A total of 1175subjects were included in the analysis, the mean age was 14.8 years old, and 54.4% were boys. Table 1 described the characteristics of subjects stratified by gender. The boys had higher WC, FPG, SBP, CVRFs z-score, lower WHtR, BFM, ABFM, TBFM, LBFM, VFL,, TC, HDL cholesterol compared to girls (all P < 0.05). The proportion of individuals with CVRFs ≥ 1 and CVRFs ≥ 2 were 49.4% and 15.2%, respectively.
Table 1
Characteristics of the study population
Variables | All | Boys | Girls | t/x2 | P value |
N (%) | 1175(100) | 639(54.4) | 536(45.6) | | |
Age (years) | 14.8 ± 1.9 | 14.9 ± 1.9 | 14.6 ± 2.0 | 2.631 | 0.008 |
Height (cm) | 167.5 ± 8.7 | 171.5 ± 8.7 | 162.8 ± 5.9 | 20.118 | < 0.001 |
Weight (kg) | 58.6 ± 13.2 | 61.9 ± 14.2 | 54.7 ± 10.5 | 9.983 | < 0.001 |
BMI (kg/m2) | 20.7 ± 3.7 | 20.9 ± 3.9 | 20.6 ± 3.4 | 1.674 | 0.094 |
WC (cm) | 73.5 ± 11.9 | 74.3 ± 14.0 | 72.7 ± 9.1 | 2.122 | 0.034 |
WHtR | 0.44 ± 0.08 | 0.43 ± 0.09 | 0.44 ± 0.06 | -2.070 | 0.039 |
Body fat distribution indexes |
BFM (kg)a | 12.10(7.80,18.00) | 9.30(6.10,15.80) | 14.35(10.83,18.88) | -11.009 | < 0.001 |
ABFM(kg)a | 0.80(0.50,1.20) | 0.50(0.35,1.00) | 1.00(0.70,1.30) | -13.988 | < 0.001 |
TBFM(kg)a | 5.50(3.10,8.70) | 0.40(2.20,7.70) | 6.65(4.70,9.00) | -9.942 | < 0.001 |
LBFM(kg)a | 2.00(1.45,2.90) | 1.60(1.20,2.50) | 2.40(1.90,3.10) | -12.008 | < 0.001 |
VFLa | 5.00(3.00,7.00) | 3.00(2.00,6.00) | 5.00(4.00,8.00) | -9.786 | < 0.001 |
PBF(%) | 22.39 ± 9.06 | 18.15 ± 8.50 | 27.43 ± 6.85 | -20.722 | < 0.001 |
Cardiometabolic risk factors |
FPG (mmol/L) | 4.67 ± 0.42 | 4.72 ± 0.45 | 4.61 ± 0.36 | 3.931 | < 0.001 |
TC (mmol/L) | 3.63 ± 0.70 | 3.56 ± 0.71 | 3.71 ± 0.67 | -3.765 | < 0.001 |
TG (mmol/L)a | 0.95(0.76,1.24) | 0.92(0.73,1.23) | 0.95(0.76,1.21) | -0.885 | 0.376 |
SBP (mmHg) | 114 ± 11 | 116 ± 11 | 110 ± 10 | 9.221 | < 0.001 |
DBP (mmHg) | 69 ± 8 | 69 ± 8 | 69 ± 8 | -1.076 | 0.282 |
LDL-C (mmol/L) | 1.91 ± 0.62 | 1.88 ± 0.64 | 1.95 ± 0.59 | -1.814 | 0.070 |
HDL-C (mmol/L) | 1.25 ± 0.24 | 1.20 ± 0.23 | 1.32 ± 0.23 | -8.303 | < 0.001 |
CVRFs ⩾1 (n,%)b | 467(49.4) | 261(51.4) | 206(47.1) | 1.688 | 0.194 |
CVRFs ⩾2 (n,%)c | 144(15.2) | 87(17.1) | 57(13.0) | 3.031 | 0.082 |
CVRFs z-score d | -0.29 ± 3.47 | -0.003 ± 3.64 | -0.63 ± 3.23 | 2.784 | 0.005 |
BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; WHtR, waist-to-height ratio; PBF, percentage of body fat; BFM, body fat mass; TFFM, body fat mass of trunk; ABFM, body fat mass of arm; LBFM, body fat mass of leg; VFL, Visceral Fat Level; FPG,; TC, total cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; SBP, systolic blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure. aSkewed distributions were logarithmically transformed for statistical tests. bSubjects have at least one cardiometabolic risk factors. c Subjects have at least two cardiometabolic risk factors. dCVRFs z-score = FPG z-score + TC z-score + logTG z-score + LDL z-score + HDL z-score*(-1) + SBP z-score + DBP z-score. |
Comparison of body fat distribution indexes among different clustering of CVRFs were shown in figure. Individuals with CVRFs ≥ 1 had higher BFM, TBFM, ABFM, LBFM, PBF, VFL compared to those with no CVRFs. Equally, subjects with CVRFs ≥ 2 had higher level of all body fat distribution indexes than those with CVRFs < 2 (all P < 0.001).
Prevalence of the cluster of cardiometabolic risk factors according to categories of different body fat distribution indexes by quartile were provided in Table 2. Prevalence of individuals with CVRFs ≥ 1 and CVRFs ≥ 2 compared to those in normal subjects increased with the quartile of all body fat distribution indexes. The prevalence of cardiovascular metabolic risk factors was the highest in the fourth percentile group(all P < 0.05).
