Key result
Metabolic syndrome is linked to ~2.1-fold higher odds of periodontal disease in women, not men.
Cross-Sectional (n=7,431)
Odds Ratio: 2.1 (95% CI 1.2–3.7)
BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome has been suggested as a potential risk factor for periodontal disease. Data based on NHANES III, with 7431 subjects aged 20 years or older, were analysed to confirm the association between metabolic syndrome and periodontal disease, and identify which components of metabolic syndrome might play a role in this association. METHODS: Clinical criteria for metabolic syndrome included: (1) abdominal obesity; (2) increased triglycerides; (3) decreased HDL cholesterol; (4) hypertension or current use of hypertension medication; and (5) high fasting plasma glucose. Periodontal disease was evaluated by probing pocket depth (PPD) and was defined as mean PPD≥2.5 mm. RESULTS: Women with two or more metabolic components had significantly increased odds of having periodontal disease as compared to those with no component [(two components, OR=5.6 (95% CI: 2.2-14.4); three or more, OR=4.7 (2.0-11.2)]. Using the definition of metabolic syndrome as having three to five metabolic components (reference group with <3 components), the adjusted odds ratios were 1.0 (0.7-1.6) for men and 2.1 (1.2-3.7) for women. Abdominal obesity was the largest contributory factor in both genders. CONCLUSIONS: While the association between metabolic syndrome and periodontal disease was particularly significant for women, abdominal obesity appeared to be the contributing metabolic factor for both genders.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Andriankaja et al. (2010) conducted a cross-sectional in Periodontal disease (n=7,431). Metabolic syndrome vs. No metabolic syndrome (<3 components) was evaluated on Periodontal disease (mean PPD≥2.5 mm) (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2-3.7). Metabolic syndrome (≥3 components) was significantly associated with periodontal disease in women (OR 2.1; 95% CI 1.2-3.7), but not in men (OR 1.0; 95% CI 0.7-1.6).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: