RESUMO
Background: Adipose tissue excess is associated with adverse health outcomes, including type 2 diabetes. Body mass index (BMI) is used to evaluate obesity but is inaccurate as it does not account for muscle mass, bone density, and fat distribution. Accurate measurement of adipose tissue through dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and computed axial tomography (CT) is crucial for managing and monitoring adiposity-related diseases. Still, these are not easily accessible in most hospitals in Mexico. Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) is non-invasive and low-cost but may not be reliable in conditions affecting the body's hydration status, like diabetes. Objectives: To assess fat mass concordance between BIA and DXA in Hispanic-American adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: Cross-sectional study of a non-probabilistic sample of subjects over 18 years with type 2 diabetes. We used DXA as the reference method. Results: We evaluated the accuracy of FM estimation through BIA and DXA in 309 subjects with type 2 diabetes. Results showed a trend of overestimating the diagnosis of obesity using BIA, especially in individuals with a higher fat mass index (FMI). At the group level, we found BIA accurate; however, at the individual level, it is not. The bias between the 2 methods showed a statistically significant overestimation of body fat by BIA (P ⩽ .01) in both sexes. BIA demonstrated high precision in estimating fat mass. We were able to provide a correction factor of 0.55 kg in men. Conclusion: BIA is inaccurate compared to DXA for body composition assessment in patients with diabetes. Inaccurate measurements can result in misclassification. However, BIA is precise for body composition assessment in patients with diabetes, so it is reliable for tracking patient progress over time.
Agreement between bioelectrical impedance analysis and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to estimate fat mass in adults with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus This study compares 2 methods for measuring body composition in patients with diabetes in Mexico. The first method is Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA), which is non-invasive, low-cost, and easy to use but may not be reliable in conditions that affect the body's hydration status, like diabetes. The second method is Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA), which is more accurate but less easily accessible. The study was a cross-sectional evaluation of 309 participants over 18 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) by HbA1C levels. The present study found BIA to be precise for body composition assessment but not accurate compared to DXA as the reference method. The study showed a trend of overestimating the diagnosis of obesity using BIA, especially in individuals with a higher fat mass index. This study found BIA is accurate at the group level but not at the individual level. The bias between the 2 methods showed a statistically significant overestimation of body fat by BIA. We provided a correction factor of 0.55 kg in men but not women. BIA is not ideal for diagnosing obesity but is reliable for tracking patient progress over time.
RESUMO
Fatty liver has been present in the lives of patients and physicians for almost two centuries. Vast knowledge has been generated regarding its etiology and consequences, although a long path seeking novel and innovative diagnostic biomarkers for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is still envisioned. On the one hand, proteomics and lipidomics have emerged as potential noninvasive resources for NAFLD diagnosis. In contrast, metabolomics has been able to distinguish between NAFLD and NASH, even detecting degrees of fibrosis. On the other hand, genetic and epigenetic markers have been useful in monitoring disease progression, eventually functioning as target therapies. Other markers involved in immune dysregulation, oxidative stress, and inflammation are involved in the instauration and evolution of the disease. Finally, the fascinating gut microbiome is significantly involved in NAFLD and NASH. This review presents state-of-the-art biomarkers related to NAFLD and NASH and new promises that could eventually be positioned as diagnostic resources for this disease. As is evident, despite great advances in studying these biomarkers, there is still a long path before they translate into clinical benefits.
RESUMO
The oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) remains as the gold standard to diagnose gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM); however, this test may be inconvenient and costly. Hence, other easy to perform and accurate diagnostic alternatives would be valuable for maternal care. The objective of the study was to assess the diagnostic performance of the TyG index to screen for GDM at 24-28 of pregnancy. A total of 140 pregnant women who received the one-step 2 h 75 g OGTT were included. Overall GDM prevalence was 27.1% according to IADSPG criteria. The mean TyG index value in the GDM group was significantly higher than the TyG index for the no GDM group (4.88 ± 0.70 versus 4.68 ± 0.19, p<.001). A sensitivity of 89% [95% CI 0.75-0.97] and a specificity of 50% [95% CI 0.39-0.60)], accompanied by a high negative predictive value of 93% was observed. No differences were found in maternal and neonatal outcomes irrespective of the TyG cutoff value for GDM. According to our results, the TyG index may be a highly sensitive and easy to perform screening test for GDM.