The global obesity epidemic is well established, with increases in obesity prevalence for most countries since the 1980s. Obesity contributes directly to incident cardiovascular risk factors, ...including dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and sleep disorders. Obesity also leads to the development of cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular disease mortality independently of other cardiovascular risk factors. More recent data highlight abdominal obesity, as determined by waist circumference, as a cardiovascular disease risk marker that is independent of body mass index. There have also been significant advances in imaging modalities for characterizing body composition, including visceral adiposity. Studies that quantify fat depots, including ectopic fat, support excess visceral adiposity as an independent indicator of poor cardiovascular outcomes. Lifestyle modification and subsequent weight loss improve both metabolic syndrome and associated systemic inflammation and endothelial dysfunction. However, clinical trials of medical weight loss have not demonstrated a reduction in coronary artery disease rates. In contrast, prospective studies comparing patients undergoing bariatric surgery with nonsurgical patients with obesity have shown reduced coronary artery disease risk with surgery. In this statement, we summarize the impact of obesity on the diagnosis, clinical management, and outcomes of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and arrhythmias, especially sudden cardiac death and atrial fibrillation. In particular, we examine the influence of obesity on noninvasive and invasive diagnostic procedures for coronary artery disease. Moreover, we review the impact of obesity on cardiac function and outcomes related to heart failure with reduced and preserved ejection fraction. Finally, we describe the effects of lifestyle and surgical weight loss interventions on outcomes related to coronary artery disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation.
Abstract The prevalence of obesity has increased worldwide and is a source of concern since the negative consequences of obesity start as early as in childhood. The most commonly used anthropometric ...tool to assess relative weight and classify obesity is the body mass index (BMI); BMI alone shows a U- or a J-shaped association with clinical outcomes and mortality. Such an inverse relationship fuels a controversy in the literature, named the ‘obesity paradox', which associates better survival and fewer cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with elevated BMI afflicted with chronic diseases compared to non-obese patients. However, BMI cannot make the distinction between an elevated body weight due to high levels of lean vs. fat body mass. Generally, an excess of body fat (BF) is more frequently associated with metabolic abnormalities than a high level of lean body mass. Another explanation for the paradox is the absence of control for major individual differences in regional BF distribution. Adipose tissue is now considered as a key organ regarding the fate of excess dietary lipids, which may determine whether or not body homeostasis will be maintained (metabolically healthy obesity) or a state of inflammation/insulin resistance will be produced, with deleterious CV consequences. Obesity, particularly visceral obesity, also induces a variety of structural adaptations/alterations in CV structure/function. Adipose tissue can now be considered as an endocrine organ orchestrating crucial interactions with vital organs and tissues such as the brain, the liver, the skeletal muscle, the heart and blood vessels themselves. Thus, the evidence reviewed in this paper suggests that adipose tissue quality/function is as important, if not more so, than its amount in determining the overall health and CV risks of overweight/obesity.
Obesity is recognized as a heterogeneous condition in which individuals with similar body mass index may have distinct metabolic and cardiovascular risk profiles. Susceptibility to obesity-related ...cardiometabolic complications is not solely mediated by overall body fat mass, but is largely dependent upon individual differences in regional body fat distribution and ability of subcutaneous adipose tissue to expand. The present review will discuss to what extent the individual variation in body fat distribution is one of the clinical key variables explaining the metabolic heterogeneity of obesity and its related cardiovascular risk. We will present the evidence for the complex nature of the relationship between obesity and cardiovascular disease, outline our current understanding of the mechanisms involved, and identify future direction of research pertinent to this interaction.
Abstract Since the publication of the 2012 guidelines new literature has emerged to inform decision-making. The 2016 guidelines primary panel selected a number of clinically relevant questions and ...has produced updated recommendations, on the basis of important new findings. In subjects with clinical atherosclerosis, abdominal aortic aneurysm, most subjects with diabetes or chronic kidney disease, and those with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥ 5 mmol/L, statin therapy is recommended. For all others, there is an emphasis on risk assessment linked to lipid determination to optimize decision-making. We have recommended nonfasting lipid determination as a suitable alternative to fasting levels. Risk assessment and lipid determination should be considered in individuals older than 40 years of age or in those at increased risk regardless of age. Pharmacotherapy is generally not indicated for those at low Framingham Risk Score (FRS; <10%). A wider range of patients are now eligible for statin therapy in the FRS intermediate risk category (10%-19%) and in those with a high FRS (> 20%). Despite the controversy, we continue to advocate for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets for subjects who start therapy. Detailed recommendations are also presented for health behaviour modification that is indicated in all subjects. Finally, recommendation for the use of nonstatin medications is provided. Shared decision-making is vital because there are many areas in which clinical trials do not fully inform practice. The guidelines are meant to be a platform for meaningful conversation between patient and care provider so that individual decisions can be made for risk screening, assessment, and treatment.
