Does there exist an obesity paradox in COVID-19? Insights of the international HOPE-COVID-19-registry

BackgroundObesity has been described as a protective factor in cardiovascular and other diseases being expressed as ‘obesity paradox’. However, the impact of obesity on clinical outcomes including mortality in COVID-19 has been poorly systematically investigated until now. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes among COVID-19 patients divided into three groups according to the body mass index (BMI).MethodsWe retrospectively collected data up to May 31^st, 2020. 3635 patients were divided into three groups of BMI (<25 kg/m²; n = 1110, 25?30 kg/m²; n = 1464, and >30 kg/m²; n = 1061). Demographic, in-hospital complications, and predictors for mortality, respiratory insufficiency, and sepsis were analyzed.ResultsThe rate of respiratory insufficiency was more recorded in BMI 25?30 kg/m² as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m² (22.8% vs. 41.8%; p < 0.001), and in BMI > 30 kg/m² than BMI < 25 kg/m², respectively (22.8% vs. 35.4%; p < 0.001). Sepsis was more observed in BMI 25?30 kg/m² and BMI > 30 kg/m² as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m², respectively (25.1% vs. 42.5%; p = 0.02) and (25.1% vs. 32.5%; p = 0.006). The mortality rate was higher in BMI 25?30 kg/m² and BMI > 30 kg/m² as compared to BMI < 25 kg/m², respectively (27.2% vs. 39.2%; p = 0.31) (27.2% vs. 33.5%; p = 0.004). In the Cox multivariate analysis for mortality, BMI < 25 kg/m² and BMI > 30 kg/m² did not impact the mortality rate (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.889?1.508; p = 0.27) (HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.893?1.479; p = 0.27). In multivariate logistic regression analyses for respiratory insufficiency and sepsis, BMI < 25 kg/m² is determined as an independent predictor for reduction of respiratory insufficiency (OR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.538?1.004; p = 0.05).ConclusionsHOPE COVID-19-Registry revealed no evidence of obesity paradox in patients with COVID-19. However, Obesity was associated with a higher rate of respiratory insufficiency and sepsis but was not determined as an independent predictor for a high mortality.     

Clinical presentation,therapeutic approach,and outcome of young patients admitted for COVID-19, with respect to the elderly counterpart

There is limited information on the presenting characteristics, prognosis, and therapeutic approaches of young patients hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We sought to investigate the baseline characteristics, in-hospital treatment, and outcomes of a wide cohort < 65 years admitted for COVID-19. Using the international multicenter HOPE-COVID-19 registry, we evaluated the baseline characteristics, clinical presentation, therapeutic approach, and prognosis of patients < 65 years discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19, also compared with the elderly counterpart. Of the included 5746 patients, 2676 were < 65 and 3070 ≥ 65 years. All risk factors and several parameters suggestive of worse clinical presentation augmented through increasing age classes. In-hospital mortality rates were 6.8% and 32.1% in the younger and older cohort, respectively (p < 0.001). Among young patients, mortality, access to ICU and treatment with IMVwere positively correlated with age. Contrariwise, over 65 years of age this trend was broken so that only the association between age and mortality was persistent, while the rates of access to ICU and IMV started to decline. Younger patients also recognized specific predictors of case fatality, such as obesity and gender. Age negatively impacts on mortality, access to ICU and treatment with IMV in patients < 65 years. In elderly patients only case fatality rate keeps augmenting in a stepwise manner through increasing age categories, while therapeutic approaches become more conservative. Besides age, obesity, gender, history of cancer, and severe dyspnea, tachypnea, chest X-ray bilateral abnormalities, abnormal level of creatinine and leucocyte among admission parameters seem to play a central role in the outcome of patients younger than 65 years.

     

Incidence of atrial and ventricular arrhythmias in obese patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction treated with sacubitril/valsartan

Aim

To compare clinical outcomes among patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) according to body mass index (BMI) after initiating treatment with an angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI).

Methods

We gathered data from 2016 to 2020 at the University Medical Center Mannheim; 208 consecutive patients were divided into two groups according to BMI (< 30 kg/m²; n = 116, ≥ 30 kg/m²; n = 92). Clinical outcomes, including mortality rate, all-cause hospitalizations and congestion, were systematically analysed.

Results

At the 12-month follow-up, the mortality rate was similar in both groups (7.9% in BMI < 30 kg/m² vs. 5.6% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; P = .76). All-cause hospitalization before ARNI treatment was comparable in both groups (63.8% in BMI < 30 kg/m² vs. 57.6% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; P = .69). After ARNI treatment, the hospitalization rate was also comparable in both groups at the 12-month follow-up (52.2% in BMI < 30 kg/m² vs. 53.7% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; P = .73). Obese patients experienced more congestion compared with non-obese patients at follow-up, without statistical significance (6.8% in BMI < 30 kg/m² vs. 15.5% in BMI ≥ 30 kg/m²; P = .11). Median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) improved in both groups, but significantly more in non-obese compared with obese patients at the 12-month follow-up (from 26% [3%-45%] [min.-max.] vs. 29% [10%-45%] [min.-max.] [P = .56] to 35.5% [15%-59%] [min.-max.] vs. 30% [13%-50%] [min.-max.] [P = .03], respectively). The incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF), non-sustained (ns) and sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) was less in non-obese than in obese patients after initiation of sacubitril/valsartan at the 12-month follow-up (AF: 43.5% vs. 53.7%; P = .20; nsVT: 9.8% vs. 28.4%; P = .01; VT: 14.1% vs. 17.9%; P = .52; VF: 7.6% vs. 13.4%; P = .23).

Conclusions

The incidence of congestion in obese patients was higher compared with non-obese patients. LVEF improved significantly more in non-obese compared with obese HFrEF patients. Furthermore, AF and the ventricular tachyarrhythmia rate were revealed more in obesity compared with those without obesity at the 12-month follow-up.