DOCSLIB.ORG

The Obesity Paradox in Heart Failure Patients with Preserved Versus Reduced Ejection Fraction: a Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Obesity Paradox in Heart Failure Patients with Preserved Versus Reduced Ejection Fraction: a Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data International Journal of Obesity (2014) 38, 1110–1114 & 2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 0307-0565/14 www.nature.com/ijo ORIGINAL ARTICLE The obesity paradox in heart failure patients with preserved versus reduced ejection fraction: a meta-analysis of individual patient data R Padwal1, FA McAlister1, JJV McMurray2, MR Cowie3, M Rich4, S Pocock5, K Swedberg6, A Maggioni7, G Gamble8, C Ariti5, N Earle8, G Whalley9, KK Poppe8, RN Doughty8 and A Bayes-Genis10 for the Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) Investigators11 BACKGROUND: In heart failure (HF), obesity, defined as body mass index (BMI) X30 kg m À 2, is paradoxically associated with higher survival rates compared with normal-weight patients (the ‘obesity paradox’). We sought to determine if the obesity paradox differed by HF subtype (reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) versus preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF)). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A sub-analysis of the MAGGIC meta-analysis of patient-level data from 14 HF studies was performed. Subjects were divided into five BMI groups: o22.5, 22.5–24.9 (referent), 25–29.9, 30–34.9 and X35 kg m À 2. Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for age, sex, aetiology (ischaemic or non-ischaemic), hypertension, diabetes and baseline blood pressure, stratified by study, were used to examine the independent association between BMI and 3-year total mortality. Analyses were conducted for the overall group and within HF-REF and HF-PEF groups. RESULTS: BMI data were available for 23 967 subjects (mean age, 66.8 years; 32% women; 46% NYHA Class II; 50% Class III) and 5609 (23%) died by 3 years. Obese patients were younger, more likely to receive cardiovascular (CV) drug treatment, and had higher comorbidity burdens. Compared with BMI levels between 22.5 and 24.9 kg m À 2, the adjusted relative hazards for 3-year mortality in subjects with HF-REF were: hazard ratios (HR) ¼ 1.31 (95% confidence interval ¼ 1.15–1.50) for BMI o22.5, 0.85 (0.76–0.96) for BMI 25.0–29.9, 0.64 (0.55–0.74) for BMI 30.0–34.9 and 0.95 (0.78–1.15) for BMI X35. Corresponding adjusted HRs for those with HF-PEF were: 1.12 (95% confidence interval ¼ 0.80–1.57) for BMI o22.5, 0.74 (0.56–0.97) for BMI 25.0–29.9, 0.64 (0.46–0.88) for BMI 30.0–34.9 and 0.71 (0.49–1.05) for BMI X35. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic HF, the obesity paradox was present in both those with reduced and preserved ventricular systolic function. Mortality in both HF subtypes was U-shaped, with a nadir at 30.0–34.9 kg m À 2. International Journal of Obesity (2014) 38, 1110–1114; doi:10.1038/ijo.2013.203 Keywords: body mass index; heart failure; prognosis; obesity paradox; ejection fraction INTRODUCTION were largely performed in patients with HF-REF.2 In addition, Obesity, defined as a body mass index (BMI) X30 kg m À 2,isan discrepant findings have been reported. For example, independent risk factor for CV morbidity and mortality and an observational study of 4700 subjects hospitalized with HF doubles the risk of heart failure (HF).1 In the presence of reported that obese subjects with HF-PEF had lower mortality established HF, obesity has been paradoxically associated with a compared with normal weight subjects (hazard ratio (HR) ¼ 0.77 reduced risk of mortality, a finding that has been termed ‘the (0.70–0.86)), whereas obese subjects with HF-REF exhibited obesity paradox’.2,3 Several explanations for the obesity paradox increased mortality risk than leaner patients with HF-REF have been proposed and it is currently unclear if it is a true (HR ¼ 1.21 (1.01–1.45)).9 Thus, there is a need to clarify whether phenomenon or a consequence of methodological bias.3–7 the paradox is specific to one HF subtype or is found to an Two major subtypes of HF exist—HF with reduced ejection equivalent degree in both HF-PEF and HF-REF. fraction (HF-REF) and HF with preserved ejection fraction (HF-PEF). We used the Meta-analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Although patients with HF-REF exhibit higher mortality rates, both Failure (MAGGIC) individual patient data meta-analysis to explore subtypes confer a high absolute mortality risk (B120–140 deaths the relationship between BMI and survival and whether the per 1000 