Mostrar registro simples

dc.contributor.authorCabral, Lucas Scottapt_BR
dc.contributor.authorCherubini, Pedro Abrahimpt_BR
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, Marina Amaral dept_BR
dc.contributor.authorBianchini, Larissapt_BR
dc.contributor.authorTorres, Carolina Machadopt_BR
dc.contributor.authorBianchin, Marino Muxfeldtpt_BR
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-19T02:32:56Zpt_BR
dc.date.issued2017pt_BR
dc.identifier.issn1664-2295pt_BR
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10183/182178pt_BR
dc.description.abstractMetabolic syndrome (MetS) is an emergent problem among patients with epilepsy. Here, we evaluate and compare the diagnostic yield and accuracy of different MetS criteria among adult patients with epilepsy to further explore the best strategy for diagnosis of MetS among patients with epilepsy. Materials and methods: Ninety-five epileptic adults from a tertiary epilepsy reference center were prospectively recruited over 22 weeks in a cross-sectional study. MetS was defined according to five international criteria used for the diagnosis of the condition [ATP3, American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), International Diabetes Federation (IDF), AHA/NHLBI, and harmonized criteria]. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values (NPVs), and area under the receiver operating character- istic curve (ROC) curve were estimated for each criterion. results: In our sample, adult patients with epilepsy showed a high prevalence of obesity, hypertension, and diabetes. However, the prevalence of MetS was significantly different according to each criterion used, ranging from 33.7%, as defined by AACE, to 49.4%, as defined by the harmonized criteria (p < 0.005). IDF criteria showed the highest sensitivity [S = 95.5% (95% CI 84.5–99.4), p < 0.05] and AACE criteria showed the lowest sensitivity and NPV [S = 68.2% (95% CI 52.4–81.4), p < 0.05; NPV = 75.8% (95% CI 62.3–86.1), p < 0.05]. ROC curve for all criteria studied showed that area under curve (AUC) for IDF criterion was 0.966, and it was not different from AUC of harmonized criterion (p = 0.092) that was used as reference. On the other hand, the use of the other three criteria for MetS resulted in significantly lower performance, with AUC for AHA/NHLBI = 0.920 (p = 0.0147), NCEP/ATP3 = 0.898 (p = 0.0067), AACE = 0.830 (p = 0.00059). conclusion: Our findings suggest that MetS might be highly prevalent among adult patients with epien
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfpt_BR
dc.language.isoengpt_BR
dc.relation.ispartofFrontiers in neurology. Lausanne. Vol. 8 (Sept. 2017), 460, 11 p.pt_BR
dc.rightsOpen Accessen
dc.subjectSíndrome metabólicapt_BR
dc.subjectmetabolic syndromeen
dc.subjectEpilepsiapt_BR
dc.subjectcomorbidities in epilepsyen
dc.subjectgeneral medical conditionsen
dc.subjectFatores de riscopt_BR
dc.subjectrisk factorsen
dc.subjectAdultopt_BR
dc.subjectcardiovascular risken
dc.titleDiagnostic yield and accuracy of different metabolic syndrome criteria in adult patients with epilepsypt_BR
dc.typeArtigo de periódicopt_BR
dc.identifier.nrb001076476pt_BR
dc.type.originEstrangeiropt_BR


Thumbnail
   

Este item está licenciado na Creative Commons License

Mostrar registro simples