Main Article Content


Background. The waist circumference is the most widely used determinant of abdominal fat. However, it is not very accurate, and cannot help us differentiate subcutaneous fat from visceral fat, which is known to be correlated with cardio-metabolic risk. The gold standard for this evaluating remains CT scan but is difficult to access in our context, due to the cost. The aim of the study was to assess the relationship between the different fat tissue layers of the abdomen, measured clinically and by CT-scans, with the cardio-metabolic risk, in order to detect the best measurement correlated with the cardio metabolic risk in Cameroonian women Patients and Methods. We performed a cross-sectional analytical study, from September 2010 to February 2011 at the Yaoundé Central Hospital. Our study population was made up of women without diabetes, stratified according to their body mass index. We looked at socio-demographic data, waist circumference, CT-scan fat measurements, insulin sensitivity and their correlation. We enrolled 48 women. Results. Their average age was 28 ± 6 years, BMI was 28kg / m2 [19-39]. Obese had higher abdominal adiposity with an average waist circumference of 107 ± 7cm and total fat at CT scan of 698 ± 98cm. Our population had poor insulin tolerance assessed using the KITT short insulin tolerance test with an average of 1.69 %/min. It was not correlated with waist circumference p = 0.056 r = 0.278 but was correlated with CT scan fat measurements p = 0.032 r = 0.310, more precisely with visceral fat p = 0.009 r = 0.375. Conclusion. This study confirm that visceral abdominal fat is better correlated with insulin sensitivity than subcutaneous fat and that waist circumference is not a reliable reflection of cardiometabolic risk.
Introduction. Le tour de taille est le déterminant de l’adiposité abdominale le plus utilisé. Cependant, il ne reflète pas l’adiposité viscérale étant mieux corrélée à l’insulinorésistance donc au risque cardiométabolique. Le scanner, le gold standard pour l'évaluer, est financièrement peu accessible dans notre contexte. Le but du travail était d’évaluer la relation entre les compartiments graisseux mesurés cliniquement et à l’aide du scanner abdominal et le risque cardiométabolique chez un groupe de femmes camerounaises. Patients et méthodes. Nous avons donc réalisé une étude analytique transversale, de septembre 2010 à février 2011 à l'Hôpital Central de Yaoundé. Résultats. Nous avons recruté 48 femmes non diabétiques, évaluées selon leur indice de masse corporelle. Nous avons examiné les données sociodémographiques, les paramètres vitaux, anthropométriques comme le tour de taille, l’adiposité scanographique, la sensibilité à l'insuline et leur corrélation. Leur âge moyen était de 28 ± 6 ans, IMC de 28 kg/m2. Les obèses avaient une adiposité abdominale plus élevée avec un tour de taille moyen de 107 ± 7 cm, une adiposité totale scanographique de 698 ± 98 cm. La sensibilité à l'insuline évaluée par le test court de tolérance à l'insuline ITT était faible (1,69 %/min) ; non corrélée au tour de taille p = 0,056 r = 0,278 mais à l’adiposité abdominale scanographique p = 0,032 r = 0,310 fortement à la viscérale p = 0,009 r = 0,375. Conclusion. Cette étude confirme que la graisse abdominale viscérale est mieux corrélée aux risque cardiométabolique que la sous-cutanée abdominale et le tour de taille qui n'est pas un reflet réel du risque cardiométabolique dans un contexte ou l'accès au scanner est financièrement limité.


cardio-metabolic risk abdominal fat CT scan risque cardiométabolique adiposité abdominale scanner

Article Details

How to Cite
Valérie Ndobo-Koe, Eugène Sobngwi, Sylvain Zemsi, Chris Nadège Nganou-Gnindjio, Alain Menanga, Samuel Kingue, Pierre Ongolo Zogo, & Jean Claude Mbanya. (2022). Abdominal Fat at CT-Scan and Cardiometabolic Risk in a Group of Cameroonian Women. HEALTH SCIENCES AND DISEASE, 23(9). Retrieved from


