Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesNarrative ReviewEurope PMC

Clinical Scenario of the Metabolic Syndrome

Brede S., Serfling G., Klement J., Schmid SM., Lehnert H.

Narrative Review on Type 2 Diabetes, published in Visc Med (2016) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level D· Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studiesEvidence level of this study

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Narrative Review
Journal
Visc Med (2016)
Reported sample size
—
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
27921045
PMCID
PMC5123021
DOI
10.1159/000449028
Citations
13

Abstract (original English)

The term metabolic syndrome (MeS) refers to a cluster of associated symptoms composed of impaired fasting glucose, abdominal obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. MeS is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular and diabetes-associated morbidity and mortality. The increased amount of visceral fat together with a chronic inflammatory state predisposes to the development of arteriosclerosis. Furthermore, insulin resistance (IR) and dyslipidemia are associated with fatty liver disease. In addition, MeS is linked to non-cardiovascular diseases such as cancer as well as psychiatric or endocrine disorders. Here, we discuss the clinical impact of MeS in cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular diseases to highlight the importance of prevention, early diagnosis, and multifactorial treatment of high-risk individuals.

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • This is a narrative review: it collects no new patient data and does not systematically appraise evidence quality.

Evidence level

Evidence from laboratory and animal studies provides groundwork for understanding mechanisms and potential before human studies continue.

How we grade evidence

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research