Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, and Department of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Whereas truncal (central) adiposity is strongly
associated with the insulin resistant metabolic syndrome, it is
uncertain whether this is accounted for principally by visceral
adiposity (VAT). Several recent studies find as strong or stronger
association between subcutaneous abdominal adiposity (SAT) and insulin
resistance. To reexamine the issue of truncal adipose tissue depots, we
performed cross-sectional abdominal computed tomography, and we
undertook the novel approach of partitioning SAT into the plane
superficial to the fascia within subcutaneous adipose tissue
(superficial SAT) and that below this fascia (deep SAT), as well as
measurement of VAT. Among 47 lean and obese glucose-tolerant men and
women, insulin-stimulated glucose utilization, measured by euglycemic clamp, was strongly correlated with both VAT and deep SAT (r = 0.61 and
0.64, respectively; both P < 0.001),
but not with superficial SAT (r =
0.29, not
significant). Also, VAT and deep SAT followed a highly congruent
pattern of associations with glucose and insulin area under the curve
(75-g oral glucose tolerance test), mean arterial blood pressure,
apoprotein-B, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglyceride.
Superficial SAT had markedly weaker association with all these
parameters and instead followed the pattern observed for thigh
subcutaneous adiposity. We conclude that there are two functionally
distinct compartments of adipose tissue within abdominal subcutaneous
fat and that the deep SAT has a strong relation to insulin resistance.
obesity; insulin resistance; visceral adiposity
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
IN OBESITY, INSULIN RESISTANCE (IR) is affected not only by the total amount but also the distribution of adipose tissue (AT) and, in particular, an upper body or truncal fat distribution (10, 36). During the past decade and more, the study of abdominal adipose tissue distribution by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging has identified the importance of visceral adiposity (11, 25, 32). There is a strong association between visceral adiposity and IR patterns of glucose homeostasis (7, 9, 31), including in type 2 diabetes mellitus (4). As well, visceral AT (VAT) is related to essential hypertension, dyslipidemia, and other factors, such as impaired fibrinolysis, that contribute to a heightened risk of cardiovascular disease (5, 8, 33). Moreover, changes in VAT, whether as increases over time or decreases in relationship to weight loss interventions, predict associated changes in glucose and insulin homeostasis (14, 16, 26).
However, a debate has arisen regarding the singular importance of visceral compared with subcutaneous AT (SAT) in relation to IR. Abate and colleagues (1, 2), reported that subcutaneous rather than visceral adipose tissue volume was the stronger correlate with insulin-resistant glucose metabolism. Perhaps the difference is related to gender, as the studies of Abate and colleagues involved men, whereas several of the key studies that find greater importance of VAT were performed in women (7, 9, 31). However, in a recent cross-sectional study of lean and moderately obese men and women, we found that VAT and SAT had a similar association with IR (17). Furthermore, among women, Carey et al. (6) found that truncal adiposity, measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA), a technique that does not distinguish between visceral and subcutaneous depots, had a robust relation with IR. In addition, Misra et al. (29) reported that SAT of the abdomen located in the posterior as opposed the anterior half of the abdomen was the site of adipose tissue deposition that was more strongly associated with IR. To account for this curious observation, these investigators suggested that the SAT of the posterior half of the abdomen is mostly "deep" subcutaneous adipose tissue (deep SAT).
There is a well described fascial plane within the SAT of the abdomen (18, 28), with the superficial adipose layer possessing compact fascial septa (Camper's fascia), whereas the deeper layer of adipose tissue has more loosely organized fascial septa (Scarpa's fascia). Fat lobules of the two sites also differ. The superficial layer is characterized by small tightly packed lobules, whereas those of the deeper layer are larger and distributed in an irregular manner (28). The thickness of the deep layer appears more variable among individuals and especially in relation to obesity (3). The presence of these fascial planes and differences in histology are well recognized with respect to liposuction, which generally is targeted toward the deep layer (15, 23). Given the anatomical basis for considering the two layers of SAT in the abdomen different and the ability to delineate the fascial plane utilizing CT (22), the current study was undertaken to examine these adipose tissue depots from a metabolic perspective. The related purpose was to address current controversies regarding the importance of subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue in relation to IR.
