Table 1. Demographic data and body composition analysis of all subjects and subgroups based on visceral fat rating.
| Variables | All | G 1 (VFR = 1-8) | G 2 (VFR = 9-12) | G 3 (VFR > 12) | p value | p value adjusted for age |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | 99 | 51 | 30 | 18 | ||
| VFR | 8.91 ± 5.21 | 5.02 ± 2.75 | 11.07 ± 1.39 | 16.33 ± 4.35 | .000 | .000 |
| Age (year) | 37.87 ± 13.46 | 32.02 ± 10.67 | 42.53 ± 11.53 | 46.67 ± 16.13 | .000 | - |
| Height (cm) | 171.94 ± 6.46 | 171.84 ± 5.99 | 173.10 ± 7.44 | 170.28 ± 5.95 | .342 | .468 |
| Weight (kg) | 78.98 ± 15.72 | 71.36 ± 10.05 b c | 87.39 ± 11.67 | 86.55 ± 23.13 | .000 | .000 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 26.82 ± 4.94 | 23.87 4.01 b c | 28.02 3.19 | 31.69 4.32 | .000 | .000 |
| WC (cm) | 100.63 ± 8.54 | 80.62 ± 8.03 b c | 92.73 ± 7.59 | 100.63 ± 8.54 b | .000 | .000 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 121.59 ± 16.14 | 110.00 ± 13.80 b c | 119.13 ± 18.18 | 119.13 ± 18.18 | .008 | .447 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 74.86 ± 10.68 | 72.10 ± 10.33 | 76.53 ± 12.07 | 80.00 ± 6.07 a | .847 | .573 |
| Fat percentage (%) | 22.86 ± 6.31 | 18.17 ± 4.40 b c | 26.45 ± 3.27 | 30.17 ± 2.98 b | .000 | .000 |
| Fat mass (kg) | 19.15 ± 8.19 | 13.30 ± 4.66 b c | 23.60 ± 5.44 | 28.29 ± 6.79 b | .000 | .000 |
| FFM (kg) | 60.82 ± 7.73 | 57.89 ± 6.49 b c | 64.09 ± 7.48 | 63.71 ± 8.48 | .000 | .001 |
| Muscle mass (kg) | 57.79 ± 7.41 | 55.15 ± 6.27 b c | 60.57 ± 7.30 | 60.64 ± 8.14 | .001 | .001 |
| MMVFR | 9.66 ± 7.27 | 14.15 ± 7.77 b c | 5.52 ± 0.70 | 3.88 ± 0.85 | .000 | .000 |
| MetS n(%) | ||||||
| Yes | 27(27.27) | 13(14.94) | 8(8.79) | 8(5.27) | .293 | |
| No | 72(72.72) | 38(36.06) | 22(21.21) | 10(12.73) |
A
different from G1;
b
different from G2;
c
different from G3.
Data is presented as mean ± SD. G: group; VFR: visceral fat rating; N: number of participants; BMI: body mass index; WC: waist circumference; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; FFM: fat-free mass; MMVFR: muscle mass to visceral fat ratio; MetS: metabolic syndrome. One-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used for group comparisons. Proportions were compared by Chi-square.