Skip Navigation
Skip to contents

Endocrinol Metab : Endocrinology and Metabolism

clarivate
OPEN ACCESS
SEARCH
Search

Articles

Page Path
HOME > Endocrinol Metab > Volume 41(4); 2026 > Article
Original Article
Diabetes, obesity and metabolism Association of Abdominal Myosteatosis and Visceral Fat Obesity with Arterial Stiffness
Min Jung Lee1orcid, Hong-Kyu Kim1orcid, Eun Hee Kim1, Sung Jin Bae1, Hyo-Jung Nam2, Sang Hoon Lee3, Chang Hee Jung4orcid, Woo Je Lee4
Endocrinology and Metabolism 2026;41(4):543-557.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3803/EnM.2025.2734
Published online: April 8, 2026

1Subdivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Health Screening and Promotion Center, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea

2Subdivision of Cardiology, Health Screening and Promotion Center, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea

3Department of Radiology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

4Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

Corresponding author: Hong-Kyu Kim. Subdivision of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Health Screening and Promotion Center, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, 88 Olympic-ro 43-gil, Songpa-gu, Seoul 05505, Korea Tel: +82-2-3010-4802, Fax: +82-2-3010-4917, E-mail: hkkim0801@amc.seoul.kr
• Received: October 22, 2025   • Revised: December 22, 2025   • Accepted: January 12, 2026