![]() |
METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Subjects.
Volunteers were recruited by advertisement, and 47 men and
premenopausal women who met inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected to participate. Fifteen volunteers (7 men and 8 women) were
lean [body-mass index (BMI) <25 kg/m2], and
32 volunteers (15 men and 17 women) were obese (BMI >27 kg/m2). Inclusion criteria included normal glucose
tolerance, being nonsmokers, not taking any chronic medications, having
stable weight for 6 mo preceding the studies, and being sedentary
(defined as not engaged in >2 exercise sessions weekly). Individuals
with diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, coronary heart disease, or vascular disease were excluded, as were those having hypertension or
being treated with antihypertensive agents. As part of the screening
examination, volunteers fasted overnight and in the morning had a 75-g
oral glucose tolerance test with venous samples for glucose and insulin
obtained at 30-min intervals for 2 h. The protocol had been reviewed
and approved by the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review
Board, and all volunteers had given written informed consent.
Computed tomography.
Computed tomography (9800 CT scanner, General Electric, Milwaukee, WI)
was used for determinations of VAT and SAT areas, as previously
described (35). Briefly, a cross-sectional scan of 10 mm thickness
centered at the L4-L5 vertebral disc space was obtained using 170 mA
with a scanning time of 2 s and a 512 × 512 matrix. The boundary
between visceral and subcutaneous AT was defined by use of the
abdominal wall musculature in continuity with the deep fascia of the
paraspinal muscles, as has been previously described (11). This method
was then modified to determine the areas of deep and superficial SAT,
according to the method of Johnson et al. (23). To do this, the image
was purposely displayed at a more negative attenuation setting to
clearly visualize the fascial plane within SAT, and a cursor was used
to demarcate this boundary. Representative images using this approach
are shown in Fig. 1.
|
Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. To determine overall fat mass (FM) and fat free mass (FFM), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) (Lunar model DPX-L, Madison, WI) was performed using software version 1.3Z. This computerized analysis was also employed to measure abdominal FM. Abdominal AT volume was assessed according to the method of Jensen et al. (21). Briefly, a region of interest on the trunk was defined by using the diaphragm as the cephalad limit and the top of the iliac spine as the caudal boundary. Care was taken to position each volunteer with arms lifted away from the trunk so as to include only the abdominal area in this analysis.
Insulin sensitivity.
For subjects to be prepared for determinations of insulin sensitivity,
they were instructed to consume a weight-maintaining diet containing
200 g of carbohydrate for
3 days before measurements of insulin
sensitivity and to avoid exercise or strenuous exertion for 2 days
before these studies. On the day before measurement of insulin
sensitivity, subjects were admitted to the University of Pittsburgh
General Clinical Research Center. That evening, they received a
standard dinner (10 kcal/kg: 50% carbohydrate, 30% fat, 20% protein)
and then fasted until completion of the insulin sensitivity
measurement. An overnight timed urine collection (~12 h duration) was
obtained for nitrogen measurements to estimate protein oxidation with
systemic indirect calorimetry. At about 7:00 AM, a catheter was placed
in a forearm vein for later infusion of glucose and insulin and to
start a primed (20 µCi), continuous (0.20 µCi/min) infusion of
HPLC-purified [3-3H]glucose (New England
Nuclear, Boston, MA). Isotope was started 100 min before beginning the
insulin infusion to allow 4 h for isotope equilibration before
determination of glucose specific activity and rates of systemic
glucose utilization during the final 40 min of the 3-h insulin
infusion. Data on these procedures have been reported previously (16,
17). Samples were collected for determination of serum insulin,
cholesterol, triglyceride, and leptin. Supine blood pressure in the
right arm was recorded. Continuous infusion of regular insulin
(Humulin, Eli Lilly, Indianapolis, IN) was given at a rate of 40 mU · m
2 · min
1
for 3 h. Euglycemia was maintained with an adjustable infusion of 20%
dextrose (500 ml) to which 80 µCi of
[3-3H]glucose was added to maintain stable
plasma glucose specific activity (12). Plasma glucose determined at
5-min intervals during the clamp remained stable during the last 40 min
[5.04 ± 0.11 (SD) mM; coefficient of variation = 3.5%].
