Table 2.
Multivariate logistic regression analysis for the fatty pancreas
| Model | Odds ratio (95% CI) | P-value | |
| Model 1 | Age (yr) | 1.025 (0.999-1.051) | 0.059 |
| Sex (male/female) | 0.397 (1.474-4.311) | 0.001 | |
| Fasting glucose (mg/dL) | 0.998 (0.987-1.010) | 0.747 | |
| HOMA-IR | 2.319 (1.431-3.757) | 0.001 | |
| Model 2 | Model 1 | ||
| (HOMA-IR) | 1.761 (1.041-2.978) | 0.035 | |
| + | |||
| TC (mg/dL) | 1.005 (0.998-1.013) | 0.184 | |
| TG (mg/dL) | 1.004 (1.000-1.008) | 0.060 | |
| FFA (mg/dL) | 1.000 (0.999-1.001) | 0.409 | |
| Model 3 | Model 2 | ||
| (HOMA-IR) | 0.990 (0.533-1.839) | 0.973 | |
| + | |||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 1.137 (0.965-1.339) | 0.125 | |
| Visceral fat | 1.000 (1.000-1.000) | 0.006 | |
| Subcutaneous fat | 1.000 (1.000-1.000) | 0.932 | |
| Thigh fat | 1.000 (1.000-1.000) | 0.214 |
Model 1: HOMA-IR and fasting glucose were adjusted for age, sex; Model 2: In addition to Model I, HOMA-IR and fasting glucose were adjusted for lipid profiles (TC, TG, FFA); Model 3: In addition to Model II, HOMA-IR and fasting glucose were adjusted for BMI and fat distribution factors (abdominal visceral fat area, abdominal subcutaneous fat area, thigh fat area). P < 0.05 was considered to be significant throughout the analysis.