Copyright © 2026 Korean Endocrine Society

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

  • 2,168 Views
  • 69 Download
prev next
  • Background
    Arterial stiffness with aging predicts cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and target organ damage. While sarcopenia has been linked to arterial stiffness, the association of myosteatosis and visceral adiposity with arterial stiffness remains underexplored. As age-related fat redistribution, including myosteatosis and visceral obesity, often precedes overt sarcopenia, their early evaluation may be beneficial in preventing arterial stiffness. Therefore, this cross-sectional study aimed to assess whether myosteatosis and visceral obesity are associated with increased arterial stiffness.
  • Methods
    A total of 6,004 subjects without CVD who underwent abdominal computed tomography and brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) between 2012 and 2013 during health examinations were included. Visceral fat area and total abdominal muscle area (TAMA) were measured at the L3 vertebral level. Muscle quality was assessed using the normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA)/TAMA index, where a lower value indicates a reduced proportion of healthy muscle (NAMA) and a higher presence of myosteatosis.
  • Results
    After adjusting for multiple cardiovascular risk factors, including myosteatosis, visceral obesity was significantly associated with elevated baPWV in men (odds ratio [OR]=1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.10 to 1.60; P=0.004). In contrast, in women, myosteatosis was significantly associated with elevated baPWV in a fully adjusted model that included visceral obesity (OR=3.26; 95% CI=1.13 to 9.44; P=0.029).
  • Conclusion
    Ectopic fat infiltration, including visceral obesity and myosteatosis, was significantly associated with increased arterial stiffness. Notably, visceral obesity was significantly associated with elevated baPWV in men, while myosteatosis was significantly associated with elevated baPWV in women after adjustment.
As population aging is recognized as a global issue of increasing importance, the timely detection and intervention of early vascular aging is critical for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). With advancing age, arteries become stiffer, which not only increases the risk of CVD but also leads to significant organ damage, including cognitive dysfunction, heart failure, atrial fibrillation, and renal dysfunction [13]. Thus, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV), a composite measure of central and peripheral arterial stiffness, has emerged as a noninvasive, convenient, valid, and reliable method suitable for population-based screening of vascular aging. Current guidelines recommend the measurement of baPWV for cardiovascular (CV) risk stratification [1,35].
During aging, significant changes occur in body composition [6,7]. Lipids are redistributed from subcutaneous adipose tissue to visceral adipose and muscle tissues, leading to visceral obesity and myosteatosis. As visceral obesity and myosteatosis progress, the associated lipotoxicity, chronic inflammation, and insulin resistance create a vicious cycle that further contributes to the development of sarcopenic obesity, overt sarcopenia, and vascular aging [7,8]. Thus, myosteatosis has recently been conceptualized as a form of ‘proto-sarcopenia’ representing an early stage in the progression toward full-blown sarcopenia [7,9,10]. Therefore, early assessment of muscle quality and visceral fat accumulation before the onset of full-blown sarcopenia is critical for the timely diagnosis and intervention of metabolic alterations. However, while previous studies have shown that reduced muscle mass, sarcopenia [1115], or visceral obesity are associated with increased arterial stiffness [16,17], precise evaluation of myosteatosis through the subdivision of muscle area has been lacking.
To evaluate myosteatosis and visceral adiposity, computed tomography (CT) has emerged as the gold standard due to its precision in differentiating and quantifying muscle and adipose tissues [6,7]. In our recent study, we segmented the CT-measured total abdominal muscle area (TAMA) into three components: normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA), which indicates healthy muscle; low attenuation muscle area (LAMA), representing lipid-infiltrated muscle; and intermuscular adipose tissue (IMAT), denoting fat tissue located between muscle groups [6]. We proposed the NAMA/TAMA index as an accurate measure of muscle quality, where a lower value signifies a decreased proportion of healthy muscle (NAMA) and an increased infiltration of myosteatosis (LAMA and IMAT) [6]. In addition, we previously reported that myosteatosis (decreased NAMA/TAMA index) was associated with various metabolic disorders [1821]. However, the relationship between myosteatosis and arterial stiffness, particularly in conjunction with visceral obesity, has yet to be investigated.
Therefore, we aimed to evaluate whether myosteatosis and visceral obesity are associated with increased arterial stiffness as measured by baPWV, in a population without known CVD.
Study population
This was a retrospective cross-sectional study involving individuals who voluntarily underwent simultaneous abdominal CT scans and baPWV assessments between 2012 and 2013 at the Health Screening and Promotion Center in Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea) (n=6,410). To analyze the association between ectopic fat infiltration and baPWV in a primary prevention setting, we excluded participants with a history of CVD, including myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and/or cerebrovascular accidents (n=202). We further excluded participants with a history of cancer or a diagnosis of incident cancer during the health examination (n=177), and an ankle-brachial index (ABI) ≤0.9 and/or >1.4 (to ensure the accuracy of baPWV measurements [n=27]) [1]. After excluding ineligible subjects, 6,004 subjects without known CVD were included. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee/Institutional Review Board at Asan Medical Center (IRB No. 2021–0517). Written informed consent from the patients was waived due to the retrospective nature of our study.
Clinical assessment
All study subjects completed a questionnaire regarding their medical history, medication use, exercise habits, alcohol consumption, and smoking habits. Diabetes was defined as a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level of ≥7.0 mmol/L or a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level of ≥6.5% [22]. Additionally, subjects taking anti-diabetic medication were classified as having diabetes. Hypertension was defined as a systolic/diastolic blood pressure (BP) of ≥140/90 mm Hg or a history of antihypertensive medication use. A family history of premature CVD was defined as the occurrence of CVD in first-degree relatives before the age of 55 for men or 65 for women [23]. Physical activity was assessed using the validated Korean version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and was converted to metabolic equivalent task minutes per week (MET-min/wk) according to the IPAQ scoring protocol [24]. Regular aerobic exercise was defined as ≥30 minutes of moderate-intensity activity on ≥5 days/week or ≥20 minutes of vigorous-intensity activity on ≥3 days/week [25]. Regular resistance exercise was defined as resistance training ≥3 days/week [26]. Smoking status was categorized as never, former, or current smoker. Smoking pack-years were calculated by multiplying the number of packs of cigarettes smoked per day by the number of years the individual has smoked. Beverage-specific alcohol consumption was calculated in grams per day based on the alcohol content, frequency of consumption, and quantity consumed [27]. Menopausal status was classified as premenopausal, postmenopausal, or surgical menopausal (i.e., menopause induced by hysterectomy with or without oophorectomy).
Anthropometric and laboratory measurements
Height and weight were measured in subjects wearing light clothing and without shoes. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated by dividing weight in kilograms by the square of height in meters. Waist circumference (WC) was measured midway between the costal margin and the iliac crest at the end of a normal expiration. BP was measured on the right arm after a rest period of at least 5 minutes, using an automatic manometer with an appropriately sized cuff. After an overnight fast, early morning venous blood samples were collected and analyzed at a central, certified laboratory at Asan Medical Center. Fasting total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), triglycerides (TG), uric acid, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels were measured using enzymatic colorimetric methods with a Toshiba 200FR Neo analyzer (Toshiba Medical System Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). Gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) levels were measured using the L-γ-glutamyl-p-nitroanilide method (Toshiba). Creatinine levels were measured using the Jaffe method, and estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) were calculated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation [28]. FPG was measured using the hexokinase method, while high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) was measured using the immunoturbidimetric method with the Toshiba 200FR Neo analyzer (Toshiba Medical System Co. Ltd.). Insulin concentrations were determined with an immunoradiometric assay (TFB, Tokyo, Japan). Ion-exchange high-performance liquid chromatography (Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc., Hercules, CA, USA) was used to measure HbA1c levels. The homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) was calculated as the product of fasting insulin (μU/mL) and FPG (mmol/L) levels, divided by 22.5. All enzymatic activities were measured at 37°C.
Measurement of baPWV
ABI and baPWV were assessed using an automatic device (VP-2000, Colin, Komaki, Japan) after the subjects had rested for at least 5 minutes. Electrodes were placed on both wrists, and the cuffs were wrapped around the brachia and ankles. After simultaneous measurement of BP and waveforms in all four limbs, the time interval between the brachial and ankle waveforms (ΔTba) was determined. The distance between the brachium and the ankle (La–Lb) was estimated automatically according to the subject’s height. After collecting these data, baPWV was calculated using the following equation: baPWV=(La−Lb)/ΔTba (in cm/sec). After measurement of the right and left baPWV, the mean baPWV was calculated and used as a marker of arterial stiffness. The measurement of baPWV was categorized as normal (<1,400 cm/sec) or elevated (≥1,400 cm/sec) according to current guidelines [1,29] and previous studies [2,30] predicting CVD risk, especially in the low-risk group.
Assessment of abdominal visceral obesity and skeletal muscle quality
Abdominal CT examinations were performed using the Somatom Definition (Siemens Healthineers, Erlangen, Germany), Discovery CT750 HD (GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, WI, USA), or LightSpeed VCT scanner (GE Healthcare). For contrast enhancement, 100–150 mL of iopromide (Ultravist 370 or Ultravist 300, Bayer Schering Pharma, Berlin, Germany) was intravenously administered. Body composition was assessed using abdominal CT in conjunction with automated artificial intelligence software developed through a fully convolutional network segmentation technique. The software automatically selected axial CT slices at the inferior endplate level of the L3 vertebra. Subsequently, the selected CT images were automatically segmented to delineate the boundaries of the muscle area, visceral fat area (VFA), and subcutaneous fat area (SFA). An image analyst and a radiologist, both blinded to the clinical information of the subjects, reviewed all selected CT slices and segmented areas.
The abdominal VFA was delineated using fat tissue thresholds (−190 to −30 Hounsfield unit [HU]) [31]. The visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio (VSR) was calculated by dividing VFA by the SFA. For the evaluation of muscle quality, the cross-sectional areas of selected axial muscle images (i.e., psoas, paraspinal, transversus abdominis, rectus abdominis, quadratus lumborum, and internal and external obliques) were further segmented based on predetermined HU thresholds as follows: (1) NAMA (30 to 150 HU), reflecting healthy muscle with minimal intramuscular fat, (2) LAMA (−29 to 29 HU), reflecting unhealthy muscle with an intramuscular lipid pool, and (3) IMAT (−190 to −30 HU), reflecting the apparent fat tissue located between muscle groups and muscle fibers [32]. TAMA (−190 to 150 HU) was defined as the total area encompassing all skeletal muscles and fat tissues (TAMA=NAMA+LAMA+IMAT). As a representative index of muscle quality, we also calculated the NAMA/ TAMA index (NAMA/TAMA×100), where a lower value indicates a decreased proportion of healthy muscle (NAMA) and an increased proportion of myosteatosis (LAMA and IMAT).
Considering the significant differences in body composition between sexes, visceral obesity was defined as a VFA of ≥130 cm2 in men and ≥85 cm2 in women [31]. Myosteatosis was defined as a NAMA/TAMA index of <66.4 in men and <65.1 in women, using a T-score of <−2.0 as the cut-off point [6].
Statistical analysis
Statistical analyses were performed separately for each sex considering the differences in visceral fat composition and myosteatosis [6,31,33]. Men and women were further divided into subgroups based on baPWV categories or sex-specific cut-off values for VFA and the NAMA/TAMA index. Continuous variables with normal distributions are presented as mean±standard deviation, while continuous variables with skewed distributions are presented as median (interquartile range). Categorical variables are expressed as numbers and percentages. The characteristics of the study population were compared according to baPWV, VFA, and NAMA/TAMA index categories, using independent t-tests or the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and the chi-squared test for categorical variables. To assess the independent associations of visceral obesity and myosteatosis with arterial stiffness, multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs).
The following adjustment models were applied: Model 1 was adjusted for visceral obesity (assessed by VFA) or myosteatosis (assessed by the NAMA/TAMA index), meaning that visceral obesity was adjusted for myosteatosis or vice versa. Model 2 included additional adjustments for age, smoking pack-years, alcohol consumption, total METs, regular resistance exercise, hypertension, diabetes, use of lipid-lowering medications, family history of CVD, and menopausal status (adjusted only for women). Model 3 included further adjustments for laboratory values, including LDL-C, HDL-C, hsCRP, and HOMA-IR. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 21.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). P values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
Characteristics according to baPWV categories
The mean age of the 6,004 subjects was 53.8±8.3 years; 61.6% were male, and the mean BMI was 24.1±3.0 kg/m2. The vast majority of study subjects, 99.7% (5,988/6,004), had eGFRs of ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2, and the remaining 0.3% (16/6,004) had a median eGFR of 57 mL/min/1.73 m2 (interquartile range, 53 to 58). Among the total population, 38.4% (n=2,306) showed elevated baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec), including 38.1% (n=1,408) of men and 38.9% (n=898) of women. Tables 1 and 2 present the differences in baseline characteristics according to baPWV categories for men and women. In both sexes, subjects in higher baPWV categories were significantly older, had a greater number of pack-years of smoking, showed a higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension, and were more likely to use lipid-lowering medications. They also displayed unfavorable metabolic parameters, including higher BP, FPG, HbA1c, TG, AST, ALT, GGT, hsCRP, HOMA-IR, and WC. Women in higher baPWV categories had a higher BMI, while men showed no significant differences. Regarding fat and muscle quality indices based on abdominal CT scans, both men and women with higher baPWV exhibited significantly higher VFA and VSR. They also showed significantly lower NAMA and NAMA/TAMA indices, along with higher LAMA and IMAT indices.
Characteristics according to VFA and NAMA/TAMA values
We divided men and women according to sex-specific cut-off points for VFA and NAMA/TAMA values (Tables 3, 4). Men exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of visceral obesity compared to women (56.1% vs. 33.8%, P<0.001). Both men and women with higher VFA had a greater number of pack-years of smoking, a higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension, and were more likely to use lipid-lowering medications. They also displayed unfavorable metabolic profiles, including higher BP, FPG, HbA1c, TG, LDL-C, uric acid, AST, ALT, GGT, hsCRP, HOMA-IR, BMI, WC, VSR, and lower HDL-C levels. Men with higher VFA showed greater alcohol consumption and were less likely to engage in regular aerobic and resistance exercises, as well as physical activity. Women with higher VFA were significantly older and more likely to be postmenopausal. In both men and women, individuals with higher VFA showed higher LAMA and IMAT indices, along with a lower NAMA/TAMA index. They also showed significantly elevated baPWV values and a higher prevalence of increased baPWV (≥ 1,400 cm/sec), regardless of sex.
When we divided the subjects using sex-specific cut-off points for NAMA/TAMA values, as described in the methods section, women exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of myosteatosis compared to men (11.3% vs. 29.4%, P<0.001). Both men and women with myosteatosis (indicated by a lower NAMA/ TAMA index) were significantly older. Subjects with myosteatosis also demonstrated a higher prevalence of diabetes and hypertension and were more likely to use lipid-lowering medications. They exhibited unfavorable metabolic profiles, including higher BP, FPG, HbA1c, GGT, hsCRP, HOMA-IR, and lower HDL levels. They showed lower levels of physical activity and higher BMI, WC, VFA, SFA, and VSR. They also exhibited lower NAMA and higher LAMA and IMAT indices. Regardless of sex, individuals with myosteatosis showed significantly higher baPWV values than those without, as well as a higher prevalence of baPWV values ≥1,400 cm/sec.
Association of visceral obesity and myosteatosis with baPWV
To assess the association of visceral obesity and myosteatosis with baPWV, multivariate logistic regression analysis was applied, and ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for elevated baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) were calculated (Table 5). In the unadjusted model, the ORs for elevated baPWV were significantly higher in groups with visceral obesity, regardless of sex. When we adjusted for myosteatosis (model 1), the ORs in subjects with visceral obesity remained significantly higher in both men and women. After further adjustments (models 2, 3), the ORs consistently remained elevated in men with statistical significance but were attenuated in women with visceral obesity. In the fully adjusted model, which included various clinical and laboratory metabolic risk factors (model 3), the ORs were 1.32 (95% CI, 1.10 to 1.60) in men (P=0.004) and 1.24 (95% CI, 0.38–4.04) in women (P=0.723).
When we analyzed the association between myosteatosis and baPWV, both men and women with myosteatosis showed significantly increased ORs for elevated baPWV in the unadjusted model. After adjusting for visceral obesity (model 1), the ORs remained significantly higher in both sexes; however, they became non-significant after further adjustments in models 2 and 3 for men. In contrast, women with myosteatosis consistently showed higher ORs for elevated baPWV across various adjusted models (models 2 and 3). In the fully adjusted model (model 3), the ORs for elevated baPWV were 3.26 (95% CI, 1.13 to 9.44) in women (P=0.029), and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.65 to 1.10) in men (P=0.213). We conducted an additional analysis stratifying women by menopausal status (Supplemental Table S1). Among premenopausal women, the association between ectopic fat deposition and elevated baPWV was no longer significant after adjustment. In contrast, among postmenopausal women, myosteatosis remained significantly associated with elevated baPWV, with an OR of 23.05 (95% CI, 3.63 to 146.52) in the fully adjusted model 3 (P=0.001).
In this study, we found that ectopic fat infiltration, including visceral obesity and myosteatosis, was significantly associated with increased arterial stiffness. After adjusting for multiple CVD risk factors, visceral obesity was significantly associated with elevated baPWV, particularly in men, while myosteatosis showed a significant association in women. To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that myosteatosis, as indicated by a low NAMA/TAMA index segmented by abdominal CT, in conjunction with visceral obesity, is associated with increased baPWV.
This study demonstrates that the types of ectopic fat deposition affecting arterial stiffness vary by sex. After adjustments, visceral obesity was found to increase the risk of arterial stiffness in men, while myosteatosis was significant in women. Although the underlying reasons remain unclear, the relatively higher prevalence of visceral obesity in men and myosteatosis in women may contribute to these differences. Men are known to accumulate more abdominal visceral fat due to the effect of testosterone [34]. Accordingly, despite applying a higher sex-specific cut-off for VFA in men (≥130 cm2 vs. ≥85 cm2 in women), its prevalence was significantly higher in men than in women (56.1% vs. 33.8%, P<0.001), potentially amplifying its adverse impact on arterial stiffness. Similarly, although a lower NAMA/TAMA index cut-off value for myosteatosis was applied in women (<65.1) than in men (<66.4), a greater proportion of subjects was classified below this threshold (men vs. women; 11.3% vs. 29.4%, P<0.001), which may have made the harmful effects of myosteatosis more pronounced in women. Additionally, since the majority of women in our study were postmenopausal (70.9%), declining estrogen levels may contribute to a decrease in muscle mass [35,36]. Previously, we also demonstrated that the prevalence of myosteatosis, defined by the same criterion used in this study (NAMA/TAMA T-score <–2) increases rapidly in postmenopausal women [37]. Furthermore, compared to men, women have a relatively higher proportion of type I muscle fibers [38], which possess greater oxidative capacity and tend to accumulate more intramyocellular lipids with aging [36]. Therefore, in post- or perimenopausal women with decreased estradiol levels, the reduced mitochondrial function and regenerative capacity of type I muscle fibers [35,39] along with increased muscular fat deposition [36], may lead to more deleterious effects of myosteatosis compared to men. In line with this, when we conducted an additional analysis stratified by menopausal status, myosteatosis was more significantly associated with elevated baPWV in the postmenopausal group (Supplemental Table S1).
As aging progresses, arterial stiffening leads to an increase in systolic and pulse BP, thereby elevating cardiac afterload [1,3]. This heightened afterload contributes to left ventricular hypertrophy and heart failure, while also diminishing coronary perfusion [1,3]. Furthermore, impaired arterial buffering results in the excessive transmission of pulsatile energy to target organs, including the brain, kidneys, and heart, ultimately causing end-organ damage [1,3]. Pulse wave velocity (PWV) is the gold standard method for assessing arterial stiffness, and among its various modalities, the baPWV measures both central and peripheral arterial stiffness [1,3]. Notably, baPWV is easy to measure, highly reliable and reproducible, noninvasive, and free from radiation exposure, making it an advantageous tool for population-based screening in clinical practice [3]. Several studies have demonstrated that an increase in baPWV is associated with a heightened risk of CV events, CV mortality, and all-cause mortality [4042]. Furthermore, when baPWV was incorporated into a CVD prediction model, net reclassification improved by approximately 25% [41]. In addition, the study reported that baPWV significantly predicted future CVD events in both individuals with and without hypertension; however, the predictive strength was stronger in those without hypertension, suggesting that baPWV plays an important role in assessing future CVD risk in low-risk populations [41]. The current Japanese Atherosclerosis Society guidelines propose baPWV cutoffs: normal (<1,400 cm/sec), borderline (1,400–1,800 cm/sec), and abnormal (>1,800 cm/sec) [29]. A prior study that informed these guidelines indicated that a baPWV ≥1,400 cm/sec is an independent predictor for distinguishing patients with atherosclerotic CVD, particularly in the general population [30]. Although we adopted an elevated PWV cut-off (≥1,400 cm/sec) based on existing guidelines and previous studies [1,29,30,43], further research is needed to determine whether this threshold is applicable across different ethnic populations.
During aging, adipose inflammation leads to the redistribution of fat to the intra-abdominal area (visceral fat) and fatty infiltrations in skeletal muscles [6,7]. The deposition of intramyocellular lipids further promotes lipotoxicity, which induces and exacerbates mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, insulin resistance, and inflammation [7]. These molecular changes interact with one another, creating a vicious cycle that contributes to sarcopenic obesity and vascular aging [7,8]. Importantly, recent studies have reported that myosteatosis precedes muscle atrophy even before sarcopenia is diagnosed [7,10]. Although previous studies have demonstrated an association between sarcopenia and arterial stiffness [1115], they had limitations in that muscle quality was not evaluated, and the analyses were primarily restricted to older populations. In this regard, our study is strengthened by the simultaneous measurement of myosteatosis and visceral fat in a relatively younger population, allowing us to analyze the association between ectopic fat infiltration and arterial stiffness. Our results indicate that subjects with a lower NAMA/TAMA index (myosteatosis) or higher VFA showed unfavorable metabolic characteristics and a higher prevalence of elevated baPWV. For the timely diagnosis and intervention of metabolic changes before the onset of sarcopenia, early assessment of muscle quality and visceral fat using opportunistically obtained CT images may be crucial in preventing vascular aging [7,8].
Our study has several limitations. First, the cross-sectional design does not permit causal inference or clarification of the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms linking myosteatosis, visceral obesity, and arterial stiffness. A decline in muscle mass reduces energy expenditure and exacerbates insulin resistance, thereby promoting ectopic fat accumulation [7]. The subsequent increase in ectopic fat further aggravates insulin resistance and systemic inflammation, leading to muscle atrophy and establishing a vicious cycle of metabolic deterioration that contributes to the progression of arterial stiffness [17]. In addition, arterial stiffness reduces blood flow, resulting in further loss of muscle mass [44]. In line with this, our study demonstrated that individuals with myosteatosis exhibited a high prevalence of visceral obesity and elevated PWV, while those with visceral obesity also showed a high prevalence of myosteatosis and elevated PWV. However, due to the cross-sectional design, it was difficult to establish a definitive causal relationship. Second, we did not evaluate appendicular muscle quality or muscle strength, both of which are important determinants in diagnosing sarcopenia and are closely linked to metabolic disorders [1215]. Lastly, as our study was conducted among Korean men and women who voluntarily underwent simultaneous abdominal CT scans and baPWV assessments during routine health examinations, selection bias may have occurred, limiting the generalizability of our findings to other populations or ethnicities.
However, our study also has several strengths. First, we specifically divided the CT-measured abdominal muscle area into good-quality (NAMA) and poor-quality (LAMA and IMAT) components, and we assessed VFA in a relatively large cohort of subjects (n=6,004). Unlike previous studies that merely evaluated the quantity of muscle or visceral obesity [16,17], our study offers the advantage of accurately assessing muscle quality by subdividing the muscle area on CT images. Second, to elucidate the clinical significance of ectopic fat infiltration in relatively healthy individuals suitable for a primary prevention setting, we excluded participants with a history of CVDs—such as myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and/or cerebrovascular accidents—as well as those with a history of cancer. Furthermore, by excluding individuals with an ABI of ≤0.9 or >1.4, we minimized the potential inaccuracies in PWV measurements caused by arterial obstruction or vascular calcification [3]. Third, considering the established differences in muscle mass and ectopic fat deposition between men and women [6,18], we conducted separate analyses by sex. Men are reported to have a significantly higher peak muscle mass and tend to accumulate more abdominal visceral fat compared to women [34,45]. Given the variations in adipose tissue distribution and muscle mass influenced by sex hormones and lifestyle risk factors [34], it is appropriate to perform sex-specific analyses. Lastly, we adjusted for multiple metabolic risk factors likely associated with arterial stiffness, including age, smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity levels, resistance exercise, diabetes, hypertension, use of lipid-lowering medications, family history of CVD, menopausal status, LDL-C, HDL-C, hsCRP, and HOMA-IR. Notably, we adjusted for visceral fat adiposity in the group with myosteatosis and for myosteatosis in the group with visceral fat adiposity, allowing us to analyze which type of ectopic fat accumulation exerts a more significant influence on arterial stiffness according to sex. In conclusion, our study demonstrated that both visceral obesity and myosteatosis were significantly associated with increased arterial stiffness in a primary prevention setting. After adjusting for all potential CV risk factors, visceral obesity remained significantly associated with arterial stiffness in men, whereas myosteatosis showed a significant association in women. Timely screening of individuals at risk for sarcopenic obesity, along with the implementation of effective preventive strategies, may help delay the progression of vascular aging and CVDs. Further well-designed interventional studies aimed at improving myosteatosis and visceral obesity are warranted to elucidate the causal role of ectopic fat deposition in the prevention of arterial stiffness.