patient years).8 Studies describing the obesity paradox association was similar in those with HF-REF and HF-PEF. 1Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada; 2BHF Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK; 3Faculty of Medicine, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London (Royal Brompton Hospital), London, UK; 4Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA; 5Department of Medical Statistics, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; 6Department of Emergency and Cardiovascular Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden; 7ANMCO Research Center, Florence, Italy; 8Department of Medicine and National Institute for Health Innovation, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand; 9Faculty of Social and Health Sciences, UNITEC Institute of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand and 10Department of Medicine, Hospital Universitari Germans Trias i Pujol UAB, Barcelona, Spain. Correspondence: Dr R Padwal, General Internal Medicine and Clinical Pharmacology, 2F1.26 WMC, University of Alberta Hospital, 8440 112 Street, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2B7, Canada. E-mail: [email protected] 11See appendix. Received 27 August 2013; revised 3 October 2013; accepted 15 October 2013; accepted article preview online 31 October 2013; advance online publication, 26 November 2013 Obesity paradox in heart failure R Padwal et al 1111 PATIENTS AND METHODS using the Cochran-Armitage trend test for ordered categorical data. Detailed methods, including details about study selection criteria, included Confidence intervals around person time rates were calculated using studies, and main results of the MAGGIC meta-analysis have been Miettinen’s exact test (http://www.openepi.com, accessed on 11 June described elsewhere.8 In this analysis, we pooled the data from the 14 2013). The Cox proportional hazard of time to all cause death within 3 studies that measured BMI at baseline and included at least 3 years of years from baseline study visit was used to model the hazard of BMI strata, follow-up. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was not an entry adjusted for age, sex, LVEF group, ischaemic aetiology, hypertension, criterion for any of the studies. The meta-analysis protocol was approved diabetes, systolic blood pressure and atrial fibrillation. Models were by the University of Auckland Human Subjects Ethics Committee. Data constructed from those individuals with complete data for each model. (including demographics, comorbidities, therapy, symptom status, clinical Imputation of missing data was not performed. Unless otherwise stated, variables, laboratory variables, and outcomes) from the individual studies SAS v9.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) were used for all analyses. were re-coded into a uniform format at the Central Coordinating Centre at All tests were two-tailed and Po0.05 was considered significant. the University of Auckland and incorporated into one database. For this analysis, HF-PEF was defined as a baseline LVEF X50%. Covariates were also defined at baseline. BMI was calculated by taking the weight in kilograms and dividing by the square of the height (in meters). RESULTS Subjects were stratified according to BMI levels (o22.5, 22.5–24.9 BMI data were available for 23 976 patients from 14 studies (mean 2 (referent), 25.0–29.9, 30.0–34.9 and X35.0 kg m À ). Sensitivity analyses age, 66.8 years; 32% women). Most patients had NYHA class II were performed by repeating the analyses within each HF subtype; in the (46%) or III (50%) symptoms. A total of 5609 (23%) patients died World Health Organization BMI strata (o18.5, 18.5–24.9, 25–29.9 over the 914 (interquartile range ¼ 316–1096) day follow-up andX30 kg m À 2); in patients with and without oedema (as a proxy measure for fluid overload); and in subjects in whom estimated glomerular period. filtration rate data were available. The baseline characteristics of patients by BMI group and Data are presented as mean (standard deviation) unless otherwise stratified by HF subtype are shown in Table 1. In both the HF-PEF stated. To compare baseline characteristics, tests for linear trend were and HF-REF subgroups, low-BMI subjects were older and more constructed from orthogonal contrasts for continuous variables and by frequently women. In contrast, hypertension and diabetes were Table 1. Baseline characteristics by BMI strata and HF subtype BMI HF-REF HF-PEF o22.5 22.5–24.9 25–29.9 30–34.9 X35 P-valuea o22.5 22.5–24.9 25–29.9 30–34.9 X35 P-valuea N (14 studies) 3073 3747 7144 2751 987 950 1140 2326 1269 