Blood samples for measurement of [3-3H]glucose
specific activity were collected every 10 min during the final 40 min
of insulin infusion. Systemic indirect calorimetry was performed in the
postabsorptive state and during the last 30 min of insulin infusion by
use of an open circuit spirometry metabolic monitor system (DeltaTrac,
Anaheim, CA), to estimate glucose and fat oxidation (13).
Analyses. Plasma glucose was measured by an automated glucose oxidase reaction (YSI 2300 Glucose Analyzer, Yellow Springs, OH). Glucose specific activity was determined with liquid scintillation spectrometry after deproteinization of the plasma with barium sulfate and zinc hydroxide. Serum insulin and leptin were determined by commercially available RIA kits (Pharmacia, Uppsala, Sweden; Linco Research, St. Louis, MO). For the insulin RIA, cross-reactivity of insulin with proinsulin was 41%, and the inter- and intra-assay coefficients of variation were between 5.4 and 5.8%. Serum cholesterol and triglycerides were determined by a spectrophotometric assay; serum high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and apoprotein-B (apoB) were measured by spectrophotometric assay.
Calculations. Rate of plasma glucose appearance and utilization (Rd) were calculated with the Steele equations (34), as modified for variable rate glucose infusions that contain isotope (12). The area under the curve (AUC) for glucose and insulin after glucose ingestion was calculated by a trapezoid method.
Statistical analysis. Data are presented as means ± SD, unless otherwise indicated. ANOVA was used to compare men and women and lean and obese groups for body composition parameters and clinical and metabolic characteristics. Regression analysis was used to determine the relationships between body composition and insulin sensitivity. All statistical measurements were made with SigmaStat (version 2.0, Jandel Scientific Software, San Rafael, CA).
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Body composition.
The body composition characteristics (means ± SE) of the lean and
obese men and women are shown in Table 1.
BMI differed for lean and obese groups as by study design but without
any effect of gender. However, systemic FM did differ by gender, being
greater in women as well as being greater in obese subjects. This
pattern also pertained to thigh AT and for superficial SAT of the
abdomen, because women had greater AT in these depots. For deep SAT in the abdomen, there was not any effect of gender. However, mean values
in obese subjects were approximately threefold greater than in lean
subjects. VAT was approximately two- to threefold greater in obese
subjects compared with lean subjects, and there was a tendency for men
to have greater VAT, but this gender difference did not achieve
statistical significance (P = 0.08). The volume of abdominal
AT, determined by DEXA, was greater in obesity. Abdominal adipose
tissue measured by DEXA was highly correlated to cross-sectional abdominal AT area (cm2) measured by CT (r = 0.97, P < 0.01).
|
Metabolic variables.
Values for insulin-stimulated glucose metabolism (glucose
Rd), 2-h glucose tolerance AUC, 2-h insulin AUC, fasting
plasma insulin, leptin, and lipids are shown in Table
2. Glucose Rd was reduced in
obesity. However, consistent with the inclusion criteria of normal
glucose tolerance, there was not a significant difference between lean
and obese subjects for glucose AUC, whereas insulin AUC did differ;
obese men and women had higher fasting insulin (P < 0.001).
There were also highly significant group and gender differences for
plasma leptin (both P < 0.001), with leptin higher in women
and in the obese group. Despite the fact that none of the volunteers
was hypertensive, mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) was significantly
higher in obesity (P < 0.001) and in men (P < 0.01). Values for MAP were: 82 ± 3, 88 ± 3, 89 ± 2, and 94 ± 2 mmHg, respectively, in lean women and men and obese women and men (Fig.
2). There were no significant differences by obesity or gender for HDL cholesterol, apoB, triglyceride, or LDL
cholesterol, as shown in Table 2.
|
|
Relation of abdominal AT depots to metabolic variables.
