4.6 Article

The metabolic syndrome increases cardiovascular mortality in Taiwanese elderly

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
Volume 38, Issue 7, Pages 469-475

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.2008.01965.x

Keywords

all cause; cardiovascular disease; elderly; metabolic syndrome; mortality; Taiwanese

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome (MetS) is high among the elderly. However, evidence that mortality increases with MetS is rare. In this study, we investigated the relationship between MetS, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all cause mortality in the elderly. Materials and methods A total 10 547 participants, aged 65 years and older, of baseline cohort were recruited from four nationwide Health Screening Centres in Taiwan from 1998 to 1999. The metabolic syndrome was defined according to the America Heart Association/National Heart Lung Blood Institute definition. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to estimate the relative risks (RRs) of CVD and all cause mortality for those with MetS for up to 8 years of follow-up. Results The baseline prevalence of MetS was 50.1% (45.6% in men and 54.4% in women, respectively). A total of 1312 participants died; of these, 300 participants died from CVD. Adjusted for age, gender, smoking, total cholesterol and estimated glomerular filtration rate, the RRs for CVD and all cause mortality among participants with MetS were 1.48 (95% confidence interval = 1.16-1.90) and 1.16 (1.03-1.30), respectively, for participants compared to those without MetS. The mean RRs for CVD, however, ranged from 1.21 to 5.31 among different combinations of MetS components. Conclusion The elderly with MetS, compared to those without MetS, had a higher CVD and all cause mortality in Taiwan. Furthermore, different combinations of MetS components posed different risks to the mortality, which deserves further research in the future.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available