Supplemental Table S1.

ORs for Elevated baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) according to Visceral Fat Obesity and Myosteatosis according to Menopausal Status in Women
enm-2025-2734-Supplemental-Table-S1.pdf

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Prof. Namkug Kim from the Department of Convergence Medicine at Asan Medical Center for developing the automated artificial intelligence software used for abdominal CT segmentation. Also, we thank Dr. Joon Seo Lim from the Scientific Publications Team at Asan Medical Center for his editorial assistance in preparing this manuscript.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conception or design: M.J.L., H.K.K. Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: M.J.L., H.K.K., S.H.L. Drafting the work or revising: M.J.L., H.K.K., E.H.K., S.J.B., H.J.N., C.H.J., W.J.L. Final approval of the manuscript: M.J.L., H.K.K., E. H.K., S.J.B., H.J.N., S.H.L., C.H.J., W.J.L.

enm-2025-2734f1.jpg
Table 1
Characteristics according to the baPWV Categories in Men
Characteristic Overall baPWV, cm/sec P value
<1,400 ≥1,400
Number (%) 3,696 2,288 (61.9) 1,408 (38.1) -
Age, yr 53.4±8.2 51.4±7.2 56.8±8.6 <0.001
Systolic BP, mm Hg 125.6±13.4 122.2±11.9 131.0±13.8 <0.001
Diastolic BP, mm Hg 80.8±10.4 78.9±9.6 83.8±10.9 <0.001
Smoking status <0.001
 Non-smoker 786 (21.3) 464 (20.3) 322 (22.9)
 Former smoker 1,661 (45.0) 992 (43.4) 669 (47.6)
 Current smoker 1,241 (33.6) 828 (36.3) 413 (29.4)
Pack-years of smoking 28.0 (16.5–40.5) 27.0 (15.0–38.0) 30.0 (18.0–45.0) <0.001
Diabetes 587 (15.9) 263 (11.5) 324 (23.0) <0.001
Hypertension 1,562 (42.3) 738 (32.3) 824 (58.5) <0.001
Lipid-lowering drugs 437 (11.8) 224 (9.8) 213 (15.1) <0.001
Family history of CVD 117 (3.2) 74 (3.2) 43 (3.1) 0.761
Alcohol intake, g/day 15.0 (4.1–46.5) 14.4 (4.5–46.5) 15.1 (3.1–46.7) 0.243
Regular aerobic exercise 322 (8.7) 197 (8.6) 125 (8.9) 0.779
Regular resistance exercise 554 (15.0) 355 (15.5) 199 (14.1) 0.253
Total METs, min/wk 1,110 (480–2,220) 1,116 (495–2,146) 1,080 (417–2,295) 0.457
FPG, mg/dL 105.2±21.6 102.6±19.0 109.2±24.8 <0.001
HbA1c, % 5.5 (5.3–5.9) 5.5 (5.3–5.8) 5.6 (5.4–6.1) <0.001
Total cholesterol, mg/dL 193.3±34.7 195.1±33.7 190.4±36.1 <0.001
TG, mg/dL 120 (85–165) 118 (84–161) 123 (88–171) 0.013
LDL-C, mg/dL 123.6±30.6 125.2±29.8 120.9±31.7 <0.001
HDL-C, mg/dL 50.7±12.5 51.0±12.9 50.3±12.0 0.104
Uric acid, mg/dL 6.0 (5.2–6.8) 6.0 (5.2–6.8) 5.9 (5.1–6.8) 0.044
AST, U/L 27 (22–33) 26 (22–33) 27 (23–34) 0.001
ALT, U/L 25 (19–35) 25 (18–35) 26 (19–35) 0.025
GGT, U/L 29 (20–48) 28 (19–45) 32 (21–54) <0.001
hsCRP, mg/L 0.6 (0.3–1.2) 0.5 (0.3–1.0) 0.6 (0.3–1.4) <0.001
HOMA-IR 1.33 (0.77–2.03) 1.27 (0.73–1.92) 1.44 (0.83–2.22) <0.001
BMI, kg/m2 24.9±2.8 24.9±2.9 24.8±2.8 0.280
WC, cm 88.4±7.8 88.1±7.8 88.8±7.8 0.013
VFA, cm2 139.0 (96.4–182.3) 132.9 (91.4–175.3) 149.3 (108.3–193.1) <0.001
SFA, cm2 117.1 (93.3–145.8) 119.2 (93.7–149.2) 114.6 (93.0–141.0) 0.002
VSR 1.12 (0.83–1.46) 1.05 (0.78–1.36) 1.24 (0.92–1.59) <0.001
NAMA, cm2 132.1±21.3 135.7±20.8 126.3±20.8 <0.001
LAMA, cm2 31.6 (25.4–39.2) 30.9 (25.0–38.3) 32.7 (26.4–40.4) <0.001
IMAT, cm2 8.5 (6.4–11.4) 8.2 (6.1–11.1) 9.0 (6.7–12.0) <0.001
TAMA, cm2 175.0±22.8 177.6±22.5 170.8±22.7 <0.001
NAMA/TAMA indexa 76.8 (71.2–81.0) 77.6 (72.3–81.7) 75.0 (70.0–79.6) <0.001
baPWV, cm/sec 1,346.5 (1,242.0–1,475.4) 1,264.0 (1,195.5–1,328.0) 1,524 (1,452–1,645) <0.001

Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; VFA, visceral fat area; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area.

a NAMA/TAMA index=normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

Table 2
Characteristics according to baPWV Categories in Women
Characteristic Overall baPWV, cm/sec P value
<1,400 ≥1,400
Number (%) 2,308 1,410 (61.1) 898 (38.9) -
Age, yr 54.3±8.3 51.2±6.9 59.0±8.1 <0.001
Systolic BP, mm Hg 118.8±15.0 113.0±12.1 127.7±14.6 <0.001
Diastolic BP, mm Hg 73.9±10.6 70.7±9.7 78.8±10.2 <0.001
Smoking status 0.415
 Non-smoker 2,158 (93.7) 1,313 (93.2) 845 (94.5)
 Former smoker 68 (3.0) 46 (3.3) 22 (2.5)
 Current smoker 77 (3.3) 50 (3.5) 27 (3.0)
Pack-years of smoking 10.0 (6.0–23.0) 10.0 (5.5–18.5) 13.8 (7.1–28.4) 0.031
Diabetes 175 (7.6) 43 (3.0) 132 (14.7) <0.001
Hypertension 595 (25.8) 178 (12.6) 417 (46.4) <0.001
Lipid-lowering drugs 283 (12.3) 97 (6.9) 186 (20.7) <0.001
Family history of CVD 77 (3.3) 52 (3.7) 25 (2.8) 0.238
Alcohol intake, g/day 0.4 (0.0–2.1) 0.5 (0.0–2.4) 0.0 (0.0–1.1) <0.001
Regular aerobic exercise 175 (7.6) 92 (6.5) 83 (9.2) 0.016
Regular resistance exercise 217 (9.4) 133 (9.4) 84 (9.4) 0.950
Total METs, min/wk 792 (318–1,914) 792 (339–1,964) 848 (297–1,827) 0.811
Menopausal status <0.001
 Premenopausal 672 (29.1) 562 (39.9) 110 (12.2)
 Postmenopausal 1,205 (52.2) 609 (43.2) 596 (66.4)
 Surgical menopause 431 (18.7) 239 (17.0) 192 (21.4)
FPG, mg/dL 98.5±15.9 95.2±11.7 103.8±19.6 <0.001
HbA1c, % 5.5 (5.3–5.8) 5.4 (5.2–5.6) 5.6 (5.4–6.0) <0.001
Total cholesterol, mg/dL 199.4±35.8 198.2±35.5 201.3±36.3 0.042
TG, mg/dL 88 (65–123) 82 (61–114) 99 (73–140) <0.001
LDL-C, mg/dL 124.6±32.1 123.0±31.0 127.1±33.6 0.003
HDL-C, mg/dL 60.6±15.0 62.0±15.3 58.4±14.3 <0.001
Uric acid, mg/dL 4.3 (3.7–4.9) 4.2 (3.7–4.8) 4.4 (3.9–5.1) <0.001
AST, U/L 24 (20–30) 24 (20–29) 25 (21–31) <0.001
ALT, U/L 18 (14–25) 17 (13–24) 20 (15–27) <0.001
GGT, U/L 15 (11–21) 14 (11–19) 16 (12–24) <0.001
hsCRP, mg/L 0.4 (0.2–0.9) 0.3 (0.2–0.7) 0.5 (0.3–1.1) <0.001
HOMA-IR 1.06 (0.63–1.66) 0.92 (0.56–1.44) 1.39 (0.81–2.00) <0.001
BMI, kg/m2 23.0±3.0 22.5±2.9 23.7±3.1 <0.001
WC, cm 79.4±8.5 77.7±8.0 82.2±8.4 <0.001
VFA, cm2 64.8 (38.6–99.2) 54.2 (31.8–82.3) 85.9 (56.3–120.9) <0.001
SFA, cm2 143.5 (115.2–175.9) 137.9 (110.4–169.9) 150.5 (119.6–183.2) <0.001
VSR 0.43 (0.29–0.64) 0.37 (0.25–0.54) 0.55 (0.37–0.76) <0.001
NAMA, cm2 80.7±13.6 83.2±12.7 76.9±13.9 <0.001
LAMA, cm2 25.4 (20.3–31.9) 24.1 (19.5–30.0) 27.8 (21.8–34.8) <0.001
IMAT, cm2 8.3 (6.0–11.4) 7.5 (5.5–10.2) 9.6 (6.8–13.0) <0.001
TAMA, cm2 117.0±14.1 117.1±13.5 116.9±14.9 0.782
NAMA/TAMA indexa 70.9 (63.6–76.3) 72.4 (66.3–77.7) 67.0 (59.7–74.2) <0.001
baPWV, cm/sec 1,347.5 (1,224.5–1,496.0) 1,250.8 (1,176.5–1,325.5) 1,543 (1,462–1,678) <0.001

Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; VFA, visceral fat area; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, inter-muscular adipose tissue; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area.

a NAMA/TAMA index = normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

Table 3
Characteristics according to Visceral Fat Obesity Categories
Men P value Women P value
VFA <130 cm2 VFA ≥ 130 cm2 VFA <85 cm2 VFA ≥ 85 cm2
Number (%) 1,621 (43.9) 2,075 (56.1) - 1,527 (66.2) 781 (33.8) -
Age, yr 53.3±8.3 53.6±8.1 0.307 52.3±7.8 58.2±7.9 <0.001
Systolic BP, mm Hg 122.7±13.2 127.8±13.0 <0.001 115.2±13.6 125.8±15.0 <0.001
Diastolic BP, mm Hg 78.4±10.2 82.6±10.2 <0.001 72.0±10.5 77.6±9.8 <0.001
Smoking status <0.001 0.182
 Non-smoker 393 (24.3) 393 (19.0) 1,421 (93.1) 737 (95.0)
 Former smoker 681 (42.1) 980 (47.3) 51 (3.3) 17 (2.2)
 Current smoker 544 (33.6) 697 (33.7) 55 (3.6) 22 (2.8)
Pack-years of smoking 26 (15–38) 30 (18–42) <0.001 10.0 (6.0–19.0) 13.3 (7.4–32.3) 0.049
Diabetes 179 (11.0) 408 (19.7) <0.001 55 (3.6) 120 (15.4) <0.001
Hypertension 486 (30.0) 1,076 (51.9) <0.001 261 (17.1) 334 (42.8) <0.001
Lipid-lowering drugs 129 (8.0) 308 (14.8) <0.001 133 (8.7) 150 (19.2) <0.001
Family history of CVD 50 (3.1) 67 (3.2) 0.804 54 (3.5) 23 (2.9) 0.454
Alcohol intake, g/day 10.9 (3.2–38.0) 21.3 (4.9–52.8) <0.001 0.4 (0.0–2.3) 0.0 (0.0–1.1) <0.001
Regular aerobic exercise 167 (10.3) 155 (7.5) 0.002 113 (7.4) 62 (7.9) 0.644
Regular resistance exercise 284 (17.5) 270 (13.0) <0.001 138 (9.0) 79 (10.1) 0.401
Total METs, min/wk 1,179 (495–2,376) 1,032 (438–2,100) 0.010 837 (360–1,980) 792 (297–1,746) 0.104
Menopausal status - <0.001
 Premenopausal - - 552 (36.1) 120 (15.4)
 Postmenopausal - - 715 (46.8) 490 (62.7)
 Surgical menopause - - 260 (17.0) 171 (21.9)
FPG, mg/dL 101.4±19.0 108.1±23.0 <0.001 95.3±12.3 104.9±19.6 <0.001
HbA1c, % 5.4 (5.2–5.7) 5.6 (5.4–6.0) <0.001 5.4 (5.2–5.6) 5.7 (5.4–6.0) <0.001
Total cholesterol, mg/dL 191.3±33.2 194.9±35.8 0.002 197.1±34.2 203.8±38.4 <0.001
TG, mg/dL 99 (73–136) 137 (101–188) <0.001 78 (60–110) 109 (83–149.5) <0.001
LDL-C, mg/dL 121.8±29.4 125.0±31.4 0.001 121.1±30.5 131.4±33.9 <0.001
HDL-C, mg/dL 53.9±13.3 48.1±11.3 <0.001 63.6±15.0 54.8±13.2 <0.001
Uric acid, mg/dL 5.7 (5.0–6.4) 6.2 (5.4–7.1) <0.001 4.1 (3.6–4.7) 4.6 (4.0–5.3) <0.001
AST, U/L 25 (21–31) 27 (23–35) <0.001 24 (20–29) 25 (21–31) <0.001
ALT, U/L 22 (17–29) 29 (21–40) <0.001 17 (13–23) 22 (16–29) <0.001
GGT, U/L 23 (17–34) 35 (24–58) <0.001 13 (10–18) 18 (14–27) <0.001
hsCRP, mg/L 0.4 (0.2–0.9) 0.7 (0.4–1.3) <0.001 0.3 (0.2–0.6) 0.7 (0.4–1.4) <0.001
HOMA-IR 0.87 (0.53–1.38) 1.73 (1.14–2.44) <0.001 0.84 (0.53–1.34) 1.64 (1.06–2.27) <0.001
BMI, kg/m2 23.0±2.1 26.3±2.5 <0.001 21.7±2.2 25.5±2.8 <0.001
WC, cm 82.9±5.7 92.7±6.4 <0.001 75.6±6.2 86.9±7.2 <0.001
VFA, cm2 91.0 (62.7–111.2) 176.1 (152.1–210.1) <0.001 47.2 (29.4–64.4) 116.4 (98.4–139.0) <0.001
SFA, cm2 99.3 (78.1–121.9) 131.8 (109.1–160.0) <0.001 131.1 (105.7–158.5) 170.6 (141.8–206.5) <0.001
VSR 0.83 (0.63–1.05) 1.36 (1.10–1.68) <0.001 0.34 (0.23–0.45) 0.70 (0.57–0.85) <0.001
NAMA, cm2 131.2±20.9 132.8±21.6 0.024 82.0±12.7 78.2±14.9 <0.001
LAMA, cm2 26.9 (22.2–32.6) 35.7 (29.2–43.5) <0.001 22.9 (18.8–27.8) 31.7 (25.5–38.2) <0.001
IMAT, cm2 7.2 (5.5–9.6) 9.6 (7.3–12.8) <0.001 7.1 (5.3–9.5) 11.0 (8.3–14.9) <0.001
TAMA, cm2 167.2±21.5 181.0±22.0 <0.001 113.8±12.6 123.3±14.7 <0.001
NAMA/TAMA indexa 79.2 (74.8–82.9) 74.4 (69.0–79.0) <0.001 73.2 (67.2–78.2) 64.9 (57.1–71.7) <0.001
baPWV, cm/sec 1,319 (1,231–1,451) 1,371 (1,254–1,496) <0.001 1,302 (1,199–1,427) 1,448 (1,321–1,615) <0.001
baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) 520 (32.1) 888 (42.8) <0.001 444 (29.1) 454 (58.1) <0.001

Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

VFA, visceral fat area; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate amino-transferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area; baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity.

a NAMA/TAMA index=normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

Table 4
Characteristics according to Myosteatosis Categories
Men P value Women P value
NAMA/TAMA≥ 66.4 NAMA/TAMA <66.4 NAMA/TAMA ≥ 65.1 NAMA/TAMA <65.1
Number (%) 3,277 (88.7) 419 (11.3) - 1,630 (70.6) 678 (29.4) -
Age, yr 52.9±7.9 57.6±9.5 <0.001 52.5±7.8 58.5±8.1 <0.001
Systolic BP, mm Hg 125.1±13.2 129.0±14.3 <0.001 116.6±14.4 123.8±15.2 <0.001
Diastolic BP, mm Hg 80.5±10.3 82.5±11.2 0.001 73.0±10.6 76.1±10.3 <0.001
Smoking status
 Non-smoker 698 (21.3) 88 (21.1) 0.267 1,522 (93.6) 636 (93.9) 0.951
 Former smoker 1,459 (44.6) 202 (48.4) 49 (3.0) 19 (2.8)
 Current smoker 1,114 (34.1) 127 (30.5) 55 (3.4) 22 (3.2)
Pack-years of smoking 28 (16–40) 32 (18–46) 0.002 10.0 (5.5–20.0) 12.5 (6.8–30.0) 0.084
Diabetes 499 (15.2) 88 (21.0) 0.002 91 (5.6) 84 (12.4) <0.001
Hypertension 1,304 (39.8) 258 (61.6) <0.001 344 (21.1) 251 (37.0) <0.001
Lipid-lowering drugs 375 (11.4) 62 (14.8) 0.045 175 (10.7) 108 (15.9) 0.001
Family history of CVD 99 (3.0) 18 (4.3) 0.160 61 (3.7) 16 (2.4) 0.092
Alcohol intake, g/day 15.0 (4.2–46.5) 14.4 (3.2–46.5) 0.528 0.4 (0.0–2.3) 0.0 (0.0–1.4) <0.001
Regular aerobic exercise 290 (8.8) 32 (7.6) 0.407 128 (7.9) 47 (6.9) 0.447
Regular resistance exercise 521 (15.9) 33 (7.9) <0.001 158 (9.7) 59 (8.7) 0.457
Total METs, min/wk 1,158 (495–2,262) 960 (318–1,908) <0.001 876 (360–1,980) 756 (240–1,684) 0.007
Menopausal status - <0.001
 Premenopausal - - 591 (36.3) 81 (11.9)
 Postmenopausal - - 767 (47.1) 438 (64.6)
 Surgical menopause - - 272 (16.7) 159 (23.5)
FPG, mg/dL 104.6±21.0 109.1±25.4 0.001 97.0±14.3 102.3±18.6 <0.001
HbA1c, % 5.5 (5.3–5.9) 5.7 (5.4–6.0) <0.001 5.4 (5.2–5.7) 5.6 (5.4–5.9) <0.001
Total cholesterol, mg/dL 194.0±34.7 187.8±34.1 0.001 197.8±35.0 203.2±37.5 0.001
TG, mg/dL 120 (85–165) 119 (88–165) 0.841 85 (63–119) 98 (72–135) <0.001
LDL-C, mg/dL 124.0±30.5 119.9±31.2 0.009 122.7±31.5 129.1±32.9 <0.001
HDL-C, mg/dL 50.9±12.6 49.2±11.8 0.009 61.6±15.3 58.0±14.0 <0.001
Uric acid, mg/dL 6.0 (5.2–6.8) 6.0 (5.0–6.9) 0.959 4.2 (3.7–4.9) 4.4 (3.9–5.1) <0.001
AST, U/L 27 (22–33) 27 (22–34) 0.665 24 (20–29) 25 (21–31) 0.001
ALT, U/L 25 (19–35) 26 (19–36) 0.215 18 (14–24) 20 (15–26) <0.001
GGT, U/L 29 (19–47) 32 (22–51) 0.005 14 (11–19) 16 (12–24) <0.001
hsCRP, mg/L 0.5 (0.3–1.1) 0.8 (0.4–1.7) <0.001 0.3 (0.2–0.7) 0.6 (0.3–1.2) <0.001
HOMA-IR 1.29 (0.75–1.96) 1.72 (0.95–2.52) <0.001 0.98 (0.58–1.56) 1.31 (0.77–2.00) <0.001
BMI, kg/m2 24.6±2.6 26.9±3.4 <0.001 22.3±2.6 24.6±3.2 <0.001
WC, cm 87.5±7.2 95.6±8.7 <0.001 77.1±7.3 85.1±8.4 <0.001
VFA, cm2 134.3 (93.2–175.0) 190.6 (141.9–232.9) <0.001 55.2 (31.8–83.0) 95.6 (65.2–129.6) <0.001
SFA, cm2 114.6 (91.5–142.2) 144.7 (114.1–193.6) <0.001 133.6 (107.2–163.4) 169.2 (137.1–204.6) <0.001
VSR 1.11 (0.82–1.45) 1.20 (0.90–1.55) <0.001 0.38 (0.26–0.57) 0.54 (0.39–0.74) <0.001
NAMA, cm2 135.2±19.8 108.6±17.9 <0.001 85.8±11.1 68.6±11.0 <0.001
LAMA, cm2 30.2 (24.8–36.2) 51.2 (45.6–59.6) <0.001 22.3 (18.7–26.3) 35.9 (31.5–41.9) <0.001
IMAT, cm2 8.0 (6.1–10.3) 15.6 (13.0–18.9) <0.001 6.8 (5.3–8.7) 13.5 (11.2–17.1) <0.001
TAMA, cm2 174.5±22.4 178.2±25.8 0.005 115.5±13.2 120.6±15.3 <0.001
NAMA/TAMA indexa 77.6 (73.4–81.5) 62.4 (58.8–64.8) <0.001 74.1 (70.3–78.3) 59.2 (53.3–62.4) <0.001
baPWV, cm/sec 1,337 (1,238–1,466) 1,399 (1,282–1,551) <0.001 1,313 (1,209–1,446) 1,431 (1,304–1,590) <0.001
baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) 1,199 (36.6) 209 (49.9) <0.001 523 (32.1) 375 (55.3) <0.001

Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; VFA, visceral fat area; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue; baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity.

a NAMA/TAMA index=normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

Table 5
ORs for Elevated baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) according to Visceral Fat Obesity and Myosteatosis
Subgroup Visceral fat obesitya Myosteatosisb
OR (95% CI) P value OR (95% CI) P value
Men
 Unadjusted 1.58 (1.38–1.81) <0.001 1.73 (1.41–2.12) <0.001
 Model 1 1.50 (1.31–1.73) <0.001 1.54 (1.25–1.89) <0.001
 Model 2 1.39 (1.17–1.66) <0.001 0.86 (0.66–1.12) 0.270
 Model 3 1.32 (1.10–1.60) 0.004 0.85 (0.65–1.10) 0.213
Women
 Unadjusted 3.39 (2.83–4.05) <0.001 2.62 (2.18–3.15) <0.001
 Model 1 2.80 (2.32–3.39) <0.001 1.89 (1.55–2.30) <0.001
 Model 2 1.36 (0.45–4.09) 0.591 3.27 (1.14–9.41) 0.028
 Model 3 1.24 (0.38–4.04) 0.723 3.26 (1.13–9.44) 0.029

Model 1: adjusted for visceral fat obesity or myosteatosis. Model 2: model 1+age, smoking pack-years, alcohol consumption, total metabolic equivalent of tasks, regular resistance exercise, hypertension, diabetes, use of lipid-lowering drugs, family history of cardiovascular disease, and menopausal status (only in women). Model 3: model 2+low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance.

OR, odds ratio; baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity; CI, confidence interval.

a Cut-off values for visceral fat obesity were visceral fat area (VFA) ≥130 cm2 in men and VFA ≥85 cm2 in women;

b Cut-off values for myosteatosis were normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA)/total abdominal muscle area (TAMA) index <66.4 in men and NAMA/TAMA index <65.1 in women.

