Loading
Life sciences · Journal article
Russian Cardiology Bulletin · October 23, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Journal article.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Background. Visceral obesity is a more important marker of cardiometabolic risk than overall adiposity or subcutaneous fat accumulation. However, there are no data on association between ultrasound-assessed regional adipose tissue distribution and subclinical atherosclerosis in the Kyrgyz ethnic group. Objective. To assess association of ultrasound parameters of visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) with carotid atherosclerosis (CA) in the Kyrgyz ethnic group. Material and methods. A cross-sectional analytical observational study included 108 respondents aged 19—65 years who attended a cardiology clinic for preventive evaluation. Demographic and behavioral risk factors, anthropometric parameters, blood pressure, glucose and lipid metabolism with calculation of HOMA-IR, ultrasound parameters of VAT and SAT, and carotid artery ultrasound data were assessed in all participants. Associations between ultrasound parameters and CA were analyzed using binary logistic regression. Results. CA was detected in 26 out of 108 participants. In between-group comparisons, all ultrasound parameters of VAT and SAT were higher in individuals with CA. In addition, ultrasound parameters of adipose tissue were associated with adverse cardiometabolic profile, including anthropometric obesity measures, blood pressure, insulin resistance, and markers of metabolic liver injury. After multivariable adjustment, only abdominal VAT thickness (odds ratio 1.056; 95% confidence interval 1.007—1.107; p=0.025) and renal VAT thickness (odds ratio 1.107; 95% confidence interval 1.022—1.199; p=0.013) remained independently associated with CA. SAT parameters were not associated with CA. In ROC analysis, abdominal VAT ≥33.5 mm and renal VAT ≥19 mm showed high sensitivity and moderate specificity for CA. Conclusion. In this cohort, greater abdominal and renal VAT thickness was independently associated with CA, whereas SAT parameters did not demonstrated these correlations.