Evidence Hub

Association between atherogenic index of plasma and gestational diabetes mellitus: a prospective cohort study based on the Korean population

Juan Zhang, Yaoyu Suo, Li Wang, Dong Liu, Yue Jia, Yajuan Fu, Weinin Fan, Yideng Jiang

Cardiovascular Diabetology, 2024

585 participants · 35 citations

Abstract

Atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) is a non-traditional lipid parameter that can reflect the burden of atherosclerosis. A lipid profile resembling atherosclerosis emerged during pregnancy. Although lipid metabolism is pivotal in diabetes pathogenesis, there is no evidence linking AIP to gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). Therefore, our objective was to explore the relationship between AIP and GDM and assess AIP's predictive capability for GDM. This was a secondary analysis based on data from a prospective cohort study in Korea involving 585 single pregnant women. AIP was calculated as log10 (TG/HDL). We examined the relationship between AIP and GDM using logistic regression models, curve fitting, sensitivity analyses, and subgroup analyses. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was also used to determine the ability of AIP to predict GDM. The average age of the participants was 32.06 ± 3.76 years. The AIP was 0.24 ± 0.20 on average. The GDM incidence was 6.15%. After adjustment for potentially confounding variables, AIP showed a positive linear relationship with GDM (P for non-linearity: 0.801, OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.27–1.97). The robustness of the connection between AIP and GDM was demonstrated by sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses. An area under the ROC curve of 0.7879 (95% CI 0.7087–0.8671) indicates that AIP is an excellent predictor of GDM. With a specificity of 75.41% and sensitivity of 72.22%, the ideal AIP cut-off value for identifying GDM was 0.3557.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 585 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free