel disease are more common in over weight and obese person (45.16% in over weight and 50% in obese person compare to 10% in under weight and 33.33% in nonmal weight person). Conclusion: In patients with established Ischemic heart disease, Increase BMI was associated with increase number of coronary lesion ( doable and tripple vessel disease more common in over weight and obese person). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/kyamcj.v1i2.13312KYAMC Journal Vol.1(2) 2011 pp.39-42


Diabetes ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 449-P
Author(s):  
TAKESHI KOMATSU ◽  
KAZUYA FUJIHARA ◽  
MAYUKO H. YAMADA ◽  
TAKAAKI SATO ◽  
MASARU KITAZAWA ◽  
...  

Diabetes ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 46 (9) ◽  
pp. 1491-1496 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Maki ◽  
P. Nuutila ◽  
H. Laine ◽  
L. M. Voipio-Pulkki ◽  
M. Haaparanta ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 1052-1080 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evangelos Oikonomou ◽  
Gerasimos Siasos ◽  
Vasiliki Tsigkou ◽  
Evanthia Bletsa ◽  
Maria-Evi Panoilia ◽  
...  

Coronary artery disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The most common pathophysiologic substrate is atherosclerosis which is an inflammatory procedure that starts at childhood and develops throughout life. Endothelial dysfunction is associated with the initiation and progression of atherosclerosis and is characterized by the impaired production of nitric oxide. In general, endothelial dysfunction is linked to poor cardiovascular prognosis and different methods, both invasive and non-invasive, have been developed for its evaluation. Ultrasound evaluation of flow mediated dilatation of the branchial artery is the most commonly used method to assessed endothelial function while intracoronary administration of vasoactive agents may be also be used to test directly endothelial properties of the coronary vasculature. Endothelial dysfunction has also been the subject of therapeutic interventions. This review article summarizes the knowledge about evaluation of endothelial function in acute coronary syndromes and stable coronary artery disease and demonstrates the current therapeutic approaches against endothelial dysfunction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document