•Heatwaves are associated with stark elevations in morbidity and mortality.•Older adults are at particular risk of multiple pathophysiological conditions.•Aging and disease elicit impaired ...physiological responses to heat stress.•These impairments can lead to acute and chronic injury in sensitive bodily systems.•Research is needed to better delineate health impacts of heatwaves in older adults.
More frequent and intense periods of extreme heat (heatwaves) represent the most direct challenge to human health posed by climate change. Older adults are particularly vulnerable, especially those with common age-associated chronic health conditions (e.g., cardiovascular disease, hypertension, obesity, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease). In parallel, the global population is aging and age-associated disease rates are on the rise. Impairments in the physiological responses tasked with maintaining homeostasis during heat exposure have long been thought to contribute to increased risk of health disorders in older adults during heatwaves. As such, a comprehensive overview of the provisional links between age-related physiological dysfunction and elevated risk of heat-related injury in older adults would be of great value to healthcare officials and policy makers concerned with protecting heat-vulnerable sectors of the population from the adverse health impacts of heatwaves. In this narrative review, we therefore summarize our current understanding of the physiological mechanisms by which aging impairs the regulation of body temperature, hemodynamic stability and hydration status. We then examine how these impairments may contribute to acute pathophysiological events common during heatwaves (e.g., heatstroke, major adverse cardiovascular events, acute kidney injury) and discuss how age-associated chronic health conditions may exacerbate those impairments. Finally, we briefly consider the importance of physiological research in the development of climate-health programs aimed at protecting heat-vulnerable individuals.
Some studies, mainly from high-income countries (HICs), report that women receive less care (investigations and treatments) for cardiovascular disease than do men and might have a higher risk of ...death. However, very few studies systematically report risk factors, use of primary or secondary prevention medications, incidence of cardiovascular disease, or death in populations drawn from the community. Given that most cardiovascular disease occurs in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), there is a need for comprehensive information comparing treatments and outcomes between women and men in HICs, middle-income countries, and low-income countries from community-based population studies.
In the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiological study (PURE), individuals aged 35–70 years from urban and rural communities in 27 countries were considered for inclusion. We recorded information on participants' sociodemographic characteristics, risk factors, medication use, cardiac investigations, and interventions. 168 490 participants who enrolled in the first two of the three phases of PURE were followed up prospectively for incident cardiovascular disease and death.
From Jan 6, 2005 to May 6, 2019, 202 072 individuals were recruited to the study. The mean age of women included in the study was 50·8 (SD 9·9) years compared with 51·7 (10) years for men. Participants were followed up for a median of 9·5 (IQR 8·5–10·9) years. Women had a lower cardiovascular disease risk factor burden using two different risk scores (INTERHEART and Framingham). Primary prevention strategies, such as adoption of several healthy lifestyle behaviours and use of proven medicines, were more frequent in women than men. Incidence of cardiovascular disease (4·1 95% CI 4·0–4·2 for women vs 6·4 6·2–6·6 for men per 1000 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio aHR 0·75 95% CI 0·72–0·79) and all-cause death (4·5 95% CI 4·4–4·7 for women vs 7·4 7·2–7·7 for men per 1000 person-years; aHR 0·62 95% CI 0·60–0·65) were also lower in women. By contrast, secondary prevention treatments, cardiac investigations, and coronary revascularisation were less frequent in women than men with coronary artery disease in all groups of countries. Despite this, women had lower risk of recurrent cardiovascular disease events (20·0 95% CI 18·2–21·7 versus 27·7 95% CI 25·6–29·8 per 1000 person-years in men, adjusted hazard ratio 0·73 95% CI 0·64-0·83) and women had lower 30-day mortality after a new cardiovascular disease event compared with men (22% in women versus 28% in men; p<0·0001). Differences between women and men in treatments and outcomes were more marked in LMICs with little differences in HICs in those with or without previous cardiovascular disease.
Treatments for cardiovascular disease are more common in women than men in primary prevention, but the reverse is seen in secondary prevention. However, consistently better outcomes are observed in women than in men, both in those with and without previous cardiovascular disease. Improving cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment, especially in LMICs, should be vigorously pursued in both women and men.
