Is there a threshold of visceral fat loss that improves the metabolic profile in @entity28 postmenopausal XXXX ?

@entity1 @entity353 @entity28 @entity1386 @entity165
It is presently unclear how much @entity1386 ( @entity1386 ) loss is needed to induce favorable metabolic changes. Cross-sectional studies have proposed that a threshold level of @entity1386 exceeding 110 cm(2) in @entity1 induces deleterious changes in the metabolic profile. It is presently unclear, however, if significant decreases in @entity1386 below this given threshold significantly improve the metabolic profile more as compared to decreases that remain below 110 cm(2). To examine whether achieving versus not achieving the proposed @entity1386 threshold impacts differently on the metabolic profile in postmenopausal @entity1 , we examined the effects of a @entity1386 loss below the 110-cm(2) threshold versus those individuals who remained higher than 110 cm(2) after a @entity353 program. Twenty-five sedentary @entity28 (baseline % body fat, 47.7% +/- 4.1%; [mean +/- SD]) postmenopausal @entity1 aged between 51 and 71 years (59.7 +/- 5.6 years) and displaying high baseline levels of @entity1386 accumulation (223 +/- 45 cm(2)) were submitted to a 1-year @entity353 program with weight stabilization periods before and after weight reduction. Based on their loss of @entity1386 after @entity353 , subjects were characterized as "attainers" (post @entity1386 levels < 110 cm(2); average, 96 +/- 10 cm(2); n = 10) or "non-attainers" (post @entity1386 levels > 110 cm(2); average, 171 +/- 34 cm(2); n = 15). We compared changes in (1) plasma lipid-lipoprotein levels, (2) insulin sensitivity (euglycemic/hyperinsulinemic clamp), and (3) supine resting blood pressure between groups who achieved these 2 distinct levels of @entity1386 . Attainers showed a 2-fold greater loss of @entity1386 compared to non-attainers (-51.5% v -27.5%, P <.001). Attainers also showed a greater loss of body weight (-19.0% v -12.5%, P <.01) and fat mass (-34.8% v -18.4%, P <.001) after the program compared to non-attainers. Despite significant differences in the loss of total fat and @entity1386 after the @entity353 program, attainers and non-attainers showed comparable improvements for plasma high-density lipoprotein- @entity165 (HDL-chol) levels (+62.5% v +50.0%, P = not significant [NS]), @entity165 /HDL-chol ratio (-45.5% v -36.5%, P = NS), insulin sensitivity (+34.1% v +23.2%, P = NS), and resting systolic (-6.9% v -5.1%, P = NS) and diastolic (-11.3% v -11.1%, P = NS) blood pressure. These results do not favor the idea that attaining levels of @entity1386 below a threshold of 110 cm(2) is necessary to favorably improve the metabolic profile in @entity28 postmenopausal @entity1 . Achieving or not the proposed threshold of @entity1386 , independently of baseline values, appears to yield similar metabolic improvements in @entity28 postmenopausal @entity1 . More moderate losses of @entity1386 appear to yield similar metabolic improvements as large losses.
