Age and Gender-Specific Pattern of Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Saudi Arabia: A Subgroup Analysis from the Heart Health Promotion Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate gender and age-specific distribution patterns of cardiovascular disease risk factors in the Saudi population for tailored health policies. METHODS: From the heart health promotion study, 3063 adult Saudis were included in this study. The study cohort was divided into five age groups (less than 40 years, 40-45 years, 46-50 years, 51-55 years and ≥56 years). The prevalence of metabolic, socioeconomic, and cardiac risk was compared between the groups. Anthropometric and biochemical data were gathered using the World Health Organization stepwise approach to chronic disease risk factors. The cardiovascular risk (CVR) was determined using the Framingham Coronary Heart Risk Score. RESULTS: The prevalence of CVR risk increased with age in both genders. Both Saudi men and women exhibit similar propensities for sedentary lifestyles and unhealthy food habits. The prevalence of tobacco smoking was significantly higher and from an early age in males compared to females (28% and 2.7%, respectively, at age 18-29 years). There is no significant difference in either the prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, or metabolic syndrome between men and women before the age of 60 years. Old Saudi females (≥60 years) have a higher prevalence of diabetes (50% vs. 38.7%) and metabolic syndrome (55.9% versus 43.5%). Obesity was more prevalent in females aged 40-49 years onwards (56.2% vs. 34.9% males), with 62.9% of females aged ≥60 years being obese compared to 37.9% of males. Dyslipidaemia prevalence increased with the progression of age, significantly more in males than females. Framingham high-risk scores showed that 30% of males were at high risk of cardiovascular diseases at the age group of 50-59 years, while only 3.7% of the females were considered as such. CONCLUSIONS: Both Saudi men and women exhibit similar propensities for sedentary lifestyles and unhealthy food habits, with a marked increase in cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors with age. Gender differences exist in risk factor prevalence, with obesity as the main risk factor in women, while smoking and dyslipidaemia were the main risk factors in men.

Effects of Age, Metabolic and Socioeconomic Factors on Cardiovascular Risk among Saudi Women: A Subgroup Analysis from the Heart Health Promotion Study.

Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death in women. Along with the effect of age on the risk of CVD, the reproductive profile of women can influence cardiac health among women. Objectives: The objective of this study is to investigate the influence of age and reproductive stages on the development and progression of cardiovascular disease risks in Saudi women. Methods: For this study, we included 1907 Saudi women from the Heart Health Promotion Study. The study cohort was divided into five age groups (less than 40 years, 40-45 years, 46-50 years, 51-55 years, and ≥56 years). The cohort stratification was meant to correspond to the social and hormonal changes in women's life, including reproductive, perimenopausal, menopausal, and postmenopausal age groups. The groups were compared with respect to the prevalence of metabolic, socioeconomic, and cardiac risks, and the age group of less than 40 years was considered as the reference group. The World Health Organization stepwise approach to chronic disease risk factor Surveillance-Instrument v2.1 was used in this study to collect the anthropometric and biochemical measurements and the Framingham Coronary Heart Risk Score was used to calculate the cardiovascular risk (CVR). Logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess the independent effect of age on CVD risks after adjustment of sociodemographic factors. Results: Metabolic and CVR increased progressively with the increase in age. There was a sharp increase in obesity, hypertension, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome, from the age group <40 years to 41-45 years and then again between the age groups of 46-50 and ≥56 years. A similar noticeable increase in metabolic risk factors (high cholesterol, high triglyceride, high Low-Density Lipoprotein) was observed between the age group <40 years and 41-45 years, but with a steady increase with the increase in age between the other age groups. The high and intermediate Framingham Coronary Heart Risk Scores showed a progressive increase in prevalence with the increase in age, where the proportion doubled from 9.4% at the age group 46-50 years, to 22% at the age group 51-55 years. It doubled again at the age group ≥56 years to 53%-these sharp inflections in the risk of CVD correspond to the women's reproductive lives. Conclusions: In Saudi women, CVR increases with the increase of age. The influence of pregnancy and menopause is apparent in the prevalence of increased risks for cardiovascular and metabolic diseases.

Progestogen for treating threatened miscarriage.

BACKGROUND: Miscarriage is a common complication encountered during pregnancy. The role of progesterone in preparing the uterus for the implantation of the embryo and its role in maintaining the pregnancy have been known for a long time. Inadequate secretion of progesterone in early pregnancy has been linked to the aetiology of miscarriage and progesterone supplementation has been used as a treatment for threatened miscarriage to prevent spontaneous pregnancy loss. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and the safety of progestogens in the treatment of threatened miscarriage. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2011) and bibliographies of all located articles for any additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compare progestogen with placebo, no treatment or any other treatment given in an effort to treat threatened miscarriage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two authors assessed the trials for inclusion in the review, assessed trial quality and extracted the data. Data were checked for accuracy. MAIN RESULTS: We included four studies (421 participants) in the meta-analysis. In three studies all the participants met the inclusion criteria and in the fourth study, we included only the subgroup of participants who met the inclusion criteria in the meta-analysis. There was evidence of a reduction in the rate of spontaneous miscarriage with the use of progestogens compared to placebo or no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35 to 0.79). There was no increase in the rate of antepartum haemorrhage (RR 0.76; 95% CI 0.30 to 1.94), or pregnancy-induced hypertension (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.88) for the mother. The rate of congenital abnormalities was no different between the newborns of the mothers who received progestogens and those who did not (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.10 to 4.82). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The data from this review suggest that the use of progestogens is effective in the treatment of threatened miscarriage with no evidence of increased rates of pregnancy-induced hypertension or antepartum haemorrhage as harmful effects to the mother, nor increased occurrence of congenital abnormalities on the newborn. However, the analysis was limited by the small number and the poor methodological quality of eligible studies (four studies) and the small number of the participants (421), which limit the power of the meta-analysis and hence of this conclusion.

Progestogen for treating threatened miscarriage.

BACKGROUND: Miscarriage is a common complication encountered during pregnancy. The role of progesterone in preparing the uterus for the implantation of the embryo and its role in maintaining the pregnancy have been known for a long time. Inadequate secretion of progesterone in early pregnancy has been linked to the aetiology of miscarriage and progesterone supplementation has been used as a treatment for threatened miscarriage to prevent spontaneous pregnancy loss. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and the safety of progestogens in the treatment of threatened miscarriage. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (December 2009) and bibliographies of all located articles for any unidentified articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials that compare progestogen with placebo, no treatment or any other treatment given in an effort to treat threatened miscarriage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two authors assessed the trials for inclusion in the review and extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies (84 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. In one study, all the participants met the inclusion criteria and in the other study, only the subgroup of participants who met the inclusion criteria was included in the meta-analysis. There was no evidence of effectiveness with the use vaginal progesterone compared to placebo in reducing the risk of miscarriage (risk ratio 0.47; 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 1.30). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on scarce data from two methodologically poor trials, there is no evidence to support the routine use of progestogens for the treatment of threatened miscarriage. Information about potential harms to the mother or child, or both, with the use of progestogens is lacking. Further, larger, randomized controlled trials on the effect of progestogens on the treatment of threatened miscarriage, which investigate potential harms as well as benefits, are needed.