Background and aim: Several working definitions of metabolic syndrome have been proposed for clinical use. However, individuals can be discordantly classified as having or not having metabolic syndrome depending on the choice of one or another definition. This study compared the cardiovascular risk profile of subjects concordantly and discordantly diagnosed by the criteria of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) and the criteria of the International Diabetes Federation (IDF).
Methods and results: Nine hundred and twenty-nine non-diabetic adult subjects belonging to a cross-sectional population-based study in Gran Canaria island (Spain) were assessed. Participants completed a questionnaire and underwent physical examination, fasting blood analyses, and a standardized oral glucose tolerance test. Two hundred and four subjects (22%) had metabolic syndrome according to both definitions, 31 (3.3%) only by the IDF criteria, and 5 (0.5%) only by the NCEP criteria. Participants fulfilling both proposals showed more adverse age and sex-adjusted measures of BMI, waist, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, post-load glucose, HOMA-IR and plasminogen inhibitor activator-1 (PAI-1) than individuals exclusively satisfying the IDF criteria. Moreover, in contrast to subjects meeting both criteria, those that fulfilled only the IDF criteria had levels of BMI, waist, total and HDL cholesterol, post-load glucose, glycated HbA1c, C-reactive protein, PAI-1 and fibrinogen not significantly different from those observed in subjects without metabolic syndrome.
Conclusion: The IDF definition identifies a surplus of individuals whose cardiovascular risk profile, particularly regarding to some non-traditional cardiovascular risk factors, is less adverse than that observed in subjects also diagnosed by the NCEP definition.