1 / 12

r 2 =0.86, p<0.001

Subcutaneous fat loss is greater than visceral fat loss with diet and exercise, weight-loss promoting drugs, and bariatric surgery. A critical review and meta-analysis Claudia Merlotti, Valerio Ceriani, Alberto Morabito, Antonio E. Pontiroli Supplemental appendix. r 2 =0.48, p<0.001.

houchinst
Download Presentation

r 2 =0.86, p<0.001

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Subcutaneous fat loss is greater than visceral fat loss with diet and exercise, weight-loss promoting drugs, and bariatric surgery. A critical review and meta-analysis Claudia Merlotti, Valerio Ceriani, Alberto Morabito, Antonio E. Pontiroli Supplemental appendix

  2. r2=0.48, p<0.001 r2=0.68, p<0.001 r2=0.86, p<0.001 r2=0.76, p<0.001 r2=0.73, p<0.001 r2=0.52, p<0.001 Supplemental Figure 1. Regressions of changes of visceral (DELTAVATAREA) and subcutaneous (DELTASATAREA) fat area as a function of changes of body mass index (DELTABMI) and of waist circumference (DELTAWAIST); mutual regressions of DELTAVATAREA as a function of DELTASATAREA, and of visceral (DELTAPESOVAT) as a function of subcutaneous (DELTAPESOSAT) fat weight.

  3. r2=0.89, p<0.001 r2=0.76, p<0.001 r2=0.45, p=0.001 r2=0.25, p<0.05 r2=0.63, p<0.001 r2=0.57, p<0.001 Supplemental Figure 2. Regressions of changes of fat mass (DELTAFM) as a function of DELTABMI and of DELTAWAIST; regressions of changes of insulin (DELTAINS) as a function of change of DELTABMI, of DELTAWAIST, of DELTAVATAREA, and of DELTASATAREA.

  4. Supplemental Figure 3. Meta-analysis: change of visceral and subcutaneous fat volume. Meta-regression as a funtion of percentage of women in studies. % women . metareg _ES females, wsse(_seES) graph Meta-regression Number of obs = 6 REML estimate of between-study variance tau2 = 0 % residual variation due to heterogeneity I-squared_res = 0.00% Proportion of between-study variance explained Adj R-squared = 100.00% With Knapp-Hartung modification ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _ES | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- females | -.0247497 .0027583 -8.97 0.001 -.0324078 -.0170916 _cons | .2192799 .1201989 1.82 0.142 -.1144458 .5530056 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  5. Supplemental Figure 4.Meta-analysis: change of visceral and subcutaneous fat weight.. Meta-regression as a funtion of baseline waist circumference. . metareg _ES waistprei, wsse(_seES) graph Meta-regression Number of obs = 10 REML estimate of between-study variance tau2 = 0 % residual variation due to heterogeneity I-squared_res = 0.00% Proportion of between-study variance explained Adj R-squared = 100.00% With Knapp-Hartung modification ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _ES | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- waistprei | -.0791062 .0125735 -6.29 0.001 -.1081008 -.0501116 _cons | 7.761179 1.344742 5.77 0.000 4.660199 10.86216 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ waist circumference

  6. Supplemental Figure 5. Meta-analysis: change of visceral and subcutaneous fat weight. Meta-regression as a funtion of change of subcutaneous fat. SC weight change . metareg _ES DELTAPESOSATi, wsse(_seES) graph Meta-regression Number of obs = 15 REML estimate of between-study variance tau2 = 0 % residual variation due to heterogeneity I-squared_res = 0.00% Proportion of between-study variance explained Adj R-squared = 100.00% With Knapp-Hartung modification ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _ES | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] --------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- DELTAPESOSATi | -.1767542 .0180412 -9.80 0.001 -.2157299 -.1377786 _cons | -.0092525 .112128 -0.08 0.935 -.2514904 .2329854 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  7. Supplemental Figure 6.Meta-analysis: change of visceral and subcutaneous fat weight. Meta-regression as a funtion of change of waist circumference. waist circumference change . metareg _ES DELTAWAISTi, wsse(_seES) graph Meta-regression Number of obs = 9 REML estimate of between-study variance tau2 = .02192 % residual variation due to heterogeneity I-squared_res = 9.38% Proportion of between-study variance explained Adj R-squared = 94.77% With Knapp-Hartung modification ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _ES | Coef. Std. Err. t P>|t| [95% Conf. Interval] -------------+---------------------------------------------------------------- DELTAWAISTi | -.1066454 .0249239 -4.28 0.004 -.1655811 -.0477097 _cons | .0011662 .2618533 0.00 0.997 -.6180185 .6203509 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More Related