Does FMI Correlate Better than BMI with the Occurrence of Metabolic Changes in Obese Patients? Study Based on 2007 Consecutive Mexican Patients.
Body composition
Body mass index
DXA
Fatty mass index
Obesity
Journal
Obesity surgery
ISSN: 1708-0428
Titre abrégé: Obes Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9106714
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2020
Apr 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
11
12
2019
medline:
15
4
2021
entrez:
11
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The body mass index (BMI) is the most commonly used anthropometric indicator. However, it does not discern among the different body components. The body fat content, expressed as fat mass index (FMI), is an accurate way to estimate adiposity. Since most metabolic diseases are associated with excess fat tissue, our aims were to comparatively analyze the frequency of associated metabolic abnormalities in patients with different obesity degrees based on BMI and FMI and to determine the best cut-off value of both indicators to predict metabolic abnormalities. From a cohort of 2007 patients, BMI and FMI were calculated using DXA. Individuals were classified into the different obesity degrees according to the reference ranges from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). A comparative analysis between BMI, FMI, and their correlation to the presence of metabolic alterations was performed. BMI underestimated the degree of obesity when compared with FMI. Spearman's rank-order correlation for both indexes resulted in very high coefficients (rho Spearman's = 0.857; p = 0.0001). The prevalence of metabolic alterations increased as BMI and FMI also increased. Despite the high positive statistical correlation between BMI and FMI, it was seen that some comorbidities were more specifically related to one particular index. There were no significant differences between the BMI and the FMI for predicting the degree of obesity. Likewise, there were no significant differences between them for the prediction of metabolic alterations.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The body mass index (BMI) is the most commonly used anthropometric indicator. However, it does not discern among the different body components. The body fat content, expressed as fat mass index (FMI), is an accurate way to estimate adiposity. Since most metabolic diseases are associated with excess fat tissue, our aims were to comparatively analyze the frequency of associated metabolic abnormalities in patients with different obesity degrees based on BMI and FMI and to determine the best cut-off value of both indicators to predict metabolic abnormalities.
METHODS
METHODS
From a cohort of 2007 patients, BMI and FMI were calculated using DXA. Individuals were classified into the different obesity degrees according to the reference ranges from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). A comparative analysis between BMI, FMI, and their correlation to the presence of metabolic alterations was performed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
BMI underestimated the degree of obesity when compared with FMI. Spearman's rank-order correlation for both indexes resulted in very high coefficients (rho Spearman's = 0.857; p = 0.0001). The prevalence of metabolic alterations increased as BMI and FMI also increased. Despite the high positive statistical correlation between BMI and FMI, it was seen that some comorbidities were more specifically related to one particular index.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
There were no significant differences between the BMI and the FMI for predicting the degree of obesity. Likewise, there were no significant differences between them for the prediction of metabolic alterations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31820402
doi: 10.1007/s11695-019-04289-2
pii: 10.1007/s11695-019-04289-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1324-1331Références
JAMA. 2017 Dec 5;318(21):2132-2134
pubmed: 29159416
BMC Public Health. 2013 Sep 03;13:797
pubmed: 24004464
Diabetes Care. 2011 Jan;34(1):61-5
pubmed: 20852030
Circulation. 2010 Jan 19;121(2):230-6
pubmed: 20038741
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2012 Sep;66(9):1004-7
pubmed: 22805496
J Clin Densitom. 2003 Summer;6(2):75-85
pubmed: 12794229
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 May 26;106(21):8611-6
pubmed: 19433783
J Pak Med Assoc. 2014 Nov;64(11):1225-8
pubmed: 25831635
Circulation. 2007 Apr 24;115(16):2111-8
pubmed: 17420343
Nutr Hosp. 2014 Oct 01;30(4):806-12
pubmed: 25335666
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2002 Jul;26(7):953-60
pubmed: 12080449
PLoS One. 2009 Sep 15;4(9):e7038
pubmed: 19753111
Endocr Pract. 2017 Apr 2;23(4):479-497
pubmed: 28156151
J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2013 Mar-Apr;33(2):77-83
pubmed: 23399846
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1998 Dec;22(12):1164-71
pubmed: 9877251
Metab Syndr Relat Disord. 2013 Dec;11(6):434-40
pubmed: 24004335
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Apr;32(4):1013-1019
pubmed: 29351164
Prev Chronic Dis. 2011 May;8(3):A56
pubmed: 21477496
Med Clin (Barc). 2001 Dec 1;117(18):681-4
pubmed: 11730628
Arch Intern Med. 2008 Aug 11;168(15):1617-24
pubmed: 18695075
Am J Public Health. 1995 May;85(5):726-8
pubmed: 7733439
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2000 Aug;24(8):1011-7
pubmed: 10951540
Lancet. 2009 Mar 28;373(9669):1083-96
pubmed: 19299006