Can Visceral Adiposity Index Serve as a Simple Tool for Identifying Individuals with Insulin Resistance in Daily Clinical Practice?
The visceral adiposity index (VAI), estimating visceral adiposity dysfunction through a simple formula, could serve as a useful tool for identifying individuals at higher cardiometabolic risk. Its relationship with insulin resistance (IR), assessed using the homeostasis model assessment of IR (HOMA-...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Lithuania), 2019-08, Vol.55 (9), p.545 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The visceral adiposity index (VAI), estimating visceral adiposity dysfunction through a simple formula, could serve as a useful tool for identifying individuals at higher cardiometabolic risk. Its relationship with insulin resistance (IR), assessed using the homeostasis model assessment of IR (HOMA-IR), and metabolic syndrome (MetS) components remains unclear. The study aimed to investigate the association of VAI with both HOMA-IR and MetS.
After undergoing anthropometric and biochemical studies, 783 individuals were divided into three groups according to a number of present MetS components. The VAI cut-offs signaling MetS and HOMA-IR were determined by maximizing the sum of the sensitivity and specificity. Correlation analysis was performed to explore the associations between VAI and other tested parameters. A logistic stepwise regression analysis was applied to identify statistically significant determinants of HOMA-IR. Given the variability of reference values, two thresholds of HOMA-IR were applied, namely 2.0 and 3.8.
VAI increased significantly between the groups with a rising number of MetS components. The VAI cut-off for MetS was 2.37, with a sensitivity of 0.86 and a specificity of 0.78. The same cut-off point identified subjects with HOMA-IR = 3.8, with a sensitivity of 0.79 and a specificity of 0.66. The VAI cut-off for HOMA-IR = 2.0 was 1.89, with a sensitivity of 0.74 and a specificity of 0.68. The strongest correlations of VAI were noted with HOMA-IR (r = 0.51) and insulin (r = 0.49), respectively, while the strongest correlation of HOMA-IR was with waist circumference (r = 0.54). Not one of the routine parameters was a significant predictor in the regression analysis.
The obtained results show an existing association of VAI with HOMA-IR. The high sensitivity and specificity of the cut-offs may allow the application of VAI in common clinical practice. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1648-9144 1010-660X 1648-9144 1010-660X |
DOI: | 10.3390/medicina55090545 |