589 Age, years (s.d.) 69 (13) 67 (12) 66 (11) 63 (11) 60 (11) o0.0001 74 (12) 72 (12) 70 (11) 68 (10) 64 (11) o0.0001 Women, % 40 25 22 25 35 o0.0001 63 44 41 49 55 0.0009 Medical history Hypertension 25 31 37 49 59 o0.0001 32 41 48 61 68 o0.0001 Myocardial infarction 44 50 50 48 40 0.964 21 27 29 28 22 0.096 Atrial fibrillation 22 23 22 25 26 0.015 33 28 27 27 26 0.0009 Diabetes 13 17 22 31 39 o0.0001 11 15 19 28 36 o0.0001 Ischaemic aetiology 52 57 59 56 47 0.475 40 45 48 44 35 0.493 Medication ACEi or ARB 68 72 70 68 65 0.207 32 35 36 42 36 0.0006 Beta-blocker 30 38 42 48 49 o0.0001 25 34 40 43 42 o0.0001 Diuretic 86 83 83 84 89 0.654 76 76 74 81 86 o0.0001 Spironolactone 28 25 23 25 25 0.0093 18 17 16 15 20 0.817 Digoxin 59 53
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evaluating the Obesity Paradox in the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project
    Diabetes Care Volume 43, March 2020 677 Seamus P. Whelton,1 Paul A. McAuley,2 Association of BMI, Fitness, and Zeina Dardari,1 Olusola A. Orimoloye,1 Clinton A. Brawner,3 Jonathan K. Ehrman,3 Mortality in Patients With Steven J. Keteyian,3 Mouaz Al-Mallah,4 and Diabetes: Evaluating the Obesity Michael J. Blaha1 Paradox in the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project) Cohort Diabetes Care 2020;43:677–682 | https://doi.org/10.2337/dc19-1673 OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of fitness on the association between BMI and mortality among patients with diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We identified 8,528 patients with diabetes (self-report, medication use, or electronic medical record diagnosis) from the Henry Ford Exercise Testing Project (FIT Project). Patients with a BMI <18.5 kg/m2 or cancer were excluded. Fitness was measuredas theMETs achieved during a physician-referred treadmill stress test and categorized as low (<6), moderate (6–9.9), or high (‡10). Adjusted hazard ratios for mortality were calculated using standard BMI (kilograms per meter squared) cutoffs 1 of normal (18.5–24.9), overweight (25–29.9), and obese (‡30). Adjusted splines Johns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Pre- CARDIOVASCULAR AND METABOLIC RISK 2 vention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins centered at 22.5 kg/m were used to examine BMI as a continuous variable. School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 2Department of Health, Physical Education and RESULTS Sport Studies, Winston-Salem State University, Patients had a mean age of 58 6 11 years (49% women) with 1,319 deaths over a Winston-Salem, NC 3 mean follow-up of 10.0 6 4.1 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Obesity in Primary Care: Prevention, Management and the Paradox David Haslam
    Haslam BMC Medicine 2014, 12:149 http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/12/149 Obesity: exploring the causes, consequences and solutions COMMENTARY Open Access Obesity in primary care: prevention, management and the paradox David Haslam Abstract Government and societal efforts to combat obesity are aimed at prevention, although there is a generation for whom excess weight is the rule rather than the exception. Although measures to prevent a worsening of the current epidemic are important, management of obesity must also be prioritised. Obesity management is beset with problems ranging from attitudinal to clinical and pharmacological, and the individualisation of therapy. Keywords: Obesity, Primary care, Obesity paradox, Obesity management, Weight Background checkout, and changing the GP incentive QOF to reward Obesity prevention has failed. If nobody in the UK gains obesity management, would have an instant beneficial another single ounce, there are enough already obese effect on the health of the Nation. Other measures will people to make epidemics of diabetes, then heart disease, take longer – the Action on Sugar campaign will spe- then premature death inevitable. The job of Primary Care cify targets for food reformulation, but will take several is to manage obesity, although this may not involve the years to make a big difference; changes to the built en- loss of a single ounce: their role is often misunderstood, vironment to promote activity might take a generation especially by departmental and Government bodies, and to have an effect. Industry, public health and Government especially by the Quality and Outcomes Framework have a major role to play, and the political power (QOF) which perversely incentivises maintaining excess wielded by the food and retail industries may thwart weight in order to bulk up the obesity register without a change.
