Репозиторий Университета

© 2021 Elsevier Ltd Four most concerned heavy metal pollutants, arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury may share common mechanisms to induce metabolic syndrome (MetS). However, recent studies exploring the relationships between MetS and metal exposure presented inconsistent findings. We aimed to clarify the relationship between heavy metal exposure biomarkers and MetS using a meta-analysis and systematic review approach. Literature search was conducted in international and the Chinese national databases up to June 2020. Of selected studies, we extracted the relevant data and evaluated the quality of each study's methodology. We then calculated the pooled effect sizes (ESs), standardized mean differences (SMDs), and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effect meta-analysis approach followed by stratification analyses for control of potential confounders. Involving 55,536 participants, the included 22 articles covered 52 observational studies reporting ESs and/or metal concentrations on specific metal and gender. Our results show that participants with MetS had significantly higher levels of heavy metal exposure [pooled ES = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.23; n = 42, heterogeneity I2 = 75.6%; and SMD = 0.22, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.29; n = 32, I2 = 94.2%] than those without MetS. Pooled ESs in the subgroups stratified by arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury were 1.04 (95% CI: 0.97, 1.10; n = 8, I2 = 61.0%), 1.10 (0.95, 1.27; 11, 45.0%), 1.21 (1.00, 1.48; 12, 82.9%), and 1.26 (1.06, 1.48; 11, 67.7%), respectively. Pooled ESs in the subgroups stratified by blood, urine, and the other specimen were 1.22 (95% CI: 1.08, 1.38; n = 26, I2 = 75.8%), 1.06 (1.00, 1.13; 14, 58.1%), and 2.41 (1.30, 4.43; 2, 0.0%), respectively. In conclusion, heavy metal exposure was positively associated with MetS. Further studies are warranted to examine the effects of individual metals and their interaction on the relationship between MetS and heavy metals. The exposure to heavy metals was positively associated with the prevalence of metabolic syndrome. Exposures to lead and mercury had a stronger association with the risk of metabolic syndrome.

© 2020 The Authors Background: Since the first report by Perry et al. (1955), most studies affirmed the hypertensive effects of cadmium (Cd) in humans. Nonetheless, conclusions between studies remain inconsistent. Objective: The aim of this study was to reevaluate the evidence for a potential relationship between Cd exposure and altered blood pressure and/or hypertension, focusing on studies published between January 2010 and March 2020. Methods: We reviewed all observational studies from database searches (PubMed and SCOPUS) on Cd exposure and blood pressure or hypertension. We extracted information from studies that provided sufficient data on population characteristics, smoking status, exposure, outcomes, and design. Results: Thirty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria; of those, twenty-nine were cross sectional, three case control, five cohort and one interventional study. Blood or urinary Cd levels were the most commonly used biomarkers. Conclusions: A positive association between blood Cd levels and blood pressure and/or hypertension was identified in numerous studies at different settings. Limited number of representative population-based studies of never-smokers was observed, which may have confounded our conclusions. The association between urinary Cd and blood pressure and/or hypertension remains uncertain due to conflicting results, including inverse relationships with lack of strong mechanistic support. We point to the urgent need for additional longitudinal studies to confirm our findings.

© 2020 The Authors Background: Since the first report by Perry et al. (1955), most studies affirmed the hypertensive effects of cadmium (Cd) in humans. Nonetheless, conclusions between studies remain inconsistent. Objective: The aim of this study was to reevaluate the evidence for a potential relationship between Cd exposure and altered blood pressure and/or hypertension, focusing on studies published between January 2010 and March 2020. Methods: We reviewed all observational studies from database searches (PubMed and SCOPUS) on Cd exposure and blood pressure or hypertension. We extracted information from studies that provided sufficient data on population characteristics, smoking status, exposure, outcomes, and design. Results: Thirty-eight studies met our inclusion criteria; of those, twenty-nine were cross sectional, three case control, five cohort and one interventional study. Blood or urinary Cd levels were the most commonly used biomarkers. Conclusions: A positive association between blood Cd levels and blood pressure and/or hypertension was identified in numerous studies at different settings. Limited number of representative population-based studies of never-smokers was observed, which may have confounded our conclusions. The association between urinary Cd and blood pressure and/or hypertension remains uncertain due to conflicting results, including inverse relationships with lack of strong mechanistic support. We point to the urgent need for additional longitudinal studies to confirm our findings.