Publication Details

AFRICAN RESEARCH NEXUS

SHINING A SPOTLIGHT ON AFRICAN RESEARCH

medicine

Prevalence of Metabolic Syndrome in Psoriatic Arthritis: Systematic Literature Review and Results from the CARMA Cohort

Journal of Clinical Rheumatology, Volume 28, No. 2, Year 2022

Objective To analyze the prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in a systematic literature review (SLR) and in the Spanish CArdiovascular in RheuMAtology (CARMA) cohort. Methods A SLR and a subanalysis of the CARMA cohort were performed. In the SLR, PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov up to March 2019 were searched. Systematic literature reviews, clinical trials, and observational studies that analyzed the prevalence or frequency of MetS in PsA were analyzed. Two reviewers selected the articles, assessed the quality of the studies, and collected data, independently. In addition, data on sociodemographic characteristics and MetS in patients with PsA from the CARMA cohort were collected and analyzed. Comparative descriptive analysis was performed. Results The SLR included 18 articles, of moderate to high quality, with PsA patients of both sexes, with mean ages between 42 and 59 years. The rate of MetS varied from 23.5% to 62.9%. The most commonly used classification method was that of the National Cholesterol Education Program. Additionally, 724 PsA patients from the CARMA cohort were analyzed; 327 (45.4%) were women, 157 (21.8%) smokers, with a mean age of 51 years and a mean PsA disease duration of 9 years. Hypertension was the most common abnormal finding (66.8%), followed by hyperglycemia (42.6%) and hypertriglyceridemia (30.6%). Notably, 222 patients (30.6%) had MetS. Conclusions The prevalence of MetS in PsA varies, depending on the definition. Whereas 23.5% to 62.9% of PsA patients have MetS, in the CARMA cohort almost a third of patients with PsA have MetS.
Statistics
Citations: 7
Authors: 7
Affiliations: 8
Identifiers
Research Areas
Noncommunicable Diseases
Study Design
Cross Sectional Study
Cohort Study
Study Approach
Systematic review
Participants Gender
Female