Obesity Paradox in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Is Malnutrition the Answer?

BACKGROUND: Obesity paradox has been reported in patients with cardiovascular disease, showing an inverse association between obesity as defined by BMI (in kg/m2) and prognosis. Nutritional status is associated with systemic inflammatory response and affects cardiovascular disease outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to examine the influence of obesity and malnutrition on the prognosis of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: This study included consecutive patients diagnosed with ACS and underwent coronary angiogram between January 2009 and February 2023. At baseline, patients were categorized according to their BMI as follows: underweight (<18), normal weight (18-24.9), overweight (25.0-29.9), and obese (>30.0). We assessed the nutritional status by Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI). Malnutrition was defined as a PNI value of <38. RESULTS: Of the 21,651 patients with ACS, 582 (2.7%) deaths from any cause were observed over 28.7 months. Compared with the patient's state of normal weight, overweight, and obesity were associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality. Malnutrition was independently associated with poor survival (hazards ratio: 2.64; 95% CI: 2.24, 3.12; P < 0.001). In malnourished patients, overweight and obesity showed a 39% and 72% reduction in the incidence of all-cause mortality, respectively. However, in nourished patients, no significant reduction in the incidence of all-cause mortality was observed (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Obesity paradox appears to occur in patients with ACS. Malnutrition may be a significant independent risk factor for prognosis in patients with ACS. The obesity paradox is influenced by the status of malnutrition.

The prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of spontaneous echocardiographic contrast or left ventricular thrombus in patients with HFrEF.

AIMS: This study aimed to determine prevalence, predictors, and association with ischaemic stroke risk of spontaneous echocardiographic contrast (SEC) or left ventricular thrombus (LVT) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Clinical, echocardiographic, and follow-up data from January 2009 through February 2019 were retrospectively extracted from electronic medical records of patients with heart failure with left ventricular ejection fraction < 40% by echocardiography on admission, with follow-up to February 2020. Of 9485 consecutive patients with HFrEF, 123 (1.3%) presented LVT and 331 (3.5%) presented SEC. Patients with vs. those without SEC/LVT had larger left ventricular end-diastolic volume (199.5 ± 77.7 vs. 165.8 ± 61.3 mL, P < 0.001), lower left ventricular ejection fractions (29.5 ± 7.0% vs. 33.7 ± 5.5%, P < 0.001), and more often ischaemic cardiomyopathy, apical aneurysm, chronic kidney diseases, and smoking habit. In Cox regression analysis, SEC and LVT were independent predictors for ischaemic stroke occurrence [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.74-3.31; HR = 4.52, 95% CI: 2.77-7.40, both P < 0.001]. In patients with those without SEC or LVT, stroke risk was higher among those not on anticoagulants (HR = 2.55, 95% CI: 1.85-3.53; HR = 4.71, 95% CI: 2.84-7.81, both P < 0.001), but similar among those on anticoagulants (P > 0.05). In patients with sinus rhythm, the associations between SEC/LVT and ischaemic stroke persist with HRs of 2.57 (95% CI: 1.69-3.92) and 5.74 (95% CI: 3.38-9.75). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with HFrEF, SEC was not uncommon and increased risk of ischaemic stroke as well as LVT. Anticoagulants could play a role in the reduction of stroke risk, suggesting that patients with SEC/LVT, even those in sinus rhythm, would benefit from systemic anticoagulation treatment.

A novel risk model to predict first-ever ischemic stroke in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

Patients with heart failure are at increased risk for ischemic stroke. We aim to develop a more accurate stroke risk prediction tools identify high-risk patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Patient data were extracted retrospectively from the electronic medical database between January 2009 and February 2019. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis were performed to identify independent predictors, which were utilized to construct a nomogram for predicting ischemic stroke. AUROC analysis was used to compare the prognostic value between the new risk score and CHADS2/CHA2DS2-VASc scores. In 6087 patients with HFrEF, the risk of first-ever ischemic stroke was 5.8% events/pts-years (n=468) during 8007.2 person-years follow-up. A nomogram constructed by integrating 6 variables, including age, atrial fibrillation (AF), deep vein thrombosis (DVT), d-dimer, anticoagulant use and spontaneous echocardiographic contrast (SEC)/left ventricular thrombus (LVT), exhibited a greater area under the curve of 0.727, 0.728 and 0.714 than that by CHADS2 score (0.515, 0.522 and 0.540), and by CHA2DS2-VASc score (0.547, 0.553 and 0.562) for predicting first-ever ischemic stroke at hospitalization, 30-day and 6-month follow-up (all p<0.001). This novel stroke risk score performed better than existing CHADS2/ CHA2DS2-VASc scores and showed improvement in predicting first-ever ischemic stroke in HFrEF patients.

