Prevalence of Undiagnosed Metabolic Syndrome (MS) in Bangladesh: A Comparative Study of Different Recommendations

INTRODUCTION:  Metabolic abnormalities, is an important public health issue. People who are unaware of the presence of any metabolic disorder may already be progressing towards complications of this condition. Since no data are available regarding the best diagnostic criteria to find the prevalence of metabolic abnormalities, this study aimed to determine the age specific prevalence of undiagnosed metabolic syndrome (MS) among the Bangladeshi population using different sets of defining criteria for MS.

METHODS:  

Briefly, 1808  people (male 1002, 55.4%) mean aged 42.2±9.7, living in Bangladesh were selected for this cross-sectional observational study, if they have no report of having any metabolic abnormality according to a physician diagnosis and were not currently taking any medicine(s). Biochemical analyses and anthropometric measurements were done following standard protocols. MS was defined using the criteria recommended by IDF (International Diabetes Federation), WHO (World Health Organization), AHA (American Heart Association), NCEP-ATPIII (National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III) and EGIR (European Group for the Study of Insulin Resistance). Data were analyzed using statistical package for social science (SPSS) for Windows version 17.

RESULTS:  

The prevalence of MS were 67.4% (n=1218, 95% CI-65.2, 69.6) according to IDF; 63.9% (n=1155, 95% CI- 61.7, 66.1) by WHO; 70.0% (n=1265, 95% CI-67.9, 72.1)by AHA; 80.1% (n=1448, 95% CI-78.3, 81.9) by NCEP-ATPIII and 81.5% (n=1473, 95% CI-79.7, 83.3) by EGIR. However, the values were 53.9%, 3.5%, 24.1%, 52.7% and 23.1% respectively when the recommended principle criteria and any variables were considered, and thus giving rise to confusion about the cut-off value and number or type of variables to be included.

CONCLUSIONS:  

Data concluded that i) Prevalence of undiagnosed metabolic syndrome in Bangladeshi population is high; (ii) The cut-off values and the type of variables given by different recommendations for MS leads to the difference in the prevalence among the subjects.