Skip to main content
. 2015 Nov 23;594(8):2175–2203. doi: 10.1113/JP270947

Table 4.

Anthropometric indexes and retinal vasculature in early life

Study population and Sample size and Age, male Anthropometric Arteriolar parameters β Venular parameters β
Study study design response rate % measurements or mean, 95 % CI or mean, 95 % CI
1 Gishti O Population‐based, cross‐sectional study 4145 6.0 years Per SDS ↓: n.s..
(2015) Generation R 61% 50% BMI: 0.06 SDS ↑ (< 0.05)
Total body fat mass: 0.05 SDS ↑ (< 0.05)
2 Xiao Wei Population‐based, cross‐sectional study 444 twins 12–19 years Fat mass index Calibre: Calibre:
(2015) The Guangzhou Twin Eye Study 46.4% (kg m−2) 147.2 vs. 148.4 μm 211.7 vs. 218.2 μm
1st vs. 4th quartile (P trend = 0.005) (P trend = 0.005)
Body water %, Calibre: Calibre:
1st vs. 4th quartile 148.3 vs. 147.9 μm 218.9 vs. 213.2 μm
Trunk fat %, (P trend = 0.009) (P trend = 0.001)
1st vs. 4th quartile Calibre: Calibre:
Triceps skinfold, mm 147.0 vs. 148.7 μm 211.7 vs. 218.8 μm
1st vs. 4th quartile (P trend = 0.007) (P trend = 0.001)
BMI (kg m−2) Calibre: Calibre:
1st vs. 4th quartile 147.7 vs. 148.2 μm 211.5 vs. 218.0 μm
(P trend = 0.007) (P trend = 0.002)
Calibre: Calibre:
149.4 vs. 147.1 μm 213.1 vs. 216.3 μm
(P trend = 0.026) (P trend = 0.020)
3 Siegrist M Randomized controlled school‐and family‐based lifestyle interventional trial 792 10–11 years BMI: AVR:
(2014) 58.5% each 1 kg m−2 −0.003 (−0.004, −0.001)
(P = 0.003)
4 Zheng YF Population‐based, 1035 twin pairs 7–19 years BMI: Calibre: Calibre:
(2013) The Guangzhou Twin Eye Study cross‐sectional study (657 MZ, 378 DZ) 51.8% each 1 kg m−2 −0.30 μm (P = 0.01) 0.43 μm (< 0.05)
5 Tapp RJ Population‐based, cross‐sectional study 1067 12 years Fat mass at 9 years: Calibre: Calibre:
(2013) ALSPAC 49% each SD ↑ n.s. 0.19 (0.03, 0.35)
Fat mass at 11 Calibre: (P = 0.022)
years: n.s. Calibre:
each SD ↑ 0.25 (0.10, 0.40)
(P = 0.001)
6 Gopinath B Australian pre‐schoolers, population‐based, cross‐sectional study 1077 3–6 years Healthy vs. Overweight vs. Obese Calibre: Calibre:
(2013) SCES 159.5 μm vs. 156.3 μm 214.1 μm vs. 218.7 μm
50.5% vs. 153.4 μm vs.220.5 μm
(P trend = 0.01) (P trend = 0.01)
7 Hanssen H German school children at 5th grade School‐based cross‐sectional study 578 out of 792 11.1 years BMI : Calibre: Calibre:
(2012) JuvenTUM 3 73.0% 41.5% each 1 kg m−2 −0.374 μm (−0.724, −0.025) 0.369 μm (0.007, 0.731)
(P = 0.036) (P = 0.046)
Obese vs. Overweight vs. AVR:
Normal weight 0.85 vs. 0.87 vs. 0.89 (≤ 0.05)
PBF: AVR:
each 1% ↑ −0.001 (−0.002, <0.001) (P = 0.002)
Waist circum: AVR:
each 1 mm ↑ −0.001 (−0.002, <0.001) (< 0.001)