Shown in Table 3 are the correlation
coefficients between glucose Rd, glucose AUC, and insulin
AUC with regard to the distribution of abdominal AT. With respect to
glucose Rd, there was a significant negative correlation
with FM but not with thigh AT or superficial SAT; for these the
correlation coefficients were very similar. The plots relating glucose
Rd to subdivisions of abdominal adipose tissue are shown in
Fig. 2. However, deep SAT was significantly and negatively correlated
with glucose Rd, and the correlation coefficient was highly
similar to that of VAT. Moreover, the sum of VAT and deep SAT had a
slightly stronger correlation (r = 0.68; P < 0.001)
than either component considered individually. In multiple regression
analysis, total body fat and VAT accounted for 45% of the variance in
insulin sensitivity, yet deep SAT remained independently associated
with insulin sensitivity (r2 = 0.51, including
total body fat, VAT, and deep SAT in the model). The amount of
superficial SAT was not associated with insulin sensitivity after
adjustment for total body fat and either VAT or deep SAT. The
association for truncal AT, measured by DEXA, and for total SAT was of
intermediate strength, being weaker than VAT and deep SAT, yet stronger
than superficial SAT, and it was similar to the association between FM
and glucose Rd.
|
|
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The current study was undertaken to examine the novel hypothesis that superficial and deep depots of subcutaneous abdominal adiposity, defined anatomically by a fascial plane that divides the two depots and differing in histological characteristics (22), might also differ in regard to their association with insulin resistance. The findings clearly indicate that strong differences do exist. Superficial SAT manifests a powerful relation to plasma leptin but a weak association with insulin resistance, and in these and other respects, it follows a pattern observed for thigh subcutaneous adipose tissue, a depot generally regarded as a weak determinant of insulin resistance. In contrast, the deep subcutaneous adipose tissue of the abdomen manifests a robust relation to IR and other key aspects that define the insulin resistance syndrome (e.g., blood pressure, fasting insulin, and lipids); moreover, it does so in a pattern nearly identical to that observed for visceral adiposity. Therefore, from the perspective of understanding body composition and insulin resistance, these results indicate that it is not accurate to "lump" these two differing adipose tissue depots into a single category, but instead it may be useful to "split" the depots in accord with the anatomic demarcation of the fascial plane (18).
In the surgical literature of the past decade, more specifically that related to the procedure of liposuction, there have been a number of reports on the fascial plane within subcutaneous adipose tissue of the abdomen and at other sites (3, 15, 22, 28). This follows by many decades earlier reports on the presence of a fascial plane in subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue that was recognized by dissection methods in humans and other species (20). Moreover, while the superficial adipose tissue has a well defined framework of vertically oriented closely spaced septa dividing the adipose tissue's relatively small lobules, the septal structure of the deeper adipose layer is less well defined, and the adipose tissue is more loosely organized (28). However, these distinctions have not been scrutinized in regard to their potential impact upon obesity-related IR, despite sustained interest during the past several decades in the role of truncal obesity.
Our interest in the potential metabolic significance of deep vs. superficial subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue was stimulated by the report of Misra et al. (29). These investigators reported that subcutaneous fat located in the posterior half of the abdominal wall was more strongly related to IR than was subcutaneous abdominal fat located anteriorly. The explanation suggested for this curious observation was that posterior subcutaneous adipose tissue may largely represent the deep subcutaneous depot, although the investigators were not able in their study to measure the two depots directly. In the current study, the hypothesis that deep subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue is associated with IR is confirmed; moreover, in also confirming that approximately three-fourths of the deep subcutaneous adipose tissue was found in the posterior half of the abdominal wall, our findings provide insight into the observations of Misra et al.
