RESUMO
RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar se a obesidade altera os marcadores ultrassonográficos de risco metabólico e cardiovascular em crianças. Métodos: Estudo transversal com 80 crianças entre 6 e 10 anos, comparando 40 crianças obesas com 40 crianças normais. Foram avaliados os seguintes parâmetros: peso; altura; índice de massa corporal; pressão arterial; massa gorda; taxa metabólica basal; HDL-colesterol, LDL-colesterol e colesterol total; insulina de jejum e glicose; índice quantitativo de verificação da sensibilidade à insulina (QUICKI); Homeostase Modell Assessment (HOMA-IR); Diâmetro basal da artéria braquial; Dilatação mediada pelo fluxo da artéria braquial (FMD) e variação do índice de pulsatilidade (PI-C). Resultados: Entre obesos e não obesos, observaram-se diferenças significativas na pressão arterial sistólica (97,7±8,4 vs. 89,0±5,8 mmHg; p<0,01), pressão arterial diastólica (64,3±7,9 vs. 52,9±5.1 mmHg; p<0,01), gordura corporal (45,1±5,9 vs. 21,3±6,0%; p<0,01), taxa metabólica basal (1216,1±102,1 vs. 1072,9±66,4 Kcal; p<0,01), colesterol (164,7±25,2 vs. 153,4±15,8 mg/dL; p=0,03), insulina de jejum (7,1±5,2 vs. 2,8±1,8 pIU/mL; p<0,01), HOMA-IR (1,5±1,1 vs. 0,6±0,4; p<0.01), diâmetro basal da artéria braquial (2,5±0,3 vs. 2,1±0,3 mm; p<0,01); PI-C (-15,5±27,2 vs. -31,9±15,5%; p<0,01), redução de QUICKI (0,4±0,05 vs. 0,4±0,03; p<0,01) e FMD (6,6±3,2 vs. 15,6±7,3%; p<0,01). Conclusões: A obesidade piora os marcadores ultrassonográficos e laboratoriais de risco metabólico e cardiovascular em crianças.
ASTRACT Objective: To evaluate whether the obesity alters ultrasonographical markers of metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk in children. Methods: A cross-sectional study evaluated 80 children aged between 6 and 10 years, comparing 40 obese with 40 normal children. The following parameters were assessed: weight; height; body mass index; arterial blood pressure; body fat; basal metabolic rate; HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and total cholesterol; fasting insulin and glucose; quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI); homeostasis model of assessment - insulin resistance (HOMA-IR); basal diameter of the brachial artery; brachial artery flow mediated dilation (FMD) and of pulsatility index change (PI-C). Results: Significant differences were observed between obese vs. non-obese children: systolic blood pressure (97.7±8.4 vs. 89.0±5.8 mmHg; p<0.01), diastolic blood pressure (64.3±7.9 vs. 52.9±5.1 mmHg; p<0.01), proportion of body fat (45.1±5.9 vs. 21.3±6.0%; p<0.01), basal metabolic rate (1216.1±102.1 vs. 1072.9±66.4 Kcal; p<0.01), total cholesterol (164.7±25.2 vs. 153.4±15.8 mg/dL; p=0.03), fasting insulin (7.1±5.2 vs. 2.8±1.8 pIU/mL; p<0.01), HOMA-IR (1.5±1.1 vs. 0.6±0.4; p<0.01), basal diameter of the brachial artery (2.5±0.3 vs. 2.1±0.3 mm; p<0.01); PI-C (-15.5±27.2 vs. -31.9±15.5%; p<0.01), decreased QUICKI (0.4±0.05 vs. 0.4±0.03; p<0.01), and FMD (6.6±3.2 vs. 15.6±7.3%; p<0.01). Conclusions: Obesity worsens ultrasonographical and laboratorial markers of metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk in children.
Assuntos
Humanos , Criança , Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico por imagem , Síndrome Metabólica/complicações , Obesidade Infantil/complicações , Estudos Transversais , Fatores de Risco , UltrassonografiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the obesity alters ultrasonographical markers of metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk in children. METHODS: A cross-sectional study evaluated 80 children aged between 6 and 10 years, comparing 40 obese with 40 normal children. The following parameters were assessed: weight; height; body mass index; arterial blood pressure; body fat; basal metabolic rate; HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and total cholesterol; fasting insulin and glucose; quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI); homeostasis model of assessment - insulin resistance (HOMA-IR); basal diameter of the brachial artery; brachial artery flow mediated dilation (FMD) and of pulsatility index change (PI-C). RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between obese vs. non-obese children: systolic blood pressure (97.7±8.4 vs. 89.0±5.8 mmHg; p<0.01), diastolic blood pressure (64.3±7.9 vs. 52.9±5.1 mmHg; p<0.01), proportion of body fat (45.1±5.9 vs. 21.3±6.0%; p<0.01), basal metabolic rate (1216.1±102.1 vs. 1072.9±66.4 Kcal; p<0.01), total cholesterol (164.7±25.2 vs. 153.4±15.8 mg/dL; p=0.03), fasting insulin (7.1±5.2 vs. 2.8±1.8 pIU/mL; p<0.01), HOMA-IR (1.5±1.1 vs. 0.6±0.4; p<0.01), basal diameter of the brachial artery (2.5±0.3 vs. 2.1±0.3 mm; p<0.01); PI-C (-15.5±27.2 vs. -31.9±15.5%; p<0.01), decreased QUICKI (0.4±0.05 vs. 0.4±0.03; p<0.01), and FMD (6.6±3.2 vs. 15.6±7.3%; p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity worsens ultrasonographical and laboratorial markers of metabolic and cardiovascular disease risk in children.