Full funding sources are listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).
The 2021 guidelines primary panel selected clinically relevant questions and produced updated recommendations, on the basis of important new findings that have emerged since the 2016 guidelines. In ...patients with clinical atherosclerosis, abdominal aortic aneurysm, most patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease, and those with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥ 5 mmol/L, statin therapy continues to be recommended. We have introduced the concept of lipid/lipoprotein treatment thresholds for intensifying lipid-lowering therapy with nonstatin agents, and have identified the secondary prevention patients who have been shown to derive the largest benefit from intensification of therapy with these agents. For all other patients, we emphasize risk assessment linked to lipid/lipoprotein evaluation to optimize clinical decision-making. Lipoprotein(a) measurement is now recommended once in a patient's lifetime, as part of initial lipid screening to assess cardiovascular risk. For any patient with triglycerides ˃ 1.5 mmol/L, either non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol or apolipoprotein B are the preferred lipid parameter for screening, rather than low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. We provide updated recommendations regarding the role of coronary artery calcium scoring as a clinical decision tool to aid the decision to initiate statin therapy. There are new recommendations on the preventative care of women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Health behaviour modification, including regular exercise and a heart-healthy diet, remain the cornerstone of cardiovascular disease prevention. These guidelines are intended to provide a platform for meaningful conversation and shared-decision making between patient and care provider, so that individual decisions can be made for risk screening, assessment, and treatment.
Le panel principal responsable des lignes directrices 2021 a sélectionné des éléments cliniquement pertinents et a soumis des recommandations actualisées, basées sur de nouvelles découvertes d'importance apparues depuis les lignes directrices de 2016. Ainsi, le traitement par statine reste recommandé pour les patients atteints d'athérosclérose clinique, d'anévrisme de l'aorte abdominale, pour la plupart des patients diabétiques ou atteints d'insuffisance rénale chronique, et chez ceux dont le cholestérol à lipoprotéines de basse densité est ≥ 5 mmol/l. Nous avons introduit la notion de seuils pour le traitement des lipides/lipoprotéines afin d'intensifier le traitement hypolipidémiant avec des agents non-statiniques, et nous avons identifié les patients en prévention secondaire distingués comme ayant tirer le plus grand bénéfice de l'intensification du traitement avec ces agents. Pour tous les autres patients, nous mettons l'accent sur l'appréciation du risque par le biais de l'évaluation des lipides/lipoprotéines afin d'optimiser la prise de décision clinique. Le dosage de la lipoprotéine (a) est maintenant recommandé une fois dans la vie d'un patient, dans le cadre du dépistage initial des lipides pour évaluer le risque cardiovasculaire. Pour tout patient présentant des taux de triglycérides ˃ 1,5 mmol/l, l'apolipoprotéine B ou le cholestérol lié aux lipoprotéines autres que celles de haute densité sont les indices lipidiques à privilégier pour le dépistage, plutôt que le cholestérol à lipoprotéines de basse densité. Nous proposons des recommandations actualisées concernant le rôle du score calcique des artères coronaires en tant qu'outil de décision clinique pour aider à la décision d'administrer un traitement par statine. Il existe de nouvelles recommandations concernant les soins préventifs des femmes souffrant de troubles hypertensifs de la grossesse. Le changement de comportement en matière de santé, incluant l'exercice physique régulier et une alimentation saine pour le coeur, reste la pierre angulaire de la prévention des maladies cardiovasculaires. Ces lignes directrices visent à fournir une plateforme pour une discussion constructive et une prise de décision partagée entre le patient et le prestataire de soins, afin que des décisions individuelles puissent être prises pour le dépistage, l'évaluation et le traitement des risques.
Abstract Many developments have occurred since the publication of the widely-used 2009 Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Dyslipidemia guidelines. Here, we present an updated version of the ...guidelines, incorporating new recommendations based on recent findings and harmonizing CCS guidelines with those from other Societies. The G rading of R ecommendations A ssessment, D evelopment and E valuation (GRADE) system was used, per present standards of the CCS. The total cardiovascular disease Framingham Risk Score (FRS), modified for a family history of premature coronary disease, is recommended for risk assessment. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol remains the primary target of therapy. However, non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol has been added to apolipoprotein B as an alternate target. There is an increased emphasis on treatment of higher risk patients, including those with chronic kidney disease and high risk hypertension. The primary panel has recommended a judicious use of secondary testing for subjects in whom the need for statin therapy is unclear. Expanded information on health behaviours is presented and is the backbone of risk reduction in all subjects. Finally, a systematic approach to statin intolerance is advocated to maximize appropriate use of lipid-lowering therapy. This document presents the recommendations and principal conclusions of this process. Along with associated Supplementary Material that can be accessed online, this document will be part of a program of knowledge translation. The goal is to increase the appropriate use of evidence-based cardiovascular disease event risk assessment in the management of dyslipidemia as a fundamental means of reducing global risk in the Canadian population.
