4.5 Article

The association of chronic kidney disease and waist circumference and waist-to-height ratio in Chinese urban adults

Journal

MEDICINE
Volume 95, Issue 25, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003769

Keywords

body mass index; chronic kidney disease; obesity; waist circumference; waist-to-height ratio

Funding

  1. state science and technology support program [2012BAI37B04, 2013BAI12B00]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study aims to investigate the association of body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) with chronic kidney disease (CKD).A cross-sectional survey was conducted in a nationally representative sample of 123,629 Chinese urban adults who participated in health examinations between 2008 and 2009. BMI, WC, and WHtR were measured, as well as serum and urine biochemical tests. CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60mL/min/1.73m(2) or urine protein positivity (proteinuria)1+ with dipstick testing.WHtR had the largest areas under ROC curve for CKD in men and women, followed by WC and BMI. Higher levels of BMI, WC, and WHtR were each associated with an increased odds for CKD among men. For per unit size change, the multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of CKD were 1.19 (95% CI, 1.13-1.25) for BMI, 1.12 (95% CI, 1.08-1.16) for WC, and 1.13 (95% CI, 1.10-1.17) for WHtR. The corresponding values were significant in multivariable models among women aged 40 years and above. Using Chinese-recommended cutoffs for BMI (24kg/m(2)), WC (85cm for men, and 80cm for women), and WHtR (0.05), WHtR was superior in the association with CKD than BMI for men, whereas WC was superior for women.Increased obesity indices were positively associated with the odds of CKD. Central obesity, defined by WC and WHtR, may be more closely correlated with CKD for Chinese urban adults.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available