8 Li LJ Population‐based, cross‐sectional study 136 6–16 years BMI: Calibre: Calibre:
(2012) STARS 45.6% each SD ↑ n.s. 3.40 μm
SD = 3.53 kg m−2 n.s. (P = 0.005)
Above vs. Below n.s. 227.38 vs. 218.05
threshold n.s. (P = 0.021)
TSF: 2.94 μm
each SD ↑ (P = 0.012)
SD = 4.49 mm 227.96 vs. 217.75
Above vs. Below threshold (P = 0.001)
9 Gopinath B Australian adolescents 2353 out of 3144 12.7 years BMI: Calibre: Calibre:
(2011) SCES Population‐based, cross‐sectional study 75.3% 50.4% 4th vs. 1st quartile 150.0 vs. 152.8 μm 221.1 vs. 216.9 μm
(< 0.0001) (P = 0.0009)
Fractal dimension:
n.s.
Obese vs. Overweight vs. Calibre: Calibre:
Normal weight 149.2 vs. 150.6 vs. 152.0 μm 222.6 vs. 220.4 vs. 218.1 μm
(P = 0.01) (P = 0.01)
10 Schiel R Clinical study, cross‐sectional 77 6–16 Years BMI (kg m−2) Dilatation: Dilatation:
(2009) n.s. r = 0.336 (P = 0.026)
11 Taylor Population‐based, cross‐sectional study 1608 out of 1740 6 years BMI: Calibre: Calibre:
SCES 92.4% 50.8% each SD ↑ −0.76 μm↓ 1.13 μm
(2007) SD = 2.14 kg m−2 (−1.43, −0.08) (0.11, 2.15)
Above vs. Below BMI threshold Calibre: Calibre:
162.0 vs. 163.7 μm 231.7 vs. 229.0
(P = 0.0029) (P = 0.0007)
Waist circum: Calibre: Calibre:
each SD ↑ n.s. 0.99 μm (0.15, 1.84)
SD = 5.14 cm
BSA: Calibre: Calibre:
each SD ↑ n.s. 1.97 μm (0.86, 3.09)
SD = 0.099 m2
12 Cheung N Singapore Chinese 768 7–9 Years BMI: Calibre: Calibre:
(2006) SCORM School‐based, cross‐sectional study each SD ↑ n.s. 2.19 (0.23, 4.15)
52.5% SD = 3.1 kg m−2 (P = 0.03)
13 Owen CG School‐based, cross‐sectional study 986 10–11 years Ponderal index: Tortuosity: Tortuosity:
(2011) CHASE 46.9% each 1 kg m−3 n.s. n.s.
Waist circum: n.s. n.s.
each 1 cm ↑ n.s. n.s.
Sum of skinfolds: n.s. n.s.
each 1 mm ↑
Fat mass index:
each 1 kg m−5
14 Sasongko MB Clinic‐based, cross‐sectional study 944 out of 1159 12–20 years BMI: Tortuosity/branchingnangle/optimality deviation/length–diameter ratio:
(2010) SPDS 81.4% 43.7% each SD ↑ n.s.
with type 1 diabetes SD = 3.5 kg m−2
15 Tapp RJ Population‐based, cross‐sectional study 166 children 9 years BMI: All vascular parameters: All vascular parameters:
(2007) ALSPAC 40% each 1 kg m−2 n.s. n.s.

Abbreviation: 95% CI: 95% confidence interval; SD, standard deviation; PBF, percentage body fat; BMI, body mass index; circum, circumference; BSA, body surface area; SCES, the Sydney Children Eye Study; ALSPAC, the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children; STARS, the Strabismus, Amblyopia and Refractive Error Study in Singapore Chinese Preschoolers; SCORM, the Singapore Cohort Study of the Risk Factors for Myopia; CHASE, the Child Heart and Health Study in England; SPDS, Sydney Pediatric Diabetes Study.