    [Show full text]
  • The Obesity Paradox in Kidney Disease: How to Reconcile It with Obesity Management
    WORLD KIDNEY DAY MINI SYMPOSIUM ON KIDNEY DISEASE AND OBESITY The Obesity Paradox in Kidney Disease: How to Reconcile It With Obesity Management Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh1,2,3,4, Connie M. Rhee1, Jason Chou1, S. Foad Ahmadi1,2,5, Jongha Park4, Joline L.T. Chen4 and Alpesh N. Amin5 1Harold Simmons Center for Kidney Disease Research and Epidemiology, University of California Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange, California, USA; 2Program for Public Health, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, USA; 3Department of Epidemiology, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, California, USA; 4Nephrology Section, VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Long Beach, California, USA; and 5Department of Medicine, University of California Irvine, School of Medicine, Orange, California, USA Obesity, a risk factor for de novo chronic kidney disease (CKD), confers survival advantages in advanced CKD. This so-called obesity paradox is the archetype of the reverse epidemiology of cardiovascular risks, in addition to the lipid, blood pressure, adiponectin, homocysteine, and uric acid paradoxes. These paradoxical phenomena are in sharp contradistinction to the known epidemiology of cardiovascular risks in the general population. In addition to advanced CKD, the obesity paradox has also been observed in heart failure, chronic obstructive lung disease, liver cirrhosis, and metastatic cancer, as well as in elderly individuals. These are populations in whom proteinÀenergy wasting and inflammation are strong predictors of early death. Both larger muscle mass and higher body fat provide longevity in these patients, whereas thinner body habitus and weight loss are associated with higher mortality. Muscle mass appears to be superior to body fat in conferring an even greater survival.
    [Show full text]
  • I UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO the Weight of Medical
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO The Weight of Medical Authority: The Making and Unmaking of Knowledge in the Obesity Epidemic A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology (Science Studies) by Julia Rogers Committee in charge: Professor Martha Lampland, Chair Professor Cathy Gere Professor Isaac Martin Professor David Serlin Professor Charles Thorpe 2018 i Copyright Julia Ellen Rogers, 2018 All Rights Reserved ii The Dissertation of Julia Ellen Rogers is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ Chair University of California San Diego 2018 iii DEDICATION For Eric and Anderson iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page………………………………………………………………………………iii Dedication ............................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents ..................................................................................................................... v List of Figures and Tables ....................................................................................................... xi Vita .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Metabolic Syndrome, Obesity Paradox and Testosterone Level Vittorio Emanuele Bianchi* Department of Endocrinology, ASUR1, Hospital of Cagli, Italy
    Metab y & o g lic o l S Bianchi, Endocrinol Metab Synd 2015, 4:2 o y n n i r d c r o o m d DOI: 10.4172/2161-1017.1000172 n e E ISSN: 2161-1017 Endocrinology & Metabolic Syndrome Research Article Open Access Metabolic Syndrome, Obesity Paradox and Testosterone Level Vittorio Emanuele Bianchi* Department of Endocrinology, ASUR1, Hospital of Cagli, Italy Abstract Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) is a cluster of risk factors proposed as a prevalent responsible for the development of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Diseases (ACVD). The predominant risk factors are obesity, abdominal obesity and insulin resistance. People in middle age with MetS are at increased absolute risk for ACVD. Criticism for MetS include its imprecise in definition, its uncertain pathogenesis as a marker of ACVD risk, and questions regarding whether this “cluster” of risk factors portend risk above and beyond the its individual components. Abdominal and visceral obesity evaluated by Waist-Circumferences (WC) and Waist-Hip-Ratio (WHR) are more specific than Body Mass Index (BMI) in definition of cardiovascular risk, but the triglycerides/HDL cholesterol ratio (TG/HDL-C) is adequate and better than MetS in diagnosis cardiovascular risk. However, evidence of an obesity paradox i.e. that obesity has a protective effect in some populations led to some confusion about the role of body mass on MetS. The role of Free Fat Mass (FFM) is relevant in this context since most studies on the obesity paradox have relied on BMI rather than body composition and fat distribution. The low BMI, prevalently due to low FFM, is correlated to exercise capacity and respiratory muscle strength is inversely related with mortality rate.