  • 1. Park JB, Sharman JE, Li Y, Munakata M, Shirai K, Chen CH, et al. Expert consensus on the clinical use of pulse wave velocity in Asia. Pulse (Basel) 2022;10:1–18.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 2. Zheng H, Wu S, Liu X, Qiu G, Chen S, Wu Y, et al. Association between arterial stiffness and new-onset heart failure: the Kailuan study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2023;43:e104–11.ArticlePubMed
  • 3. Stone K, Veerasingam D, Meyer ML, Heffernan KS, Higgins S, Maria Bruno R, et al. Reimagining the value of brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity as a biomarker of cardiovascular disease risk: a call to action on behalf of VascAgeNet. Hypertension 2023;80:1980–92.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 4. Nemcsik J, Cseprekal O, Tisler A. Measurement of arterial stiffness: a novel tool of risk stratification in hypertension. Adv Exp Med Biol 2017;956:475–88.ArticlePubMed
  • 5. Umemura S, Arima H, Arima S, Asayama K, Dohi Y, Hirooka Y, et al. The Japanese Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension (JSH 2019). Hypertens Res 2019;42:1235–481.PubMed
  • 6. Kim HK, Kim KW, Kim EH, Lee MJ, Bae SJ, Ko Y, et al. Age-related changes in muscle quality and development of diagnostic cutoff points for myosteatosis in lumbar skeletal muscles measured by CT scan. Clin Nutr 2021;40:4022–8.ArticlePubMed
  • 7. Li CW, Yu K, Shyh-Chang N, Jiang Z, Liu T, Ma S, et al. Pathogenesis of sarcopenia and the relationship with fat mass: descriptive review. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2022;13:781–94.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 8. Damluji AA, Alfaraidhy M, AlHajri N, Rohant NN, Kumar M, Al Malouf C, et al. Sarcopenia and cardiovascular diseases. Circulation 2023;147:1534–53.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 9. Nachit M, De Rudder M, Thissen JP, Schakman O, Bouzin C, Horsmans Y, et al. Myosteatosis rather than sarcopenia associates with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease preclinical models. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2021;12:144–58.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 10. Geladari E, Alexopoulos T, Kontogianni MD, Vasilieva L, Mani I, Tenta R, et al. The presence of myosteatosis is associated with age, severity of liver disease and poor outcome and may represent a prodromal phase of sarcopenia in patients with liver cirrhosis. J Clin Med 2023;12:3332.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 11. Piotrowicz K, Klich-Raczka A, Skalska A, Gryglewska B, Grodzicki T, Gasowski J. Pulse wave velocity and sarcopenia in older persons: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022;19:6477.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 12. Sun T, Ma Z, Gao L, Wang Y, Xie H. Correlation between sarcopenia and arteriosclerosis in elderly community dwellers: a multicenter study. J Nutr Health Aging 2021;25:692–7.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 13. Zhang L, Guo Q, Feng BL, Wang CY, Han PP, Hu J, et al. A cross-sectional study of the association between arterial stiffness and sarcopenia in Chinese community-dwelling elderly using the Asian working group for sarcopenia criteria. J Nutr Health Aging 2019;23:195–201.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 14. Rong YD, Bian AL, Hu HY, Ma Y, Zhou XZ. A cross-sectional study of the relationships between different components of sarcopenia and brachial ankle pulse wave velocity in community-dwelling elderly. BMC Geriatr 2020;20:115.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 15. Zhang Y, Miyai N, Abe K, Utsumi M, Uematsu Y, Terada K, et al. Muscle mass reduction, low muscle strength, and their combination are associated with arterial stiffness in community-dwelling elderly population: the Wakayama Study. J Hum Hypertens 2021;35:446–54.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 16. Kim HL, Ahn DW, Kim SH, Lee DS, Yoon SH, Zo JH, et al. Association between body fat parameters and arterial stiffness. Sci Rep 2021;11:20536.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 17. Bak HR, Jang HJ, Koh HM, Ko NG, Cho YH. Association between sarcopenic obesity and arterial stiffness in Korean adults. J Clin Med 2024;13:6108.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 18. Kim EH, Kim HK, Lee MJ, Bae SJ, Kim KW, Choe J. Association between type 2 diabetes and skeletal muscle quality assessed by abdominal computed tomography scan. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2022;38:e3513.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 19. Kim HK, Lee MJ, Kim EH, Bae SJ, Kim KW, Kim CH. Comparison of muscle mass and quality between metabolically healthy and unhealthy phenotypes. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2021;29:1375–86.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 20. Kim HK, Bae SJ, Lee MJ, Kim EH, Park H, Kim HS, et al. Association of visceral fat obesity, sarcopenia, and myosteatosis with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease without obesity. Clin Mol Hepatol 2023;29:987–1001.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 21. Lee MJ, Kim HK, Kim EH, Bae SJ, Kim KW, Kim MJ, et al. Association between muscle quality measured by abdominal computed tomography and subclinical coronary atherosclerosis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2021;41:e128–40.Article
  • 22. American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 2. Diagnosis and classification of diabetes: standards of care in diabetes–2025. Diabetes Care 2025;48(1 Suppl 1):S27–49.PubMedPMC
  • 23. Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, Beam C, Birtcher KK, Blumenthal RS, et al. 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA guideline on the management of blood cholesterol: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines. Circulation 2019;139:e1082–143.
  • 24. Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, et al. International Physical Activity Questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003;35:1381–95.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 25. Haskell WL, Lee IM, Pate RR, Powell KE, Blair SN, Franklin BA, et al. Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2007;39:1423–34.PubMed
  • 26. Strasser B, Siebert U, Schobersberger W. Resistance training in the treatment of the metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of resistance training on metabolic clustering in patients with abnormal glucose metabolism. Sports Med 2010;40:397–415.PubMed
  • 27. Baik I, Shin C. Prospective study of alcohol consumption and metabolic syndrome. Am J Clin Nutr 2008;87:1455–63.ArticlePubMed
  • 28. Levey AS, Stevens LA, Schmid CH, Zhang YL, Castro AF, Feldman HI, et al. A new equation to estimate glomerular filtration rate. Ann Intern Med 2009;150:604–12.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 29. Okamura T, Tsukamoto K, Arai H, Fujioka Y, Ishigaki Y, Koba S, et al. Japan Atherosclerosis Society (JAS) guidelines for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases 2022. J Atheroscler Thromb 2024;31:641–853.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 30. Yamashina A, Tomiyama H, Arai T, Hirose K, Koji Y, Hirayama Y, et al. Brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity as a marker of atherosclerotic vascular damage and cardiovascular risk. Hypertens Res 2003;26:615–22.ArticlePubMed
  • 31. Kim EH, Kim HK, Lee MJ, Bae SJ, Choe J, Jung CH, et al. Sex differences of visceral fat area and visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio for the risk of incident type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab J 2022;46:486–98.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 32. Aubrey J, Esfandiari N, Baracos VE, Buteau FA, Frenette J, Putman CT, et al. Measurement of skeletal muscle radiation attenuation and basis of its biological variation. Acta Physiol (Oxf) 2014;210:489–97.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 33. Anderson DE, D’Agostino JM, Bruno AG, Demissie S, Kiel DP, Bouxsein ML. Variations of CT-based trunk muscle attenuation by age, sex, and specific muscle. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2013;68:317–23.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 34. Gavin KM, Bessesen DH. Sex differences in adipose tissue function. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2020;49:215–28.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 35. Yoh K, Ikeda K, Horie K, Inoue S. Roles of estrogen, estrogen receptors, and estrogen-related receptors in skeletal muscle: regulation of mitochondrial function. Int J Mol Sci 2023;24:1853.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 36. Hamrick MW, McGee-Lawrence ME, Frechette DM. Fatty infiltration of skeletal muscle: mechanisms and comparisons with bone marrow adiposity. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2016;7:69.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 37. Kim HK, Kim CH. Quality matters as much as quantity of skeletal muscle: clinical implications of myosteatosis in cardiometabolic health. Endocrinol Metab (Seoul) 2021;36:1161–74.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 38. Haizlip KM, Harrison BC, Leinwand LA. Sex-based differences in skeletal muscle kinetics and fiber-type composition. Physiology (Bethesda) 2015;30:30–9.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 39. Pellegrino A, Tiidus PM, Vandenboom R. Mechanisms of estrogen influence on skeletal muscle: mass, regeneration, and mitochondrial function. Sports Med 2022;52:2853–69.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 40. Vlachopoulos C, Aznaouridis K, Terentes-Printzios D, Ioakeimidis N, Stefanadis C. Prediction of cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality with brachial-ankle elasticity index: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertension 2012;60:556–62.ArticlePubMed
  • 41. Ohkuma T, Ninomiya T, Tomiyama H, Kario K, Hoshide S, Kita Y, et al. Brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity and the risk prediction of cardiovascular disease: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Hypertension 2017;69:1045–52.ArticlePubMedPMC
  • 42. Sang T, Lv N, Dang A, Cheng N, Zhang W. Brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity and prognosis in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hypertens Res 2021;44:1175–85.ArticlePubMedPDF
  • 43. Tanaka A, Tomiyama H, Maruhashi T, Matsuzawa Y, Miyoshi T, Kabutoya T, et al. Physiological diagnostic criteria for vascular failure. Hypertension 2018;72:1060–71.ArticlePubMed
  • 44. Abbatecola AM, Chiodini P, Gallo C, Lakatta E, Sutton-Tyrrell K, Tylavsky FA, et al. Pulse wave velocity is associated with muscle mass decline: health ABC study. Age (Dordr) 2012;34:469–78.ArticlePubMedPMCPDF
  • 45. Janssen I, Heymsfield SB, Wang ZM, Ross R. Skeletal muscle mass and distribution in 468 men and women aged 18–88 yr. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2000;89:81–8.ArticlePubMed

Figure & Data

References

    Citations

    Citations to this article as recorded by  

      • PubReader PubReader
      • ePub LinkePub Link
      • Cite
        Cite
        export Copy Download
        Close
        Download Citation
        Download a citation file in RIS format that can be imported by all major citation management software, including EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and Reference Manager.

