4.3 Article

Leptin/adiponectin ratio in overweight patients - gender differences

期刊

DIABETES & VASCULAR DISEASE RESEARCH
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 260-262

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1479164117752491

关键词

Adiponectin; gender; leptin; leptin; adiponectin ratio; overweight

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Obesity-related atherosclerosis is a systemic disease with a background connected to multiple metabolic-neurohumoral pathways. The leptin/adiponectin ratio has been suggested as an atherosclerotic marker in obese patients. The aim of this study was to assess (1) the significance of the L/A ratio in overweight subjects, (2) the relation with anthropometric/metabolic parameters and (3) gender difference. Method: The study included 80 adult males and females, overweight, non-diabetic patients. Biochemical blood analysis and anthropometric and cardiovascular measurements were performed. Serum leptin levels were measured with a radioimmunoassay test and total adiponectin levels with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Leptin/adiponectin ratios were calculated as ratios between total serum concentrations of leptin and adiponectin. Results: Differences between leptin, adiponectin serum levels and leptin/adiponectin ratios are presented in overweight persons, where females have a significantly higher leptin/adiponectin ratio than men (p<0.001). In men, the leptin/adiponectin ratio showed a positive correlation with total cholesterol levels (p=0.011), low-density lipoprotein (p=0.013) and triglycerides (p=0.032). In females, the leptin/adiponectin ratio correlated with anthropometric parameters of visceral obesity: waist circumference (p=0.001) and waist-to-hip ratio (p=0.025). Conclusion: The leptin/adiponectin ratio could represent an atherosclerotic risk marker of the early stage of obesity. Gender plays a significant role in pathophysiological changes, with different clinical manifestations, where sex hormones have a crucial effect on neurohumoral adipose tissue activity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据