    [Show full text]
  • Obesity Paradox&Rsquo
    International Journal of Obesity (2015) 39, 82–84 © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 0307-0565/15 www.nature.com/ijo DEBATE ‘Obesity paradox’ misunderstands the biology of optimal weight throughout the life cycle JB Dixon1, GJ Egger2, EA Finkelstein3, JG Kral4 and GW Lambert1 The ‘obesity paradox’ refers to observations that run counter to the thesis that normal weight (BMI 18.5–24.9 kg/m2) provides the lowest mortality and higher weight is associated with greater mortality. We argue that the weight of lowest mortality is influenced by aging and chronic disease, with mortality advantage extending into the overweight and even class I obese ranges under some circumstances. A focus on quality nutrition, physical activity, fitness, and maintaining function in these weight ranges may be preferable to a focus on intentional weight loss, which has uncertain effects. The ‘obesity paradox’ is no ‘paradox’ if one defines and interprets ‘ideal’ weight appropriately. International Journal of Obesity (2015) 39, 82–84; doi:10.1038/ijo.2014.59 Keywords: healthy aging; reverse causation; obesity epidemic; survival advantage; body mass index The ‘obesity paradox’ assumes that being overweight or even frailty. As median life expectancy increases, so do aging-related obese, measured by body mass index (BMI) cutoffs, provides diseases, the foundations of which may have been laid down very mortality advantage compared to being ‘normal’ weight (BMI early in life (‘developmental origins of adult disease’). 18.5–24.9 kg/m2). Perhaps the most convincing data come from How do we reconcile these apparently paradoxical observa- population studies indicating that whereas obesity (BMI>30) is tions? We propose that there is no paradox.
    [Show full text]
  • Complications After Esophagectomy Are Associated with Extremes of Body Mass Index”
    356 Editorial Editorial on “Complications after esophagectomy are associated with extremes of body mass index” Erin M. Corsini, Boris Sepesi Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA Correspondence to: Erin M. Corsini, MD. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Pickens, FCT 19.6000, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Email: [email protected]. Provenance: This is an invited Editorial commissioned by the Section Editor Shuangjiang Li (Department of Thoracic Surgery and West China Medical Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China). Comment on: Mitzman B, Schipper PH, Edwards MA, et al. Complications After Esophagectomy Are Associated With Extremes of Body Mass Index. Ann Thorac Surg 2018;106:973-80. Submitted Nov 15, 2018. Accepted for publication Nov 23, 2018. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.11.120 View this article at: http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jtd.2018.11.120 There is overwhelming evidence that obesity has become increased risk in obese populations, while other authors a public health epidemic, with more than one third of have failed to demonstrate worse outcomes or, rather, have American adults classified as obese (1). While many have reported an “obesity paradox” in which mildly overweight demonstrated that obesity is a risk factor for a variety of patients experience some benefit compared to their disease processes, including hypertension, diabetes mellitus, underweight or morbidly obese counterparts (6-11). In their obstructive sleep apnea, and cardiovascular disease, there retrospective review of over 9,000 patients from the Society is increasing awareness that obesity may play a role in of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) General Thoracic Surgery complications following surgery (2-4).