OBJETIVO: Avaliar se a obesidade altera os marcadores ultrassonográficos de risco metabólico e cardiovascular em crianças. MÉTODOS: Estudo transversal com 80 crianças entre 6 e 10 anos, comparando 40 crianças obesas com 40 crianças normais. Foram avaliados os seguintes parâmetros: peso; altura; índice de massa corporal; pressão arterial; massa gorda; taxa metabólica basal; HDL-colesterol, LDL-colesterol e colesterol total; insulina de jejum e glicose; índice quantitativo de verificação da sensibilidade à insulina (QUICKI); Homeostase Modell Assessment (HOMA-IR); Diâmetro basal da artéria braquial; Dilatação mediada pelo fluxo da artéria braquial (FMD) e variação do índice de pulsatilidade (PI-C). RESULTADOS: Entre obesos e não obesos, observaram-se diferenças significativas na pressão arterial sistólica (97,7±8,4 vs. 89,0±5,8 mmHg; p<0,01), pressão arterial diastólica (64,3±7,9 vs. 52,9±5.1 mmHg; p<0,01), gordura corporal (45,1±5,9 vs. 21,3±6,0%; p<0,01), taxa metabólica basal (1216,1±102,1 vs. 1072,9±66,4 Kcal; p<0,01), colesterol (164,7±25,2 vs. 153,4±15,8 mg/dL; p=0,03), insulina de jejum (7,1±5,2 vs. 2,8±1,8 pIU/mL; p<0,01), HOMA-IR (1,5±1,1 vs. 0,6±0,4; p<0.01), diâmetro basal da artéria braquial (2,5±0,3 vs. 2,1±0,3 mm; p<0,01); PI-C (-15,5±27,2 vs. -31,9±15,5%; p<0,01), redução de QUICKI (0,4±0,05 vs. 0,4±0,03; p<0,01) e FMD (6,6±3,2 vs. 15,6±7,3%; p<0,01). CONCLUSÕES: A obesidade piora os marcadores ultrassonográficos e laboratoriais de risco metabólico e cardiovascular em crianças.
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico por imagem , Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , Síndrome Metabólica/complicações , Obesidade Infantil/complicações , Criança , Estudos Transversais , Humanos , Fatores de Risco , UltrassonografiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To determine the pain thresholds of women taking different formulations of hormonal contraceptives. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Basic health care unit. PATIENT(S): Eighty-nine healthy nonusers and 188 users of hormonal contraceptives. INTERVENTION(S): Subject interviews were followed by the application of a semistructured questionnaire, including a psychometric assessment with the Beck Depression Inventory and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. After the interview, a 10-mL peripheral blood sample was collected. Pain thresholds were obtained by performing pressure algometry. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Serum concentrations of E2, P, and T (free fraction) were determined via chemoluminescence. The menstrual cycle phase was determined according to hormonal level and identification of an LH surge in urine. Pain threshold was evaluated with a dynamometer applied to the forearm skin of the nondominant limb and abdominal wall. RESULT(S): Progestin-only contraceptive users showed a higher pain pressure threshold in the forearm (2.94 ± 0.96 vs. 2.74 ± 0.89 vs. 2.62 ± 0.92) and right (2.11 ± 0.87 vs. 1.83 ± 0.81 vs. 1.78 ± 0.77) and left abdomen (2.12 ± 0.88 vs. 1.79 ± 0.76 vs. 1.73 ± 0.70) than did combined hormonal contraceptive users and nonusers of hormonal contraceptives, respectively. Users of contraceptives that continuously release etonogestrel (subcutaneous implant, vaginal ring) or levonorgestrel (intrauterine devices) had higher pain thresholds. CONCLUSION(S): Women who used hormonal contraceptives enabling continuous release of etonogestrel or levonorgestrel tended to have higher pain thresholds than did nonusers of hormonal contraceptives.