In the current study, visceral adipose tissue had a strong (negative) correlation with insulin resistance as measured by the euglycemic insulin infusion method. Moreover, visceral adipose tissue was associated with blood pressure, fasting insulin, and lipids in a pattern entirely consistent with numerous previous reports indicating the correlation of visceral adiposity with the insulin resistance syndrome (5, 8, 14, 36). The novel finding is that, in all these respects, deep subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue mirrored those relationships found for visceral adiposity. Indeed, deep subcutaneous abdominal and visceral adipose tissue content was independently associated with insulin resistance. In recent years, despite the strong body of data linking insulin resistance to visceral adiposity, some debate has arisen regarding the relative importance of subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue. Two studies by Abate and colleagues (1, 2), in which insulin sensitivity was determined by the "gold standard" glucose clamp method and abdominal adipose tissue volumes were carefully measured by MRI, yielded the provocative finding that subcutaneous abdominal adiposity was of greater importance than visceral adiposity. A recent study from our laboratory yielded similar results (17). These studies appeared to conflict with previous studies that had emphasized the importance of visceral adiposity (7, 8, 14, 31). Based on the current findings of the starkly different associations found for deep vs. superficial subcutaneous adipose tissue, we believe that this controversy can now be substantially resolved.
Part of the difference in the data of Abate and colleagues (1, 2) compared with that of others (7, 9, 29) might be that the latter studies involved only women, whereas those of Abate and colleagues involved only men. Even when matched for body mass index, women generally have more adipose tissue than men do, and this gender difference is principally due to greater subcutaneous adipose tissue. These gender differences are reconfirmed in the present study with respect to superficial subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue, as well as thigh subcutaneous adipose tissue. Among women, compared with men and regardless of obesity, superficial subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue comprised a greater proportion of the overall amount of subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue. In contrast, we did not observe a gender effect on the amount of deep subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue; differences were related to obesity, and in both men and women this depot was strongly correlated to insulin resistance. Thus, if subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue is considered only as a single depot, the adverse effect of the deep depot will be diluted by inclusion of the superficial depot, and this effect will be somewhat greater in women.
The anatomical differences between deep and superficial abdominal
adipose tissue in association with insulin resistance may also have
implications for the site-specific differences in adipocyte biology
(30). For example, evidence from ex vivo studies on human
adipocytes indicates that catecholamine-induced lipolysis is
enhanced in visceral compared with subcutaneous abdominal tissue (19),
primarily due to an increase in visceral adipocyte
3-adrenergic receptor function (19, 27).
This results in greater fatty acid delivery to the portal circulation
(27), which may adversely affect in vivo insulin action. Although these
results cannot be interpreted with respect to deep vs. superficial
subcutaneous adipose tissue, it is possible that analogous differences
in metabolic activity exist between these depots. Indeed, studies in
swine have found increased lipogenic enzyme levels in deep vs.
superficial subcutaneous tissue (20), but these results have yet to be
confirmed in humans. Future studies are required to elucidate
physiological differences in deep vs. superficial abdominal adipocytes,
which may provide insight into mechanisms of insulin resistance of obesity.
In summary, we have utilized computed tomography to clearly visualize the fascial plane of abdominal subcutaneous adipose tissue and to thereby measure superficial and deep depots in lean and obese men and women. The novel finding is that deep subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue is strongly related to insulin resistance and in a manner nearly identical to that of visceral adiposity. In contrast, superficial subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue had a weak association with insulin sensitivity but a strong association with plasma leptin and, overall, followed the pattern observed for thigh subcutaneous adipose tissue.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
---|
We would like to gratefully acknowledge the participation and cooperation of the research volunteers. We would also like to thank the research staffs at the General Clinical Research Center, the Obesity and Nutrition Research Center, and most particularly, those of the Department of Radiology. In addition, we would like to acknowledge the contributions of Sue Andreko, Nancy Mazzei, Amy Meirer, and Rena Wing.
![]() |
FOOTNOTES |
---|
This project was supported by funding from National Institutes of Health R01 DK-49200-04, 5M01 RR-00056 (General Clinical Research Center), and 1P30 DK-46204 (Obesity and Nutrition Research Center). National Institutes of Health National Research Service Award DK-07052-23 supported B. Goodpaster. During these studies, F. Troost was a visiting student at the University of Pittsburgh from the University of Maastricht, The Netherlands.
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: D. E. Kelley, Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, East-1140 Biomedical Science Tower, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15261 (E-mail: kelley{at}msx.dept-med.pitt.edu).
Received 3 August 1999; accepted in final form 10 December 1999.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1.
