Overweight followed by obesity have the lowest mortality among patients with systolic or diastolic heart failure independent of comorbidities whereas cachexia has the highest mortality

Introduction

The incidence and prevalence of obesity has risen dramatically in the United States and has reached pandemic levels worldwide.^1,2 The disease has been extensively studied and excess visceral adiposity has been shown to impose a variety of systemic metabolic derangements, such as increasing pro-inflammatory signaling cascades, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system activation, insulin resistance, and blood vessel sympathoactivation,^3,4 leading to many chronic diseases. Particularly, it serves as a significant risk factor in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease (CVD),^3,4,5,6 including hypertension, coronary heart disease, atrial fibrillation, and heart failure (HF).

Still, our collective understanding of weight and obesity continues to grow. Although it continues to serve as a major comorbidity in the development of CVD, studies have shown that in patients with established CVD, overweight and obese populations display a better prognosis in comparison to those with normal weight.^5,6,7,8,9 This “obesity paradox” in CVD is especially apparent in HF, although questions regarding this phenomenon persist and warrant further examination. Some have suggested that in patients with HF, mortality decreases with increasing weight,^8,9,10,11,12 whereas others have proposed that there is a specific point where the detrimental effects of obesity are minimized and the beneficial effects of the obesity paradox are maximized.^5,6,7,13 Still, results are unclear, and the point of weight optimization remains uncertain. Furthermore, due to obesity’s complex interplay with various metabolic systems, comorbidities of obesity make studying its effects on HF challenging and bring uncertainty to our current understanding of the relationship. The goal of this study is to evaluate and characterize the obesity paradox in both SHF and DHF patients with the largest available inpatient database of adult patients while eliminating potential confounders by adjusting for baseline characteristics and comorbidities of patients.

Method

Results

There was a total of 7,364,023 patients with a diagnosis of SHF that were stratified by weight groups and demographics, with a total all-cause inpatient mortality rate of 5.34% (Table 2). There was a total of 10,064,223 patients with a diagnosis of DHF that were stratified by weight groups and demographics, with a total all-cause inpatient mortality rate of 4.16% (Table 3). Demographic trends were observed, particularly in the distribution of weight groups among race (Figures 1,2) and median household income (Figures 3,4). For both SHF and DHF, all-cause inpatient mortality was lowest in overweight patients followed by those with obesity and morbid obesity whereas mortality was highest in those with cachexia when compared to normal weight (Table 4).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1:

SHF demographic trends in the distribution of weight groups with race. Normal weight category omitted to better visualize trends of other groups.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2:

DHF demographic trends in the distribution of weight groups with race. Normal weight category omitted to better visualize trends of other groups.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3:

SHF demographic trends in the distribution of weight groups with median household income. Normal weight category omitted to better visualize trends of other groups.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4:

DHF demographic trends in the distribution of weight groups with median household income. Normal weight category omitted to better visualize trends of other groups.

For both SHF and DHF, this relationship persists after multivariate analysis for comorbid conditions and baseline characteristics, as evident by the adjusted mortality odds ratios of each group in comparison to normal weight (Table 5). Mortality odds ratios of comorbidities in each group additionally show little variation in comparison to each other, indicating a lack of a confounding effect secondary to a comorbid condition (Figures 5,6).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 5:

SHF mortality odds ratios of comorbidities.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 6:

DHF mortality odds ratios of comorbidities.

Discussion

Cachexia is a devastating illness that clinically presents as progressive weight loss with alterations in body composition and disturbed homeostasis of several body systems. Particularly, cachexia is characterized by the loss of muscle mass, which may or may not be accompanied by a loss of fat mass. It can manifest in a variety of diseases, including HF (termed cardiac cachexia in this context), and is related to increased morbidity and mortality.^14,15 Our findings support this and it reinforces the external validity of our study, but more importantly, cardiac cachexia may provide an explanation for the underlying physiology of the obesity paradox in CVD. It has been shown that in the context of altered levels of endocrine mediators such as insulin, insulin-like growth factor 1, leptin, ghrelin, melanocortin, growth hormone, and neuropeptide Y that lead to cardiac cachexia, cardiac obesity actually plays a protective role.^14,15 That is, cardiac obesity is thought to mitigate the increased morbidity and mortality that would normally be witnessed in these patients secondary to cardiac cachexia. Furthermore, adipose tissue has been shown to be beneficial to cardiac cachexia in more than one way. It has been recently demonstrated that in those with cachexia and lower fat/lean body mass ratio, there is more right ventricle (RV) dysfunction, suggesting that increased adipose tissue relative to lean mass may be cardioprotective in the context of HF.^6,16 It follows that those who have a higher fat/lean body mass ratio may develop cardiac cachexia less, and have lower mortality rates in HF. This further highlights the paradoxical and multifaceted cardioprotection that excess fat provides in the context of HF, as it mitigates cardiac cachexia which is linked to significantly increased mortality in these patients.