    [Show full text]
  • The Hunger–Obesity Paradox: Obesity in the Homeless
    Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, Vol. 89, No. 6 doi:10.1007/s11524-012-9708-4 * 2012 The New York Academy of Medicine The Hunger–Obesity Paradox: Obesity in the Homeless Katherine A. Koh, Jessica S. Hoy, James J. O’Connell, and Paul Montgomery ABSTRACT Despite stereotypes of the homeless population as underweight, the literature lacks a rigorous analysis of weight status in homeless adults. The purpose of this study is to present the body mass index (BMI) distribution in a large adult homeless population and to compare this distribution to the non-homeless population in the United States. Demographic, BMI, and socioeconomic variables from patients seen in 2007–2008 were collected from the Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program (BHCHP). This population was compared to non-homeless adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Among 5,632 homeless adults, the mean BMI was 28.4 kg/m2 and the prevalence of obesity was 32.3 %. Only 1.6 % of homeless adults were underweight. Compared to mean BMI in NHANES (28.6 kg/m2), the difference was not significant in unadjusted analysis (p=0.14). Adjusted analyses predicting BMI or likelihood of obesity also showed that the homeless had a weight distribution not statistically different from the general population. Although underweight has been traditionally associated with homelessness, this study suggests that obesity may be the new malnutrition of the homeless in the United States. KEYWORDS Homeless, Obesity, Body mass index, Malnutrition INTRODUCTION Stereotypes and the media have generally portrayed the homeless as starving and underweight.1 However, few studies have documented their weight status or compared their weight distribution to that of the general population.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Obesity and the Obesity Paradox on Prevalence and Prognosis in Heart Failure
    JACC: Heart Failure Vol. 1, No. 2, 2013 Ó 2013 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation ISSN 2213-1779/$36.00 Published by Elsevier Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jchf.2013.01.006 STATE-OF-THE-ART PAPER Impact of Obesity and the Obesity Paradox on Prevalence and Prognosis in Heart Failure Carl J. Lavie, MD,*y Martin A. Alpert, MD,z Ross Arena, PHD, PT,x Mandeep R. Mehra, MBBS,k Richard V. Milani, MD,* Hector O. Ventura, MD* New Orleans and Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Columbia, Missouri; Albuquerque, New Mexico; and Boston, Massachusetts Obesity has reached epidemic proportions in the United States and worldwide. Considering the adverse effects of obesity on left ventricular (LV) structure, diastolic and systolic function, and other risk factors for heart failure (HF), including hypertension and coronary heart disease, HF incidence and prevalence, not surprisingly, is markedly increased in obese patients. Nevertheless, as with most other cardiovascular diseases, numerous studies have documented an obesity paradox, in which overweight and obese patients, defined by body mass index, percent body fat, or central obesity, demonstrate a better prognosis compared with lean or underweight HF patients. This review will describe the data on obesity in the context of cardiopulmonary exercise testing in HF. Additionally, the implications of obesity on LV assist devices and heart transplantation are reviewed. Finally, despite the obesity paradox, we address the current state of weight reduction in HF. (J Am Coll Cardiol HF 2013;1:93–102) ª 2013 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation There are numerous adverse effects of overweightness and This paper describes the hemodynamic alterations of obesity, usually defined by body mass index (BMI) criteria, overweight/obesity and its pathological effects on arterial on general and, particularly, cardiovascular (CV) health.