Abate, N,
Garg A,
Peshock RM,
Stray-Gundersen J,
Adams-Huet B,
and
Grundy SM.
Relationship of generalized and regional adiposity to insulin sensitivity in men with NIDDM.
Diabetes
45:
1684-1693,
1996[Abstract].
2.
Abate, N,
Garg A,
Peshock RM,
Stray-Gundersen J,
and
Grundy SM.
Relationships of generalized and regional adiposity to insulin sensitivity in men.
J Clin Invest
96:
88-98,
1995[ISI][Medline].
3.
Alexander, H,
and
Dugale A.
Fascial planes with subcutaneous fat in humans.
Eur J Clin Nutr
46:
903-906,
1992[ISI][Medline].
4.
Banjeri, M,
Chaiken R,
Gordon D,
and
Lebowitz H.
Does intra-abdominal adipose tissue in black men determine whether NIDDM is insulin resistant or insulin-sensitive?
Diabetes
44:
141-146,
1995[Abstract].
5.
Björntorp, P.
"Portal" adipose tissue as a generator of risk factors for cardiovascular disease and diabetes.
Arteriosclerosis
10:
493-496,
1990[Medline].
6.
Carey, DG,
Jenkins AB,
Campbell LV,
Freund J,
and
Chisholm DJ.
Abdominal fat and insulin resistance in normal and overweight women.
Diabetes
45:
633-638,
1996[Abstract].
7.
Colberg, SR,
Simoneau J-A,
Theate FL,
and
Kelley DE.
Skeletal muscle utilization of FFA in women with visceral obesity.
J Clin Invest
95:
1846-1853,
1995[ISI][Medline].
8.
Després, J-P.
Abdominal obesity as important component of insulin resistance syndrome.
Nutrition
9:
452-459,
1993[ISI][Medline].
9.
Després, J,
Nadeau A,
Tremblay A,
Ferland M,
Moorjani S,
Lupien PJ,
Thériault G,
Pinault S,
and
Bouchard C.
Role of deep abdominal fat in the association between regional adipose tissue distribution and glucose tolerance in obese women.
Diabetes
38:
304-309,
1989[Abstract].
10.
Evans, DJ,
Hoffman RG,
Kalkoff RK,
and
Kissebah AH.
Relationship of body fat topography to insulin sensitivity and metabolic profile in premenopausal women.
Metabolism
36:
68-75,
1984.
11.
Ferland, M,
Després J-P,
Tremblay A,
Pinault S,
Nadeau A,
Moorjani S,
Lupien P,
Thériault G,
and
Bouchard C.
Assessment of adipose tissue distribution by computed axial tomography in obese women: association with body density and anthropometric measurements.
Br J Nutr
61:
139-148,
1989[ISI][Medline].
12.
Finegood, DT,
Bergman RN,
and
Vranic M.
Estimation of endogenous glucose production during hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic glucose clamps. Comparison of unlabeled and labeled and unlabeled exogenous glucose infusates.
Diabetes
36:
914-924,
1987[Abstract].
13.
Frayn, KN.
Calculation of substrate oxidation rates in vivo from gaseous exchange.
J Appl Physiol
55:
628-634,
1983
14.
Fujioka, S,
Matsuzawa Y,
Tokunaga K,
and
Tarui S.
Contribution of intra-abdominal fat accumulation to the impairment of glucose and lipid metabolism in human obesity.
Metabolism
36:
54-59,
1987[ISI][Medline].
15.
Gasperoni, C,
and
Salgarello M.
Liposuction related to the anatomy of subcutaneous fat and superficial fascial system.
Aesthetic Plast Surg
19:
13-20,
1995[ISI][Medline].
16.
Goodpaster, BH,
Kelley DE,
Wing RR,
Meier A,
and
Thaete FL.
Effects of weight loss on regional fat distribution and insulin sensitivity in obesity.
Diabetes
48:
839-847,
1999[Abstract].
17.
Goodpaster, BH,
Thaete FL,
Simoneau J-A,
and
Kelley DE.
Subcutaneous abdominal fat and thigh muscle composition predict insulin sensitivity independently of visceral fat.