Most studies of long-term exposure to outdoor fine particulate matter (PM2·5) and cardiovascular disease are from high-income countries with relatively low PM2·5 concentrations. It is unclear whether ...risks are similar in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) and how outdoor PM2·5 contributes to the global burden of cardiovascular disease. In our analysis of the Prospective Urban and Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study, we aimed to investigate the association between long-term exposure to PM2·5 concentrations and cardiovascular disease in a large cohort of adults from 21 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries.
In this multinational, prospective cohort study, we studied 157 436 adults aged 35–70 years who were enrolled in the PURE study in countries with ambient PM2·5 estimates, for whom follow-up data were available. Cox proportional hazard frailty models were used to estimate the associations between long-term mean community outdoor PM2·5 concentrations and cardiovascular disease events (fatal and non-fatal), cardiovascular disease mortality, and other non-accidental mortality.
Between Jan 1, 2003, and July 14, 2018, 157 436 adults from 747 communities in 21 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries were enrolled and followed up, of whom 140 020 participants resided in LMICs. During a median follow-up period of 9·3 years (IQR 7·8–10·8; corresponding to 1·4 million person-years), we documented 9996 non-accidental deaths, of which 3219 were attributed to cardiovascular disease. 9152 (5·8%) of 157 436 participants had cardiovascular disease events (fatal and non-fatal incident cardiovascular disease), including 4083 myocardial infarctions and 4139 strokes. Mean 3-year PM2·5 at cohort baseline was 47·5 μg/m3 (range 6–140). In models adjusted for individual, household, and geographical factors, a 10 μg/m3 increase in PM2·5 was associated with increased risk for cardiovascular disease events (hazard ratio 1·05 95% CI 1·03–1·07), myocardial infarction (1·03 1·00–1·05), stroke (1·07 1·04–1·10), and cardiovascular disease mortality (1·03 1·00–1·05). Results were similar for LMICs and communities with high PM2·5 concentrations (>35 μg/m3). The population attributable fraction for PM2·5 in the PURE cohort was 13·9% (95% CI 8·8–18·6) for cardiovascular disease events, 8·4% (0·0–15·4) for myocardial infarction, 19·6% (13·0–25·8) for stroke, and 8·3% (0·0–15·2) for cardiovascular disease mortality. We identified no consistent associations between PM2·5 and risk for non-cardiovascular disease deaths.
Long-term outdoor PM2·5 concentrations were associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease in adults aged 35–70 years. Air pollution is an important global risk factor for cardiovascular disease and a need exists to reduce air pollution concentrations, especially in LMICs, where air pollution levels are highest.
Full funding sources are listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).
Abstract Background Aerobic exercise is a common nonpharmacological intervention for the management of obesity. However, the efficacy of isolated aerobic exercise at promoting weight loss is unclear. ...We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of isolated aerobic exercise programs in overweight and obese populations. Methods We searched for published randomized controlled trial reports of aerobic exercise through January 20, 2010. Trials with an isolated aerobic exercise intervention were included. A random-effect model was used to synthesize the results of each intervention. Results We identified 14 trials involving 1847 patients. The duration of aerobic exercise programs ranged from 12 weeks to 12 months. Results were pooled for programs with 6-month duration and programs with 12-month duration. Six-month programs were associated with a modest reduction in weight (weighted mean difference WMD = −1.6 kg; 95% confidence interval CI, −1.64 to −1.56) and waist circumference (WMD = −2.12 cm; 95% CI, −2.81 to −1.44). Twelve-month programs also were associated with modest reductions in weight (WMD = −1.7 kg; 95% CI, −2.29 to −1.11) and waist circumference (WMD = −1.95 cm; 95% CI, −3.62 to −0.29). Conclusion Moderate-intensity aerobic exercise programs of 6-12 months induce a modest reduction in weight and waist circumference in overweight and obese populations. Our results show that isolated aerobic exercise is not an effective weight loss therapy in these patients. Isolated aerobic exercise provides modest benefits to blood pressure and lipid levels and may still be an effective weight loss therapy in conjunction with diets.
PDF