    [Show full text]
  • Food Insecurity and Obesity
    Understanding the Connections: Food Insecurity and Obesity October 2015 hile all segments of the U.S. population are affected by obesity, food insecure and low-income people can be Wespecially vulnerable due to the additional risk factors associated with inadequate resources and under-resourced communities. This brief first will highlight research on food insecurity and obesity, and then explore why food insecurity and obesity can co-exist. What Does the Research Say About Food Insecurity and Obesity? The extent of research on food insecurity and obesity has grown considerably since 1995, when a leading pediatrician published a medical case report that proposed a relationship between hunger and obesity.1 At first, the relationship between food insecurity and obesity was considered counterintuitive and labeled a paradox. This was due, in part, to our limited understanding of the causes and consequences of food insecurity. But now, with a more extensive research base and comprehensive conceptual framework, researchers conclude that the “coexistence of food insecurity and obesity is expected given that both are consequences of economic and social disadvantage.”2 While food insecurity and obesity can co-exist in the same individual, family, or community, the research on whether there is a statistically significant relationship provides mixed results.3,4,5,6 A number of research studies in the U.S. and abroad have found positive associations between food insecurity and overweight or obesity. Other studies have found no relationship, or even a lower risk of overweight or obesity with food insecurity. Associations, or lack thereof, often differ by gender, age, and/or race-ethnicity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Obesity Paradox and Diabetes
    In Brief The obesity paradox (survival advantage in overweight/obese patients with DISEASE HEART TO PREVENT DIABETES AND CORONARY FROM RESEARCH TO PRACTICE/FOUR OPPORTUNITIES type 2 diabetes) has called into question the importance of weight loss in over- weight people with diabetes. A systematic review of weight loss studies with a minimum of 1-year outcomes in people with diabetes reported inconsistent beneficial effects of weight loss on A1C, lipids, and blood pressure. To lower the risk of cardiovascular disease, a better nutrition therapy intervention may be reducing energy intake, which may or may not lead to weight loss, and selecting cardioprotective foods in appropriate portion sizes. However, any nutrition therapy intervention must be based on lifestyle changes the person with diabetes is willing and able to make. The Obesity Paradox and Diabetes It is being called the “obesity para- to heavier patients, cardioprotective dox”: research findings that people metabolic effects of increased body Marion J. Franz, MS, RD, CDE with obesity-related illnesses and who fat, and/or beneficial effects of higher are overweight or obese have better metabolic reserves.1 outcomes, including less mortality, A U-shaped association of weight than their normal-weight peers.1 These with mortality is reported in people seemingly contradictory results have with diabetes. In a recent study,4 the also been shown to apply to people records of 106,640 people with type with acute coronary syndrome, stroke, 2 diabetes in Scotland were reviewed and diabetes.2–9 The consequences of and BMI recorded around the time obesity are clear: increased risk for of diagnosis and mortality through- diabetes, high blood pressure, heart out the next ~ 5 years was assessed.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenging the Obesity Paradox: Extreme Obesity and COPD Mortality in the SUMMIT Trial
    ERJ OPEN RESEARCH ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE E.P. BRIGHAM ET AL. Challenging the obesity paradox: extreme obesity and COPD mortality in the SUMMIT trial Emily P. Brigham 1, Julie A. Anderson 2, Robert D. Brook3, Peter M.A. Calverley4, Bartolome R. Celli 5, Nicholas J. Cowans6, Courtney Crim7, James E. Diserens6, Fernando J. Martinez8, Meredith C. McCormack1, David E. Newby9, Julie Yates7, Jorgen Vestbo 10, Tianshi David Wu 11 and Robert A. Wise 1 1Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2Research and Development, GlaxoSmithKline, Stockley Park, UK. 3Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA. 4Dept of Medicine, Clinical Sciences Centre, University of Liverpool, University Hospital Aintree, Liverpool, UK. 5Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. 6Statistics and Programming, Veramed Ltd, Twickenham, UK. 7Research and Development, GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA. 8Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 9Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 10Division of Infection, Immunity and Respiratory Medicine, Manchester Academic Health Sciences Centre, The University of Manchester and Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK. 11Section of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. Corresponding author: Emily P. Brigham ([email protected]) Shareable abstract (@ERSpublications) In a population with moderate COPD, at heightened cardiovascular risk and containing a substantial proportion of individuals with BMI ⩾40 kg/m2, BMI and mortality demonstrate a U-shaped (rather than J-shaped) relationship https://bit.ly/3hDztI6 Cite this article as: Brigham EP, Anderson JA, Brook RD, et al.
    [Show full text]