Abstract 4125493: Is There an Obesity Paradox for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair? A Pilot Meta-Analysis

Background: The impact of body mass index (BMI) on Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair (TEER) outcomes remains uncertain, with studies showing conflicting results. Some suggest an 'obesity paradox' exists, favoring better outcomes for obese patients and worse outcomes for underweight patients, while others report no significant impact of BMI. Methodology: We conducted a systematic literature search using major databases to identify studies investigating the association between baseline BMI status and post-procedural outcomes in patients undergoing TEER. Patients were categorized into four BMI groups: underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m 2 ), normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m 2 ), overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m 2 ), and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ). The endpoints included were the risk of in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Data were pooled using Review Manager with a random-effects model. Risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the effect measure. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. Results: Our study included a total of six observational studies, encompassing 7,627 obese and 74,820 non-obese patients. The outcome of in-hospital mortality revealed no significant difference between the two groups (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.57, 1.27; p=0.43). Subgroup analysis showed a trend towards higher in-hospital mortality risk for underweight patients compared to overweight (RR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.11, 1.95; p=0.007) and obese patients (RR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.92; p=0.04). The comparison between underweight and normal-weight patients did not reach statistical significance (RR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.55; p=0.22). Additionally, the risk of myocardial infarction (RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.77, 1.58; p=0.59) and stroke (RR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.13, 1.42; p=0.17) did not differ significantly between obese and non-obese patients. Conclusions: Our study found no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between obese and non-obese patients. However, underweight patients had a higher mortality risk compared to both overweight and obese patients. While myocardial infarction rates were similar across all groups, there was a non-significant trend suggesting a potentially lower risk of stroke in obese patients. These findings warrant further prospective studies to provide robust evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2024-11-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.150.suppl_1.4125493
Primary Topic
Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4125493: Is There an Obesity Paradox for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair? A Pilot Meta-Analysis

Hritvik Jain, Aman Goyal, Samia Aziz Sulaiman, Haleema Qayyum Abbasi et al.
Circulation
Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
article

Abstract 4125493: Is There an Obesity Paradox for Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair? A Pilot Meta-Analysis

Hritvik Jain, Aman Goyal, Samia Aziz Sulaiman, Haleema Qayyum Abbasi, Gauranga Mahalwar, Surabhi Maheshwari, Darshan Puttaswamy, Rozi Khan
article en

Abstract

Background: The impact of body mass index (BMI) on Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair (TEER) outcomes remains uncertain, with studies showing conflicting results. Some suggest an 'obesity paradox' exists, favoring better outcomes for obese patients and worse outcomes for underweight patients, while others report no significant impact of BMI. Methodology: We conducted a systematic literature search using major databases to identify studies investigating the association between baseline BMI status and post-procedural outcomes in patients undergoing TEER. Patients were categorized into four BMI groups: underweight (BMI < 18.5 kg/m 2 ), normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m 2 ), overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m 2 ), and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m 2 ). The endpoints included were the risk of in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Data were pooled using Review Manager with a random-effects model. Risk ratios (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used as the effect measure. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. Results: Our study included a total of six observational studies, encompassing 7,627 obese and 74,820 non-obese patients. The outcome of in-hospital mortality revealed no significant difference between the two groups (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.57, 1.27; p=0.43). Subgroup analysis showed a trend towards higher in-hospital mortality risk for underweight patients compared to overweight (RR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.11, 1.95; p=0.007) and obese patients (RR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.92; p=0.04). The comparison between underweight and normal-weight patients did not reach statistical significance (RR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.91, 1.55; p=0.22). Additionally, the risk of myocardial infarction (RR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.77, 1.58; p=0.59) and stroke (RR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.13, 1.42; p=0.17) did not differ significantly between obese and non-obese patients. Conclusions: Our study found no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between obese and non-obese patients. However, underweight patients had a higher mortality risk compared to both overweight and obese patients. While myocardial infarction rates were similar across all groups, there was a non-significant trend suggesting a potentially lower risk of stroke in obese patients. These findings warrant further prospective studies to provide robust evidence.

CirculationVol. 150(Suppl_1)
University of Jordan (JO), Cleveland Clinic (US), Ayub Medical College (PK), Medical University of South Carolina (US), University of Alabama (US), King Edward Memorial Hospital and Seth G.S. Medical College (IN), All India Institute of Medical Sciences Jodhpur (IN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 66%
Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.