        Format:
        • RIS — For EndNote, ProCite, RefWorks, and most other reference management software
        • BibTeX — For JabRef, BibDesk, and other BibTeX-specific software
        Include:
        • Citation for the content below
        Association of Abdominal Myosteatosis and Visceral Fat Obesity with Arterial Stiffness
        Endocrinol Metab. 2026;41(4):543-557.   Published online April 8, 2026
        Close
      • XML DownloadXML Download
      Figure
      • 0
      Association of Abdominal Myosteatosis and Visceral Fat Obesity with Arterial Stiffness
      Image
      Graphical abstract
      Association of Abdominal Myosteatosis and Visceral Fat Obesity with Arterial Stiffness
      Characteristic Overall baPWV, cm/sec P value
      <1,400 ≥1,400
      Number (%) 3,696 2,288 (61.9) 1,408 (38.1) -
      Age, yr 53.4±8.2 51.4±7.2 56.8±8.6 <0.001
      Systolic BP, mm Hg 125.6±13.4 122.2±11.9 131.0±13.8 <0.001
      Diastolic BP, mm Hg 80.8±10.4 78.9±9.6 83.8±10.9 <0.001
      Smoking status <0.001
       Non-smoker 786 (21.3) 464 (20.3) 322 (22.9)
       Former smoker 1,661 (45.0) 992 (43.4) 669 (47.6)
       Current smoker 1,241 (33.6) 828 (36.3) 413 (29.4)
      Pack-years of smoking 28.0 (16.5–40.5) 27.0 (15.0–38.0) 30.0 (18.0–45.0) <0.001
      Diabetes 587 (15.9) 263 (11.5) 324 (23.0) <0.001
      Hypertension 1,562 (42.3) 738 (32.3) 824 (58.5) <0.001
      Lipid-lowering drugs 437 (11.8) 224 (9.8) 213 (15.1) <0.001
      Family history of CVD 117 (3.2) 74 (3.2) 43 (3.1) 0.761
      Alcohol intake, g/day 15.0 (4.1–46.5) 14.4 (4.5–46.5) 15.1 (3.1–46.7) 0.243
      Regular aerobic exercise 322 (8.7) 197 (8.6) 125 (8.9) 0.779
      Regular resistance exercise 554 (15.0) 355 (15.5) 199 (14.1) 0.253
      Total METs, min/wk 1,110 (480–2,220) 1,116 (495–2,146) 1,080 (417–2,295) 0.457
      FPG, mg/dL 105.2±21.6 102.6±19.0 109.2±24.8 <0.001
      HbA1c, % 5.5 (5.3–5.9) 5.5 (5.3–5.8) 5.6 (5.4–6.1) <0.001
      Total cholesterol, mg/dL 193.3±34.7 195.1±33.7 190.4±36.1 <0.001
      TG, mg/dL 120 (85–165) 118 (84–161) 123 (88–171) 0.013
      LDL-C, mg/dL 123.6±30.6 125.2±29.8 120.9±31.7 <0.001
      HDL-C, mg/dL 50.7±12.5 51.0±12.9 50.3±12.0 0.104
      Uric acid, mg/dL 6.0 (5.2–6.8) 6.0 (5.2–6.8) 5.9 (5.1–6.8) 0.044
      AST, U/L 27 (22–33) 26 (22–33) 27 (23–34) 0.001
      ALT, U/L 25 (19–35) 25 (18–35) 26 (19–35) 0.025
      GGT, U/L 29 (20–48) 28 (19–45) 32 (21–54) <0.001
      hsCRP, mg/L 0.6 (0.3–1.2) 0.5 (0.3–1.0) 0.6 (0.3–1.4) <0.001
      HOMA-IR 1.33 (0.77–2.03) 1.27 (0.73–1.92) 1.44 (0.83–2.22) <0.001
      BMI, kg/m2 24.9±2.8 24.9±2.9 24.8±2.8 0.280
      WC, cm 88.4±7.8 88.1±7.8 88.8±7.8 0.013
      VFA, cm2 139.0 (96.4–182.3) 132.9 (91.4–175.3) 149.3 (108.3–193.1) <0.001
      SFA, cm2 117.1 (93.3–145.8) 119.2 (93.7–149.2) 114.6 (93.0–141.0) 0.002
      VSR 1.12 (0.83–1.46) 1.05 (0.78–1.36) 1.24 (0.92–1.59) <0.001
      NAMA, cm2 132.1±21.3 135.7±20.8 126.3±20.8 <0.001
      LAMA, cm2 31.6 (25.4–39.2) 30.9 (25.0–38.3) 32.7 (26.4–40.4) <0.001
      IMAT, cm2 8.5 (6.4–11.4) 8.2 (6.1–11.1) 9.0 (6.7–12.0) <0.001
      TAMA, cm2 175.0±22.8 177.6±22.5 170.8±22.7 <0.001
      NAMA/TAMA indexa 76.8 (71.2–81.0) 77.6 (72.3–81.7) 75.0 (70.0–79.6) <0.001
      baPWV, cm/sec 1,346.5 (1,242.0–1,475.4) 1,264.0 (1,195.5–1,328.0) 1,524 (1,452–1,645) <0.001
      Characteristic Overall baPWV, cm/sec P value
      <1,400 ≥1,400
      Number (%) 2,308 1,410 (61.1) 898 (38.9) -
      Age, yr 54.3±8.3 51.2±6.9 59.0±8.1 <0.001
      Systolic BP, mm Hg 118.8±15.0 113.0±12.1 127.7±14.6 <0.001
      Diastolic BP, mm Hg 73.9±10.6 70.7±9.7 78.8±10.2 <0.001
      Smoking status 0.415
       Non-smoker 2,158 (93.7) 1,313 (93.2) 845 (94.5)
       Former smoker 68 (3.0) 46 (3.3) 22 (2.5)
       Current smoker 77 (3.3) 50 (3.5) 27 (3.0)
      Pack-years of smoking 10.0 (6.0–23.0) 10.0 (5.5–18.5) 13.8 (7.1–28.4) 0.031
      Diabetes 175 (7.6) 43 (3.0) 132 (14.7) <0.001
      Hypertension 595 (25.8) 178 (12.6) 417 (46.4) <0.001
      Lipid-lowering drugs 283 (12.3) 97 (6.9) 186 (20.7) <0.001
      Family history of CVD 77 (3.3) 52 (3.7) 25 (2.8) 0.238
      Alcohol intake, g/day 0.4 (0.0–2.1) 0.5 (0.0–2.4) 0.0 (0.0–1.1) <0.001
      Regular aerobic exercise 175 (7.6) 92 (6.5) 83 (9.2) 0.016
      Regular resistance exercise 217 (9.4) 133 (9.4) 84 (9.4) 0.950
      Total METs, min/wk 792 (318–1,914) 792 (339–1,964) 848 (297–1,827) 0.811
      Menopausal status <0.001
       Premenopausal 672 (29.1) 562 (39.9) 110 (12.2)
       Postmenopausal 1,205 (52.2) 609 (43.2) 596 (66.4)
       Surgical menopause 431 (18.7) 239 (17.0) 192 (21.4)
      FPG, mg/dL 98.5±15.9 95.2±11.7 103.8±19.6 <0.001
      HbA1c, % 5.5 (5.3–5.8) 5.4 (5.2–5.6) 5.6 (5.4–6.0) <0.001
      Total cholesterol, mg/dL 199.4±35.8 198.2±35.5 201.3±36.3 0.042
      TG, mg/dL 88 (65–123) 82 (61–114) 99 (73–140) <0.001
      LDL-C, mg/dL 124.6±32.1 123.0±31.0 127.1±33.6 0.003
      HDL-C, mg/dL 60.6±15.0 62.0±15.3 58.4±14.3 <0.001
      Uric acid, mg/dL 4.3 (3.7–4.9) 4.2 (3.7–4.8) 4.4 (3.9–5.1) <0.001
      AST, U/L 24 (20–30) 24 (20–29) 25 (21–31) <0.001
      ALT, U/L 18 (14–25) 17 (13–24) 20 (15–27) <0.001
      GGT, U/L 15 (11–21) 14 (11–19) 16 (12–24) <0.001
      hsCRP, mg/L 0.4 (0.2–0.9) 0.3 (0.2–0.7) 0.5 (0.3–1.1) <0.001
      HOMA-IR 1.06 (0.63–1.66) 0.92 (0.56–1.44) 1.39 (0.81–2.00) <0.001
      BMI, kg/m2 23.0±3.0 22.5±2.9 23.7±3.1 <0.001
      WC, cm 79.4±8.5 77.7±8.0 82.2±8.4 <0.001
      VFA, cm2 64.8 (38.6–99.2) 54.2 (31.8–82.3) 85.9 (56.3–120.9) <0.001
      SFA, cm2 143.5 (115.2–175.9) 137.9 (110.4–169.9) 150.5 (119.6–183.2) <0.001
      VSR 0.43 (0.29–0.64) 0.37 (0.25–0.54) 0.55 (0.37–0.76) <0.001
      NAMA, cm2 80.7±13.6 83.2±12.7 76.9±13.9 <0.001
      LAMA, cm2 25.4 (20.3–31.9) 24.1 (19.5–30.0) 27.8 (21.8–34.8) <0.001
      IMAT, cm2 8.3 (6.0–11.4) 7.5 (5.5–10.2) 9.6 (6.8–13.0) <0.001
      TAMA, cm2 117.0±14.1 117.1±13.5 116.9±14.9 0.782
      NAMA/TAMA indexa 70.9 (63.6–76.3) 72.4 (66.3–77.7) 67.0 (59.7–74.2) <0.001
      baPWV, cm/sec 1,347.5 (1,224.5–1,496.0) 1,250.8 (1,176.5–1,325.5) 1,543 (1,462–1,678) <0.001
      Men P value Women P value
      VFA <130 cm2 VFA ≥ 130 cm2 VFA <85 cm2 VFA ≥ 85 cm2
      Number (%) 1,621 (43.9) 2,075 (56.1) - 1,527 (66.2) 781 (33.8) -
      Age, yr 53.3±8.3 53.6±8.1 0.307 52.3±7.8 58.2±7.9 <0.001
      Systolic BP, mm Hg 122.7±13.2 127.8±13.0 <0.001 115.2±13.6 125.8±15.0 <0.001
      Diastolic BP, mm Hg 78.4±10.2 82.6±10.2 <0.001 72.0±10.5 77.6±9.8 <0.001
      Smoking status <0.001 0.182
       Non-smoker 393 (24.3) 393 (19.0) 1,421 (93.1) 737 (95.0)
       Former smoker 681 (42.1) 980 (47.3) 51 (3.3) 17 (2.2)
       Current smoker 544 (33.6) 697 (33.7) 55 (3.6) 22 (2.8)
      Pack-years of smoking 26 (15–38) 30 (18–42) <0.001 10.0 (6.0–19.0) 13.3 (7.4–32.3) 0.049
      Diabetes 179 (11.0) 408 (19.7) <0.001 55 (3.6) 120 (15.4) <0.001
      Hypertension 486 (30.0) 1,076 (51.9) <0.001 261 (17.1) 334 (42.8) <0.001
      Lipid-lowering drugs 129 (8.0) 308 (14.8) <0.001 133 (8.7) 150 (19.2) <0.001
      Family history of CVD 50 (3.1) 67 (3.2) 0.804 54 (3.5) 23 (2.9) 0.454
      Alcohol intake, g/day 10.9 (3.2–38.0) 21.3 (4.9–52.8) <0.001 0.4 (0.0–2.3) 0.0 (0.0–1.1) <0.001
      Regular aerobic exercise 167 (10.3) 155 (7.5) 0.002 113 (7.4) 62 (7.9) 0.644
      Regular resistance exercise 284 (17.5) 270 (13.0) <0.001 138 (9.0) 79 (10.1) 0.401
      Total METs, min/wk 1,179 (495–2,376) 1,032 (438–2,100) 0.010 837 (360–1,980) 792 (297–1,746) 0.104
      Menopausal status - <0.001
       Premenopausal - - 552 (36.1) 120 (15.4)
       Postmenopausal - - 715 (46.8) 490 (62.7)
       Surgical menopause - - 260 (17.0) 171 (21.9)
      FPG, mg/dL 101.4±19.0 108.1±23.0 <0.001 95.3±12.3 104.9±19.6 <0.001
      HbA1c, % 5.4 (5.2–5.7) 5.6 (5.4–6.0) <0.001 5.4 (5.2–5.6) 5.7 (5.4–6.0) <0.001
      Total cholesterol, mg/dL 191.3±33.2 194.9±35.8 0.002 197.1±34.2 203.8±38.4 <0.001
      TG, mg/dL 99 (73–136) 137 (101–188) <0.001 78 (60–110) 109 (83–149.5) <0.001
      LDL-C, mg/dL 121.8±29.4 125.0±31.4 0.001 121.1±30.5 131.4±33.9 <0.001
      HDL-C, mg/dL 53.9±13.3 48.1±11.3 <0.001 63.6±15.0 54.8±13.2 <0.001
      Uric acid, mg/dL 5.7 (5.0–6.4) 6.2 (5.4–7.1) <0.001 4.1 (3.6–4.7) 4.6 (4.0–5.3) <0.001
      AST, U/L 25 (21–31) 27 (23–35) <0.001 24 (20–29) 25 (21–31) <0.001
      ALT, U/L 22 (17–29) 29 (21–40) <0.001 17 (13–23) 22 (16–29) <0.001
      GGT, U/L 23 (17–34) 35 (24–58) <0.001 13 (10–18) 18 (14–27) <0.001
      hsCRP, mg/L 0.4 (0.2–0.9) 0.7 (0.4–1.3) <0.001 0.3 (0.2–0.6) 0.7 (0.4–1.4) <0.001
      HOMA-IR 0.87 (0.53–1.38) 1.73 (1.14–2.44) <0.001 0.84 (0.53–1.34) 1.64 (1.06–2.27) <0.001
      BMI, kg/m2 23.0±2.1 26.3±2.5 <0.001 21.7±2.2 25.5±2.8 <0.001
      WC, cm 82.9±5.7 92.7±6.4 <0.001 75.6±6.2 86.9±7.2 <0.001
      VFA, cm2 91.0 (62.7–111.2) 176.1 (152.1–210.1) <0.001 47.2 (29.4–64.4) 116.4 (98.4–139.0) <0.001
      SFA, cm2 99.3 (78.1–121.9) 131.8 (109.1–160.0) <0.001 131.1 (105.7–158.5) 170.6 (141.8–206.5) <0.001
      VSR 0.83 (0.63–1.05) 1.36 (1.10–1.68) <0.001 0.34 (0.23–0.45) 0.70 (0.57–0.85) <0.001
      NAMA, cm2 131.2±20.9 132.8±21.6 0.024 82.0±12.7 78.2±14.9 <0.001
      LAMA, cm2 26.9 (22.2–32.6) 35.7 (29.2–43.5) <0.001 22.9 (18.8–27.8) 31.7 (25.5–38.2) <0.001
      IMAT, cm2 7.2 (5.5–9.6) 9.6 (7.3–12.8) <0.001 7.1 (5.3–9.5) 11.0 (8.3–14.9) <0.001
      TAMA, cm2 167.2±21.5 181.0±22.0 <0.001 113.8±12.6 123.3±14.7 <0.001
      NAMA/TAMA indexa 79.2 (74.8–82.9) 74.4 (69.0–79.0) <0.001 73.2 (67.2–78.2) 64.9 (57.1–71.7) <0.001
      baPWV, cm/sec 1,319 (1,231–1,451) 1,371 (1,254–1,496) <0.001 1,302 (1,199–1,427) 1,448 (1,321–1,615) <0.001
      baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) 520 (32.1) 888 (42.8) <0.001 444 (29.1) 454 (58.1) <0.001
      Men P value Women P value
      NAMA/TAMA≥ 66.4 NAMA/TAMA <66.4 NAMA/TAMA ≥ 65.1 NAMA/TAMA <65.1
      Number (%) 3,277 (88.7) 419 (11.3) - 1,630 (70.6) 678 (29.4) -
      Age, yr 52.9±7.9 57.6±9.5 <0.001 52.5±7.8 58.5±8.1 <0.001
      Systolic BP, mm Hg 125.1±13.2 129.0±14.3 <0.001 116.6±14.4 123.8±15.2 <0.001
      Diastolic BP, mm Hg 80.5±10.3 82.5±11.2 0.001 73.0±10.6 76.1±10.3 <0.001
      Smoking status
       Non-smoker 698 (21.3) 88 (21.1) 0.267 1,522 (93.6) 636 (93.9) 0.951
       Former smoker 1,459 (44.6) 202 (48.4) 49 (3.0) 19 (2.8)
       Current smoker 1,114 (34.1) 127 (30.5) 55 (3.4) 22 (3.2)
      Pack-years of smoking 28 (16–40) 32 (18–46) 0.002 10.0 (5.5–20.0) 12.5 (6.8–30.0) 0.084
      Diabetes 499 (15.2) 88 (21.0) 0.002 91 (5.6) 84 (12.4) <0.001
      Hypertension 1,304 (39.8) 258 (61.6) <0.001 344 (21.1) 251 (37.0) <0.001
      Lipid-lowering drugs 375 (11.4) 62 (14.8) 0.045 175 (10.7) 108 (15.9) 0.001
      Family history of CVD 99 (3.0) 18 (4.3) 0.160 61 (3.7) 16 (2.4) 0.092
      Alcohol intake, g/day 15.0 (4.2–46.5) 14.4 (3.2–46.5) 0.528 0.4 (0.0–2.3) 0.0 (0.0–1.4) <0.001
      Regular aerobic exercise 290 (8.8) 32 (7.6) 0.407 128 (7.9) 47 (6.9) 0.447
      Regular resistance exercise 521 (15.9) 33 (7.9) <0.001 158 (9.7) 59 (8.7) 0.457
      Total METs, min/wk 1,158 (495–2,262) 960 (318–1,908) <0.001 876 (360–1,980) 756 (240–1,684) 0.007
      Menopausal status - <0.001
       Premenopausal - - 591 (36.3) 81 (11.9)
       Postmenopausal - - 767 (47.1) 438 (64.6)
       Surgical menopause - - 272 (16.7) 159 (23.5)
      FPG, mg/dL 104.6±21.0 109.1±25.4 0.001 97.0±14.3 102.3±18.6 <0.001
      HbA1c, % 5.5 (5.3–5.9) 5.7 (5.4–6.0) <0.001 5.4 (5.2–5.7) 5.6 (5.4–5.9) <0.001
      Total cholesterol, mg/dL 194.0±34.7 187.8±34.1 0.001 197.8±35.0 203.2±37.5 0.001
      TG, mg/dL 120 (85–165) 119 (88–165) 0.841 85 (63–119) 98 (72–135) <0.001
      LDL-C, mg/dL 124.0±30.5 119.9±31.2 0.009 122.7±31.5 129.1±32.9 <0.001
      HDL-C, mg/dL 50.9±12.6 49.2±11.8 0.009 61.6±15.3 58.0±14.0 <0.001
      Uric acid, mg/dL 6.0 (5.2–6.8) 6.0 (5.0–6.9) 0.959 4.2 (3.7–4.9) 4.4 (3.9–5.1) <0.001
      AST, U/L 27 (22–33) 27 (22–34) 0.665 24 (20–29) 25 (21–31) 0.001
      ALT, U/L 25 (19–35) 26 (19–36) 0.215 18 (14–24) 20 (15–26) <0.001
      GGT, U/L 29 (19–47) 32 (22–51) 0.005 14 (11–19) 16 (12–24) <0.001
      hsCRP, mg/L 0.5 (0.3–1.1) 0.8 (0.4–1.7) <0.001 0.3 (0.2–0.7) 0.6 (0.3–1.2) <0.001
      HOMA-IR 1.29 (0.75–1.96) 1.72 (0.95–2.52) <0.001 0.98 (0.58–1.56) 1.31 (0.77–2.00) <0.001
      BMI, kg/m2 24.6±2.6 26.9±3.4 <0.001 22.3±2.6 24.6±3.2 <0.001
      WC, cm 87.5±7.2 95.6±8.7 <0.001 77.1±7.3 85.1±8.4 <0.001
      VFA, cm2 134.3 (93.2–175.0) 190.6 (141.9–232.9) <0.001 55.2 (31.8–83.0) 95.6 (65.2–129.6) <0.001
      SFA, cm2 114.6 (91.5–142.2) 144.7 (114.1–193.6) <0.001 133.6 (107.2–163.4) 169.2 (137.1–204.6) <0.001
      VSR 1.11 (0.82–1.45) 1.20 (0.90–1.55) <0.001 0.38 (0.26–0.57) 0.54 (0.39–0.74) <0.001
      NAMA, cm2 135.2±19.8 108.6±17.9 <0.001 85.8±11.1 68.6±11.0 <0.001
      LAMA, cm2 30.2 (24.8–36.2) 51.2 (45.6–59.6) <0.001 22.3 (18.7–26.3) 35.9 (31.5–41.9) <0.001
      IMAT, cm2 8.0 (6.1–10.3) 15.6 (13.0–18.9) <0.001 6.8 (5.3–8.7) 13.5 (11.2–17.1) <0.001
      TAMA, cm2 174.5±22.4 178.2±25.8 0.005 115.5±13.2 120.6±15.3 <0.001
      NAMA/TAMA indexa 77.6 (73.4–81.5) 62.4 (58.8–64.8) <0.001 74.1 (70.3–78.3) 59.2 (53.3–62.4) <0.001
      baPWV, cm/sec 1,337 (1,238–1,466) 1,399 (1,282–1,551) <0.001 1,313 (1,209–1,446) 1,431 (1,304–1,590) <0.001
      baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) 1,199 (36.6) 209 (49.9) <0.001 523 (32.1) 375 (55.3) <0.001
      Subgroup Visceral fat obesitya Myosteatosisb
      OR (95% CI) P value OR (95% CI) P value
      Men
       Unadjusted 1.58 (1.38–1.81) <0.001 1.73 (1.41–2.12) <0.001
       Model 1 1.50 (1.31–1.73) <0.001 1.54 (1.25–1.89) <0.001
       Model 2 1.39 (1.17–1.66) <0.001 0.86 (0.66–1.12) 0.270
       Model 3 1.32 (1.10–1.60) 0.004 0.85 (0.65–1.10) 0.213
      Women
       Unadjusted 3.39 (2.83–4.05) <0.001 2.62 (2.18–3.15) <0.001
       Model 1 2.80 (2.32–3.39) <0.001 1.89 (1.55–2.30) <0.001
       Model 2 1.36 (0.45–4.09) 0.591 3.27 (1.14–9.41) 0.028
       Model 3 1.24 (0.38–4.04) 0.723 3.26 (1.13–9.44) 0.029
      Table 1 Characteristics according to the baPWV Categories in Men

      Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

      baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; VFA, visceral fat area; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area.

      NAMA/TAMA index=normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

      Table 2 Characteristics according to baPWV Categories in Women

      Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

      baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; VFA, visceral fat area; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, inter-muscular adipose tissue; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area.

      NAMA/TAMA index = normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

      Table 3 Characteristics according to Visceral Fat Obesity Categories

      Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

      VFA, visceral fat area; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate amino-transferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area; baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity.

      NAMA/TAMA index=normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

      Table 4 Characteristics according to Myosteatosis Categories

      Values are expressed as mean±standard deviation, number (%), or median (interquartile range).

      NAMA, normal attenuation muscle area; TAMA, total abdominal muscle area; BP, blood pressure; CVD, cardiovascular disease; MET, metabolic equivalent of task; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; HbA1c, glycated hemoglobin; TG, triglyceride; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; GGT, gamma-glutamyltransferase; hsCRP, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; VFA, visceral fat area; SFA, subcutaneous fat area; VSR, visceral-to-subcutaneous fat ratio; LAMA, low attenuation muscle area; IMAT, intermuscular adipose tissue; baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity.

      NAMA/TAMA index=normal attenuation muscle area/total abdominal muscle area×100.

      Table 5 ORs for Elevated baPWV (≥1,400 cm/sec) according to Visceral Fat Obesity and Myosteatosis

      Model 1: adjusted for visceral fat obesity or myosteatosis. Model 2: model 1+age, smoking pack-years, alcohol consumption, total metabolic equivalent of tasks, regular resistance exercise, hypertension, diabetes, use of lipid-lowering drugs, family history of cardiovascular disease, and menopausal status (only in women). Model 3: model 2+low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance.

      OR, odds ratio; baPWV, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity; CI, confidence interval.

      Cut-off values for visceral fat obesity were visceral fat area (VFA) ≥130 cm2 in men and VFA ≥85 cm2 in women;

      Cut-off values for myosteatosis were normal attenuation muscle area (NAMA)/total abdominal muscle area (TAMA) index <66.4 in men and NAMA/TAMA index <65.1 in women.


      Endocrinol Metab : Endocrinology and Metabolism
      TOP