Table 2
Prevalence according to categories of different body fat distrobution indexes
Variables | CVRFs < 1 | CVRFs ⩾1 | x2 | P value | CVRFs < 2 | CVRFs ⩾2 | x2 | P value |
BFM | | | | | | | | |
Q1* | 152(60.3) | 100(39.7) | 72.953 | < 0.001 | 231(91.7) | 21(8.3) | 70.425 | < 0.001 |
Q2* | 134(61.5) | 84(38.5) | 203(93.1) | 15(6.9) |
Q3* | 122(54.5) | 102(45.5) | 194(86.6) | 30(13.4) |
Q4 | 70(27.9) | 181(72.1) | 173(68.9) | 78(31.1) |
TBFM | | | | | | | | |
Q1* | 154(62.1) | 94(37.9) | 79.808 | < 0.001 | 229(92.3) | 19(7.7) | 81.083 | < 0.001 |
Q2* | 141(61.0) | 90(39.0) | 214(92.6) | 17(7.4) |
Q3* | 116(53.5) | 101(46.5) | 190(87.6) | 27(12.4) |
Q4 | 67(26.9) | 182(73.1) | 168(67.5) | 81(32.5) |
ABFM | | | | | | | | |
Q1* | 124(58.2) | 89(41.8) | 61.546 | < 0.001 | 192(90.1) | 21(9.9) | 54.309 | < 0.001 |
Q2* | 148(64.6) | 81(35.4) | 213(93.0) | 16(7.0) |
Q3* | 122(51.5) | 115(48.5) | 206(86.9) | 31(13.1) |
Q4 | 84(31.6) | 182(68.4) | 190(71.4) | 76(28.6) |
LBFM | | | | | | | | |
Q1* | 133(61.0) | 85(39.0) | 61.425 | < 0.001 | 202(92.7) | 16(7.3) | 61.628 | < 0.001 |
Q2* | 128(61.8) | 79(38.2) | 191(92.3) | 16(7.7) |
Q3* | 135(52.9) | 120(47.1) | 221(86.7) | 34(13.3) |
Q4 | 82(30.9) | 183(69.1) | 187(70.6) | 78(29.4) |
PBF | | | | | | | | |
Q1* | 131(57.2) | 98(42.8) | 42.784 | < 0.001 | 205(89.5) | 24(10.5) | 40.631 | < 0.001 |
Q2* | 141(61.6) | 88(38.4) | 212(92.6) | 17(7.4) |
Q3* | 119(51.3) | 119(48.7) | 197(84.9) | 35(15.1) |
Q4 | 87(34.1) | 168(65.9) | 187(73.3) | 68(26.7) |
VFL | | | | | | | | |
Q1* | 87(62.1) | 53(37.9) | 51.620 | < 0.001 | 131(93.6) | 9(6.4) | 50.708 | < 0.001 |
Q2* | 128(65.6) | 67(34.4) | 188(96.4) | 7(3.6) |
Q3༆ | 71(48.3) | 76(51.7) | 123(83.7) | 24(16.3) |
Q4 | 75(33.5) | 149(66.5) | 161(71.9) | 63(28.1) |
* Compared with Q4, P<0.05. &Compared with Q3, P<0.05. |
After adjusted for age and sex, we found TBFM was positively associated with CVRFs z-score(β = 0.693,95%, CI: 0.363, 1.023), and LBFM was inversely associated with CVRFs z-score (β=-1.471, 95%CI: -2.768, -0.175), both P < 0.05, in Table 3.
Table 3
Multivariable associations of body fat distrobution indexes with CVRFs z-score
Variables | Unstandardized Coefficients B | Standardized Coefficients Beta | t | 95%CI | P value |
TBFM | 0.693 | 0.836 | 4.123 | 0.363 to 1.023 | < 0.001 |
ABFM | 1.090 | 0.208 | 1.126 | -0.811 to -2.992 | 0.261 |
LBFM | -1.471 | -0.489 | -2.229 | -2.768 to -0.175 | 0.026 |
VFL | -0.075 | -0.081 | -0.438 | -0.410 to 0.260 | 0.661 |
Model adjusted for age and sex. |
Body fat distribution indexes predicted the risks of development cardiometabolic risk factors clustering was given in Table 4. The increase in TBFM by 1standard deviation was associated with higher odds rates of CVRFs ≥ 1 (OR = 1.426,95%CI:1.126,1.820, P = 0.004) and CVRFs ≥ 2 (OR = 2.111, 95%CI:1.558,2.861, P < 0.001), as well as the decrease in LBFM by 1standard deviation was associated with CVRFs ≥ 2 (OR = 0.194, 95%CI:0.057,0.659, P = 0.009).
Table 4
Results of the logistic regression analysis for the association between body fat distrobution indexes and cardiometabolic risk factors
Vaiables | CVRFs ⩾1 | CVRFs ⩾2 |
Coefficients B | OR(95%CI) | P | Coefficients B | OR(95%CI) | P |
TBFM | 0.335 | 1.426(1.116,1.820) | 0.004 | 0.747 | 2.111(1.558,2.861) | < 0.001 |
ABFM | -0.040 | 0.961(0.179,5.147) | 0.963 | 0.241 | 1.272(0.204,7.935) | 0.796 |
LBFM | -0.624 | 0.536(0.195,1.470) | 0.225 | -1.641 | 0.194(0.057,0.659) | 0.009 |
VFL | -0.017 | 0.983(0.767,1.260) | 0.892 | -0.129 | 0.879(0.652,1.185) | 0.398 |
Model adjusted for age and sex. |