  1. Sun H, Saeedi P, Karuranga S, Pinkepank M, Ogurtsova K, Duncan BB, Stein C, Basit A, Chan JCN, Mbanya JC, Pavkov ME, Ramachandaran A, Wild SH, James S, Herman WH, Zhang P, Bommer C, Kuo S, Boyko EJ, Magliano DJ. IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global, regional and country-level diabetes prevalence estimates for 2021 and projections for 2045. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. janv 2022;183:109119.
  2. Simo LP, Agbor VN, Temgoua FZ, Fozeu LCF, Bonghaseh DT, Mbonda AGN, Yurika R, Dotse-Gborgbortsi W, Mbanya D. Prevalence and factors associated with overweight and obesity in selected health areas in a rural health district in Cameroon: a cross-sectional analysis. BMC Public Health. 10 mars 2021;21(1):475.
  3. Arroyo P, Avila-Rosas H, Fernández V, Casanueva E, Galván D. Parity and the prevalence of overweight. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics. 1995;48(3):269‑72.
  4. Bergman RN, Kim SP, Catalano KJ, Hsu IR, Chiu JD, Kabir M, Hucking K, Ader M. Why visceral fat is bad: mechanisms of the metabolic syndrome. Obesity (Silver Spring). févr 2006;14 Suppl 1:16S-19S.
  5. Borkan GA, Gerzof SG, Robbins AH, Hults DE, Silbert CK, Silbert JE. Assessment of abdominal fat content by computed tomography. Am J Clin Nutr. juill 1982;36(1):172‑7.
  6. Rosenquist KJ, Pedley A, Massaro JM, Therkelsen KE, Murabito JM, Hoffmann U, Fox CS. Visceral and Subcutaneous Fat Quality is Associated with Cardiometabolic Risk. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. juill 2013;6(7):762‑71.
  7. WHO Expert Committee on Physical Status : the Use and Interpretation of Anthropometry (1993 : Geneva S, Organization WH. Physical status : the use of and interpretation of anthropometry , report of a WHO expert committee [Internet]. World Health Organization; 1995 [cité 26 juill 2022]. Disponible sur:
  8. Lapidus L, Bengtsson C, Larsson B, Pennert K, Rybo E, Sjöström L. Distribution of adipose tissue and risk of cardiovascular disease and death: a 12 year follow up of participants in the population study of women in Gothenburg, Sweden. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 10 nov 1984;289(6454):1257‑61.
  9. Okosun IS, Chandra KM, Choi S, Christman J, Dever GE, Prewitt TE. Hypertension and type 2 diabetes comorbidity in adults in the United States: risk of overall and regional adiposity. Obes Res. janv 2001;9(1):1‑9.
  10. Kiawi E, Edwards R, Shu J, Unwin N, Kamadjeu R, Mbanya JC. Knowledge, attitudes, and behavior relating to diabetes and its main risk factors among urban residents in Cameroon: a qualitative survey. Ethn Dis. 2006;16(2):503‑9.
  11. Pouliot MC, Després JP, Lemieux S, Moorjani S, Bouchard C, Tremblay A, Nadeau A, Lupien PJ. Waist circumference and abdominal sagittal diameter: best simple anthropometric indexes of abdominal visceral adipose tissue accumulation and related cardiovascular risk in men and women. Am J Cardiol. 1 mars 1994;73(7):460‑8.
  12. Ruderman N, Chisholm D, Pi-Sunyer X, Schneider S. The metabolically obese, normal-weight individual revisited. Diabetes. mai 1998;47(5):699‑713.
  13. Duran-Tauleria E, Rona RJ, Chinn S. Factors associated with weight for height and skinfold thickness in British children. J Epidemiol Community Health. oct 1995;49(5):466‑73.
  14. Ziegler O, Trebea A, Tourpe D, Böhme P, Quilliot D, Guerci B. Tissu adipeux viscéral : rôle majeur dans le syndrome métabolique. Cahiers de Nutrition et de Diététique. 1 avr 2007;42(2):85‑9.
  15. Wajchenberg BL. Subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue: their relation to the metabolic syndrome. Endocr Rev. déc 2000;21(6):697‑738.
  16. Bonora E, Moghetti P, Zancanaro C, Cigolini M, Querena M, Cacciatori V, Corgnati A, Muggeo M. Estimates of in vivo insulin action in man: comparison of insulin tolerance tests with euglycemic and hyperglycemic glucose clamp studies. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. févr 1989;68(2):374‑8.

Most read articles by the same author(s)