Search for


TEXT SIZE

search for



CrossRef (0)
Heart Rate Recovery in Metabolically Healthy Obesity and Metabolically Unhealthy Obesity Korean Adults
Biomed. Sci. Lett. 2018;24:245-252
Published online September 30, 2018;  https://doi.org/10.15616/BSL.2018.24.3.245
© 2018 The Korean Society For Biomedical Laboratory Sciences.

Kyung-A Shin,*

Department of Clinical Laboratory Science, Shinsung University, Dangjin 31801, Korea
Correspondence to: Kyung-A Shin. Department of Clinical Laboratory Science, Shinsung University, 1 Daehak-ro, Jeongmi-myeon, Dangjin 31801, Korea.
Tel: +82-41-350-1408, Fax: +82-41-350-1355, e-mail: mobitz2@hanmail.net
*Professor.
Received June 7, 2018; Revised July 11, 2018; Accepted September 7, 2018.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
 Abstract
Heart rate recovery (HRR) is simply an indicator of autonomic balance and is a useful physiological indicator to predict cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to compare the differences in HRR between metabolically healthy obesity group and metabolically unhealthy obesity and to ascertain whether heart rate recovery is a predictor of metabolic syndrome. Metabolic syndrome was defined according to the standards of the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Care Panel III. Obesity was assessed according to WHO Asian criteria. It was classified into three groups of metabolically healthy non-obesity group (MHNO, n=113), metabolically healthy obesity group (MHO, n=66), metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO, n=18). Exercise test was performed with Bruce protocol using a treadmill instrument. There was no difference in HRR between MHO and MUO (32.71짹12.25 vs 25.53짹8.13), but there was late HRR in MUO than MHNO (25.53짹8.13 vs 34.51짹11.80). HRR in obese was significantly correlated with BMI (r=-0.342, P=0.004), waist circumference (r=-0.246, P=0.043), triglyceride (r=-0.350, P=0.003), HbA1c (r=-0.315, P=0.009), insulin (r=-0.290, P=0.017) and uric acid (r=-0.303, P=0.012). HRR showed a lower prevalence of abdominal obesity, hypertriglyceridemia, and low HDL-cholesterol in the third tertile than in the first tertile. In conclusion, MHO had no difference in vagal activity compared with MHNO, but MUO had low vagal activity. HRR is associated with metabolic parameters and is a useful predictor of abdominal obesity, hypertriglyceridemia, and low HDL-cholesterolemia
Keywords : Heart rate recovery, MHO, MUO