Diabetes
46:
1579-1585,
1997[Abstract].
18.
Goss, C.
Gray's Anatomy. Philadelphia, PA: Lea and Febiger, 1985.
19.
Hoffstedt, J,
Arner P,
Hellers G,
and
Lonnqvist F.
Variation in adrenergic regulation of lipolysis between omental and subcutaneous adipocytes from obese and non-obese men.
J Lipid Res
38:
795-804,
1997[Abstract].
20.
Hood, R,
and
Allen C.
Lipogenic enzyme activity in adipose tissue during the growth of swine with different propensities to fatten.
J Nutr
103:
353-362,
1973[ISI][Medline].
21.
Jensen, MD,
Kanaley JA,
Reed JE,
and
Sheedy PF.
Measurement of abdominal and visceral fat with computed tomography and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry.
Am J Clin Nutr
61:
274-278,
1995[Abstract].
22.
Johnson, D,
Cormack G,
Abrahams P,
and
Dixon A.
Computed tomographic observations on subcutaneous fat: implications for liposuction.
Plast Reconstr Surg
97:
387-395,
1996[ISI][Medline].
23.
Johnson, D,
Dixon A,
and
Abrahams P.
The abdominal subcutaneous tissue: computed tomographic, magnetic resonance, and anatomical observations.
Clin Anat
9:
19-24,
1996[Medline].
24.
Kelley, DE,
Slasky BS,
and
Janosky J.
Skeletal muscle density: effects of obesity and non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.
Am J Clin Nutr
54:
509-15,
1991[Abstract].
25.
Kvist, H,
and
Sjöström TU.
Adipose tissue volume determinations in women by computed tomography: technical considerations.
Int J Obes
10:
53-67,
1986[ISI][Medline].
26.
Lemieux, S,
Prud'homme D,
Nadeau A,
Tremblay A,
Bouchard C,
and
Després J.
Seven-year changes in body fat and visceral adipose tissue in women.
Diabetes Care
19:
983-991,
1996[Abstract].
27.
Lonnqvist, F,
Thorne A,
Large V,
and
Arner P.
Sex differences in visceral fat lipolysis and metabolic complications of obesity.
Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol
17:
1472-1480,
1997
28.
Markman, B,
and
Barton JF.
Anatomy of the subcutaneous tissue of the trunk and lower extremity.
Plast Reconstr Surg
80:
248-254,
1987[ISI][Medline].
29.
Misra, A,
Garg A,
Abate N,
Peshock R,
Stray-Gundersen J,
and
Grundy S.
Relationship of anterior and posterior subcutaneous abdominal fat to insulin sensitivity in nondiabetic men.
Obes Res
5:
93-99,
1997[Abstract].
30.
Pond, D.
Physiological specialisation of adipose tissue.
Prog Lipid Res
38:
225-248,
1999[ISI][Medline].
31.
Ross, R,
Fortier L,
and
Hudson R.
Separate associations between visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue distribution, insulin and glucose levels in obese women.
Diabetes Care
19:
1404-1411,
1996[Abstract].
32.
Ross, R,
Leger L,
Morris D,
de Guise J,
and
Guardo R.
Quantification of adipose tissue by MRI: relationship with anthropometric variables.
J Appl Physiol
72:
787-95,
1992
33.
Seidell, J,
and
Bouchard C.
Visceral fat in relation to health: is it a major culprit or simply an innocent bystander?
Int J Obes
21:
626-631,
1997[ISI].
34.
Steele, R.
Influence of glucose loading and injected insulin on hepatic glucose output.
Ann NY Acad Sci
82:
420-430,
1959[ISI].
35.
Thaete, FL,
Colberg SR,
Burke T,
and
Kelley DE.
Reproducibility of computed tomography measurement of visceral adipose tissue area.
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord
19:
464-467,
1995[Medline].
36.
Vague, J.
The degree of masculine differentiation of obesity: a factor determining predisposition to diabetes, atherosclerosis, gout, and uric calculous disease.
Am J Clin Nutr
4:
20-34,
1956[ISI].