Prediabetes remission after bariatric surgery: a 4-years follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery leads to weight loss and to cardiometabolic risk improvement. Although prediabetes remission after bariatric surgery is biologically plausible, data on this topic is scarce. We aimed to assess prediabetes remission rate and clinical predictors of remission in a 4 year follow up period. METHODS: Observational longitudinal study including patients with obesity and prediabetes who had undergone bariatric surgery in our centre. Prediabetes was defined as having a baseline glycated haemoglobin (A1c) between 5.7% and 6.4% and absence of anti-diabetic drug treatment. We used logistic regression models to evaluate the association between the predictors and prediabetes remission rate. RESULTS: A total of 669 patients were included, 84% being female. The population had a mean age of 45.4 ± 10.1 years-old, body mass index of 43.8 ± 5.7 kg/m2, and median A1c of 5.9 [5.8, 6.1]%. After bariatric surgery, prediabetes remission rate was 82%, 73%, 66%, and 58%, respectively in the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th years of follow-up. Gastric sleeve (GS) surgery was associated with higher prediabetes remission rate than Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery in the 3rd year of follow-up. Men had a higher remission rate than women, in the 1st and 3nd years of follow-up in the unadjusted analysis. Younger patients presented a higher remission rate comparing to older patients in the 3rd year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: We showed a high prediabetes remission rate after bariatric surgery. The remission rate decreases over the follow-up period, although most of the patients maintain the normoglycemia. Prediabetes remission seems to be more significant in patients who had undergone GS, in male and in younger patients.

Nutrient profile of packaged foods according to the degree of processing.

An increased consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF) leads to a rising prevalence of chronic noncommunicable diseases. This study aims to characterise the nutrient profile of white-label pre-packaged foods and bakery products available in a market leader Portuguese food retail chain, according to the extent of processing proposed by NOVA classification system. The nutrient profile (energy, sugar, total fat, saturated fat and sodium) according to processing degree was analysed using non-parametric tests. UPF were the most energy dense (278 kcal/100 g, p < .001) and the highest in sugar (15.9 g/100 g, p < .001). Processed foods were the highest in sodium (538 mg/100 g, p < .001). Processed and UPF showed significantly higher total (12.4 and 10.8 g/100 g, respectively) and saturated fat content (6.10 and 4.61 g/100 g, respectively) than unprocessed/minimally processed foods (p < .001). Regarding the variation of the nutritional value across the extent of processing, different results were observed for some categories suggesting the importance of a stratified analysis. The consumption of less processed foods and the manufacture of processed/UPF with better nutrient profile should be promoted.

Association of metabolic syndrome components and NAFLD with quality of life: Insights from a cross-sectional study.

AIM: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is associated with higher cardiovascular and metabolic risks, as well as with psychosocial disorders. Data regarding quality of life (QoL) in patients with MetS, point towards a significative association between MetS and a worse QoL. It remains unclear whether MetS components and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) are associated with QoL in these individuals. We aimed to evaluate the association between QoL of patients with MetS and prespecified metabolic parameters (anthropometric, lipidic and glucose profiles), the risk of hepatic steatosis and fibrosis, and hepatic elastography parameters. METHODS: Cross-sectional study including patients from microDHNA cohort. This cohort includes patients diagnosed with MetS, 18 to 75 years old, followed in our tertiary center. The evaluation included anamnesis, physical examination, a QoL questionnaire (Short-Form Health Survey, SF-36), blood sampling and hepatic elastography. We used ordered logistic regression models adjusted to sex, age and body mass index to evaluate the associations between the QoL domains evaluated by SF-36 and the prespecified parameters. RESULTS: We included a total of 65 participants with MetS, with 54% being female and the mean age 61.9 ± 9.6 years old. A worse metabolic profile, specifically higher waist circumference, lower HDL, higher triglycerides, and more severe hepatic steatosis, were associated with worse QoL scores in several domains. We found no significant association of hepatic fibrosis with QoL. CONCLUSION: Our data suggests that there is a link between a worse metabolic profile (specifically poorer lipidic profile and presence of hepatic steatosis) and a worse QoL in patients with MetS.

Office- versus home-based evaluation of quality of life in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure (HF) patients often experience poor health-related quality-of-life (HR-QoL). The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) is frequently used for assessing HR-QoL in HF. Whether KCCQ scores vary in a clinical meaningful manner according to the setting (home vs office) where patients respond to the questionnaire is currently unknown. AIMS: Assess the differences in the responses to KCCQ-23 questionnaire when completed at home or office. METHODS: Randomized parallel-group study, including patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Primary outcome was home vs office comparison of overall summary score (KCCQ-OSS). Main secondary outcomes were clinical summary score (KCCQ-CSS) and total symptom score (KCCQ-TSS). RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were included in the study: 50 home vs 50 office. Mean age was 71 yrs. Most baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups, except male sex, MRA use, and prior HF hospitalizations which were more frequent in the home group. No statistically-significant between-group differences were found regarding KCCQ-OSS (median [percentile25-75]) scores: home 69.1 (42.0-86.5) vs office 63.1 (44.3-82.3) points, P-value = 0.59, or main secondary outcomes: KCCQ-CSS home 62.2 (46.5-79.9) vs office 68.1 (51.9-79.2) points, P-value = 0.69, and KCCQ-TSS home 84.7 (59.7-97.2) vs office 76.4 (66.7-94.4) points, P-value = 0.85. Results remained similar after adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics and using non-parametric regressions. CONCLUSIONS: No major differences were found in KCCQ-23 scores regardless of whether the questionnaire was completed at home or office. These findings can be useful to make HR-QoL more accessible, allowing patients to respond at home using email or cell-phone applications.

COVID-19 Lockdown and Impact on 2-Year Weight Loss in a Bariatric Center.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a worldwide lockdown, which affected physical exercise habits, as well as having a detrimental effect on psychological health and follow-up visits of patients submitted to bariatric surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 lockdown on the 2-year weight loss of patients submitted to bariatric surgery in our center. METHODS: This was an observational study comparing the weight loss of patients who underwent bariatric surgery from January to March 2020 with a control group submitted to surgery between January and March 2017. Percentage of total weight loss (% TWL) and excess weight loss (% EWL) were assessed 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. RESULTS: A total number of 203 patients were included in this study, 102 had bariatric surgery during the selected period in 2020 and 101 underwent surgery during the same period in 2017. There was no statistically significant difference in weight loss between the 2017 and 2020 groups which was reported as % TWL (mean 27.08 ± 7.530 vs. 28.03 ± 7.074, 33.87 ± 8.507 vs. 34.07 ± 8.979 and 34.13 ± 9.340 vs. 33.98 ± 9.993; p = 0.371) and % EWL (mean 66.83 ± 23.004 vs. 69.71 ± 17.021, 83.37 ± 24.059 vs. 84.51 ± 21.640 and 83.47 ± 24.130 vs. 84.27 ± 23.651; p = 0.506) at 6, 12, and 24 months post-surgery. CONCLUSION: Despite social limitations imposed by the COVID-19 lockdown, we found no significant difference between weight loss at 2 years postoperatively in the 2020 group when compared with a control group who underwent bariatric surgery in 2017. These results show that the outcomes of bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 lockdown were comparable with those recorded before the pandemic, supporting the efficacy of bariatric procedures' metabolic effects during the first 2 years after surgery, regardless of lifestyle habits.