Metabolic syndrome by the international diabetes federation definition in Hong Kong Chinese

• Published in: Diabetes research and clinical practice Vol. 73; no. 1; pp. 58 - 64
• Main Authors: Ko, G.T.C., Cockram, C.S., Chow, C.C., Yeung, V.T.F., Chan, W.B., So, W.Y., Chan, N.N., Chan, J.C.N.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Ireland Elsevier Ireland Ltd 01-07-2006
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Asian Continental Ancestry Group; Chinese; Diagnostic criteria; Female; Hong Kong - epidemiology; Humans; International Diabetes Federation; Male; Metabolic syndrome; Metabolic Syndrome - classification; Metabolic Syndrome - diagnosis; Metabolic Syndrome - epidemiology; Middle Aged; Prevalence; Chinese; Metabolic syndrome; Diagnostic criteria; International Diabetes Federation
• ISSN: 0168-8227; 1872-8227
• DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2005.11.009

In this report, we aimed to examine the impact of the new International Diabetes Federation (IDF) definition on the prevalence and clinical characteristics of subjects with metabolic syndrome (MES). Data were obtained from a prevalence survey for cardiovascular risk factors in a Hong Kong Chinese working population. There were 1513 subjects well representing all occupational groups from managers to general laborers [910 (60.1%) men and 603 (39.9%) women (mean age 37.5
±
9.2, median 37.0, range 18–66 years)]. The crude prevalence of MES defined by the IDF criterion was 7.4% (compared to other criteria: NCEP, 9.6%; WHO, 13.4% and EGIR, 8.9%). The age-standardized prevalence of MES by the IDF criterion was 8.8% in women and 7.3% in men. Subjects with MES defined by IDF criterion had higher body mass index and waist compared to those with MES defined by NCEP or WHO criteria, and lower triglyceride compared to those with MES defined by NCEP criterion after adjustment for age, gender and smoking. Non-MES subjects defined by IDF criterion had higher 2
h glucose and insulin resistance compared to non-MES subjects defined by WHO. In conclusion, the new IDF criterion for MES is easy to implement in clinical practice. It may be potentially more ‘specific’ in identifying subjects with MES although compared to the NCEP criterion, it may have missed a proportion of subjects, especially men, who have metabolic derangement. Prospective and interventional studies are needed to validate the prognostic values of this new definition in comparison with other existing definitions.