While different definitions for the diagnosis of metabolic syndrome (MetS) have been proposed, their applicability brings confusion about which criteria should be used in clinical practice. This was an observational cross-sectional study conducted during October 2008. in 3 university hospital centers in the north, midst and south of the Serbia. 1715 patients were recruited from outpatient clinical practice and primary health care offices: 37% males and 63% females, aged 34-80 years. To evaluate the impact of different criteria in discriminating high risk population for coronary artery disease (CAD) we used NCEP-ATP III, AHA/NHLBI and IDF definitions. 21,7% (373) from the patients included in the study sustained CAD. The prevalence of MetS in the CAD group was 84,7%, 86,1% and 82,0%, respectively, compared with 58,3%, 60,6% and 61,2% in the control group (p<0.0001). ROC curves ploted by the probabilities for CAD calculated in the logistic models for each definition (adjusted for age, sex, smoking and educational status) indicated that NCEP-ATP III and NHLBI-AHA definitions had a better predictive accuracy compared with IDF (p=0,006 and p=0,016, respectively). When the waist girth is introduced in NCEP-ATP III and NHLBI-AHA definitions as obligatory, this distinction was lost. The NCEP-ATP III and AHA/NHLBI definition is more suitable for discrimination of MetS diagnosis, than the later proposed IDF definition in the subjects of the given population. Inclusion of waist circumference as obligatory criteria failed to show increase in predictive accuracy for CAD.
Executive Summary of The Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, And Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol In Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001;2486–97.
2.
Alberti K, Zimmet P. Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Part 1: diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus provisional report of a WHO consultation. Diabet Med. 1998;539–53.
3.
Grundy S, Brewer H, Cleeman J, Smith S, Lenfant C. Definition of metabolic syndrome. Circulation. 2004;433–8.
4.
Grundy S, Cleeman J, Daniels S, Donato K, Eckel R, Franklin B, et al. Diagnosis and Management of the Metabolic Syndrome. Circulation. 2005;2735–52.
5.
Federation I. The IDF consensus worldwide definition of the metabolic syndrom. :1–14.
6.
Alberti K, Zimmet P, Shaw J. The metabolic syndrome -a new worldwide definition. Lancet. 2005;1059–62.
7.
Nilsson P, Engstrom G, Hedblad B. The metabolic syndrome and incidence of cardiovascular disease in non-diabetic subjects a population-based study comparing three different definitions. Diabet Med. 2007;464–72.
8.
Saely C, Koch L, Schmid F, Marte T, Aczel S, Langer P, et al. Adult Treatment Panel III 2001 but not International Diabetes Federation 2005 criteria of the metabolic syndrome predict clinical cardiovascular events in subjects who underwent coronary angiography. Diabetes Care. 2006;901–7.
9.
Tong P, Kong A, So W, Yang X, Ho C, Ma R, et al. The usefulness of the International Diabetes Federation and the National Cholesterol Education Program’s Adult Treatment Panel III definitions of the metabolic syndrome in predicting coronary heart disease in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007;(5):1206–11.
10.
Lawlor D, Smith G, Ebrahim S. Does the new International Diabetes Federation definition of the metabolic syndrome predict CHD any more strongly than older definitions? Findings from the British Women’s Heart and Health Study. Diabetologia. 2006;41–8.
11.
Qiao Q. Comparison of different definitions of the metabolic syndrome in relation to cardiovascular mortality in European men and women. Diabetologia. 2006;2837–46.
12.
Sattar N, Gaw A, Scherbakova O, Ford I, Reilly O, Haffner D, et al. Metabolic syndrome with and without C-reactive protein as a predictor of coronary heart disease and diabetes in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. Circulation. 2003;414–9.
13.
Koutsovasilis A, Protopsaltis J, Triposkiadis F, Kokkoris S, Milionis H, Zairis M, et al. Comparative Performance of Three Metabolic Syndrome Definitions in the Prediction of Acute Coronary Syndrome. Inter Med. 2009;179–87.
14.
Katzmarzyk P, Janssen I, Ross R, Church T, Blair S. The importance of waist circumference in the definition of metabolic syndrome: prospective analyses of mortality in men. Diabetes Care. 2006;404–9.
15.
Parapid B, Ostojic M, Lalic N, Micic D, Damjanovic S, Bubanja D, et al. Risk factors clustering within the metabolic syndrome: a pattern or by chance? Hellenic J Cardiol. 2014;(2):92–100.
16.
Obesity: Preventing and Managin the Global epidemic. 1998;
17.
Chobanian A, Bakris G, Black H, Cushman W, Green L, Izzo J, et al. JAMA. 2003;(19):2560–72.
18.
Hwang Y, Jee J, Oh E, Choi Y, Lee M, Kim K, et al. Metabolic syndrome as a predictor of cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes in Koreans. Int J Cardiol. 2009;(3):313–21.
19.
Wang C, Hou X, Bao Y, Pan J, Zuo Y, Zhong W, et al. The metabolic syndrome increased risk of cardiovascular events in Chinese-A community based study. Int J Cardiol. 2008;
20.
Kuusisto J, Mykkanen L, Pyorala K, Laakso M. Hyperinsulinemic microalbuminuria. A new risk indicator for coronary heart disease. Circulation. 1995;831–7.
21.
Willerson J, Ridker P. Inflammation as a cardiovascular risk factor. Circulation. 2004;I2-10.
22.
Lorenzo C, Williams K, Hunt K, Haffner S. The National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III, International Diabetes Federation, and World Health Organization definitions of the metabolic syndrome as predictors of incident cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2007;8–13.
23.
Balkau B, Deanfield J, Després J, Bassan J, Fox K, Smith S. International Day for the Evaluation of Abdominal Obesity (IDEA): a study of waist circumference, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes mellitus in 168 000 primary care patients in 63 countries. Circulation. 2007;(17):1942–51.
24.
Yusuf S, Hawken S, Ounpuu S, Bautista L, Franzosi M, Commerford P, et al. INTERHEART Study Investigators. Obesity and the risk of myocardial infarction in 27,000 participants from 52 countries: a case-control study. Lancet. 2005;1640–9.
25.
Cote M, Mauriege P, Bergeron J. Adiponectinemia in visceral obesity: impact on glucose tolerance and plasma lipoprotein and lipid levels in men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005;1434–9.
26.
Ford E. Prevalence of the Metabolic Syndrome Defined by the International Diabetes Federation Among Adults in the U.S. Diabetes Care. 2005;2745–9.
27.
Lorenzo C, Serrano-Rios M, Martinez-Larrad M, Gabriel R, Williams K, Gomez-Gerique J, et al. Central adiposity determines prevalence differences of the metabolic syndrome. Obes Res. 2003;1480–7.
28.
Sundstrom J, Riserus U, Byberg L, Zethelius B, Lithell H, Lind L. Clinical value of the metabolic syndrome for long term prediction of total and cardiovascular mortality: prospective, population based cohort study. BMJ. 2006;878–82.
29.
Gu D, Reynolds K, Wu X, Chen J, Duan X, Reynolds R, et al. Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome and overweight among adults in China. Lancet. 2005;1398–405.
30.
Woodward M, Tunstall-Pedoe H. The metabolic syndrome is not a sensible tool for predicting the risk of coronary heart disease. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2009;(2):210–4.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