Left Bundle Branch Pacing for Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy: Nonrandomized On-Treatment Comparison With His Bundle Pacing and Biventricular Pacing.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) is a novel method for delivering cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). We compared on-treatment outcomes with His bundle pacing (HBP) and biventricular pacing (BVP) in this nonrandomized observational study. METHODS: Consecutive patients with left-ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40% and typical left bundle branch block (LBBB) referred for CRT received BVP, HBP, or LBBP. QRS duration, pacing threshold, LVEF, and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-seven patients were recruited: 49 HBP, 32 LBBP, and 54 BVP; 2 did not receive CRT. The majority of patients had nonischemic cardiomyopathy. Mean paced QRS duration was 100.7 ± 15.3 ms, 110.8 ± 11.1 ms, and 135.4 ± 20.2 ms during HBP, LBBP, and BVP, respectively. HBP and LBBP demonstrated a similar absolute increase (Δ) in LVEF (+23.9% vs +24%, P = 0.977) and rate of normalized final LVEF (74.4% vs 70.0%, P = 0.881) at 1-year follow-up. This was significantly higher than in the BVP group (Δ LVEF +16.7% and 44.9% rate of normalized final LVEF, P < 0.005). HBP and LBBP also demonstrated greater improvements in NYHA class compared with BVP. LBBP was associated with higher R-wave amplitude (11.2 ± 5.1 mV vs 3.8 ± 1.9 mV, P < 0.001) and lower pacing threshold (0.49 ± 0.13 V/0.5 ms vs 1.35 ± 0.73 V/0.5 ms, P < 0.001) compared with HBP. CONCLUSION: LBBP appears to be a promising method for delivering CRT. We observed similar improvements in symptoms and LV function with LBBP and HBP. These improvements were significantly greater than those seen in patients treated with BVP in this nonrandomized study. These promising findings justify further investigation with randomized trials.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with echocardiographic left ventricular spontaneous echo contrast.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous echo contrast (SEC) is a known precursor to thrombus formation and thromboembolic events. This study aims to demonstrate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with left ventricular spontaneous echo contrast (LV-SEC). METHODS: Patients with consecutive echocardiogram performed from October 2009 to September 2019 were enrolled in this retrospective, single-center study. Those with LV-SEC were included, while patients complicated by left ventricular thrombus, with history of infective endocarditis, prosthetic valves, or lost to follow-up were excluded. The clinical endpoint was 1-year thromboembolic events (i.e. stroke and peripheral embolism). RESULTS: Among 417 patients (mean age 63.5 ± 14.7 years; 86.8% men) with LV-SEC, the incidence of 1-year embolism was 12.9%. In multivariate Cox proportional hazard model, significant risk factors for thromboembolic event were age [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.022, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.000-1.045], atrial fibrillation (AF) (HR = 2.292, 95% CI: 1.237-4.244), hemoglobin (HR = 1.032, 95% CI: 1.017-1.047), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (HR = 1.021, 95% CI: 1.002-1.041), and anticoagulant therapy (HR = 0.310, 95% CI: 0.168-0.572). For patients with repeated measurements for echocardiography, D-dimer (HR = 1.137, 95% CI: 1.051-1.231), and △LVEF (HR = 0.961, 95% CI: 0.928-0.996) were independently associated with the persistent LV-SEC. CONCLUSION: The present study reported a high incidence of 1-year thromboembolic event in patients with LV-SEC. Age, AF, hemoglobin, LVEF were independent risk factors for 1-year embolism and a reduced risk of embolism was observed among patients with anticoagulation therapy. Additionally, D-dimer and △LVEF are independently associated with the persistent LV-SEC.

Impact of QRS morphology on response to conduction system pacing after atrioventricular junction ablation.

AIMS: His-Purkinje conduction system pacing (HPCSP) utilizing His (HBP) or left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and wide QRS duration has not been well studied. We assessed the benefit of left bundle branch block (LBBB) correction during HPCSP in AF patients undergoing atrioventricular junction (AVJ) ablation with LBBB, compared with those with narrow QRS duration. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an observational study in consecutive patients with typical LBBB or narrow QRS duration in whom we attempted HPCSP after AVJ ablation for refractory AF with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 50%. Echocardiographic responses and clinical outcomes were assessed at baseline and during 1 year of follow-up. A total of 178 patients were enrolled, of which 170 achieved AVJ ablation + permanent HPCSP (age 69.3 ± 10.1 years; LVEF 34.3 ± 7.7%), 133 (78.2%) patients had a narrow QRS duration, and 37 (21.2%) had an LBBB. The QRS duration changed from a baseline of 159.7 ± 16.6 ms to a paced QRS duration of 110.4 ± 12.7 ms in the LBBB cohort and from 95.6 ± 10.4 to 100.8 ± 14.5 ms (both P < 0.001) in the narrow QRS cohort after AVJ ablation and pacing. Compared with the narrow QRS cohort, the LBBB cohort showed a greater absolute increase in LVEF (+22.3% vs. +14.2%, P < 0.001), higher super responder rate (71.4% vs. 49.2%, P = 0.011), and greater New York Heart Association (NYHA) class improvement (-1.9 vs. -1.4, P < 0.001) at 1 year. CONCLUSION: Patients with LBBB have greater improvement in LVEF and NYHA class function than patients with narrow QRS from HPCSP after AVJ ablation.