Our data is consistent with these hypotheses and displays the weight at which excess adiposity is the most cardioprotective while still minimizing the detrimental effects of obesity. That is, HF patients with less adiposity than the overweight HF patients do not reap the benefit of cardioprotection, but those with more adiposity than the overweight group face the detrimental effects that excess adipose tissue exerts on their bodies. Still, HF patients who are obese and morbidly obese have lower all-cause inpatient mortality rates than those of normal weight, suggesting that the benefit of cardioprotection outweighs the cost of the negative metabolic effects of excess adiposity on the body in these populations.

Conversely, some have hypothesized that the patterns observed in the obesity paradox may not be secondary to excess fat mass playing a protective role, but instead are related to levels of lean mass.^5,6,13,17,18 In this context, lean refers to fat-free mass, such as skeletal muscle. A deficiency in lean mass, also known as sarcopenia, is independently associated with a poor prognosis in numerous chronic diseases, including HF.^19,20 If this was the case, findings would likely manifest with patients of lower BMI having worse outcomes in comparison to those with higher BMI. This may be due to the relationship between skeletal muscle mass and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF),^13,21 defined by the minute ventilation divided by carbon dioxide production (VLJ_E / VLJ_CO2) slope. This is a measure that quantifies ventilatory efficiency and a lower VLJ_E / VLJ_CO2slope has been shown to correlate with better outcomes in HF patients, irrespective of body habitus.¹³ It follows that higher amounts of lean mass exert protective effects on patients with HF, and/or the detrimental effects of sarcopenia manifest as increased mortality in lower BMI categories. This also suggests that among two HF patients of similar weights in the obese category of BMI, with one being nonsarcopenic obese and the other being sarcopenic obese, the former would have higher CRF and better outcomes.¹³

Our data is also consistent with this idea of skeletal muscle’s role in CRF, and further ties in with the idea that cardiac cachexia plays a significant role in HF mortality. Still, these competing hypotheses function on different ideologies regarding the underlying physiology of the obesity paradox. Is it increased fat mass, increased lean mass, or a combination of the two that are protective from mortality in HF? This question sheds light on the primary limitation of those studying obesity in all fields of research, including our own HF study. We used ICD-10 diagnosis codes, which function on a basis of BMI, to identify and categorize our patients. BMI is a measure that has widespread standardized use in healthcare, and therefore utilizing it has allowed us to identify and categorize an extremely large number of HF patients. However, this comes at a cost since BMI does not distinguish between variations in body composition (fat mass versus lean mass) and fat distribution (subcutaneous fat versus visceral fat).^6,17,18,22 As a result, there may be patients with different body compositions and more importantly, different metabolic profiles, who get placed into the same BMI group. BMI is an incredibly quick, easy, and useful tool for healthcare workers to get a snapshot of a patient’s potential body type and allows researchers to have an abundance of data to analyze. However, due to the variation in body composition within BMI groups, it has been argued that there are more effective measures of adiposity such as waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, body fat percentage, and fat mass index.^3,6,23 These alternative measures are not nearly as commonly used in medicine as BMI is. Furthermore, they require more time with patients, training of healthcare workers, and increased cost of visits.⁵ As such, this may introduce challenges to those studying obesity in any field, as most patients obtain a BMI measurement when they are receiving healthcare, and very few obtain a measurement with one of the alternative techniques mentioned above. Even more so, it may be warranted to obtain measures of lean mass alongside these alternative measures of fat mass to obtain a more complete picture of the underlying physiology of the obesity paradox.

Although some have criticized the use of BMI as a predictor of mortality in CVD, it has been demonstrated that at the population level, BMI still predicts clinical outcomes and that BMI can be as clinically important as the other total adiposity measures.²⁴ In fact, it has also been shown that these other measures of fat mass still demonstrate the obesity paradox.⁵ Given these findings, BMI will likely continue to be the gold standard of body composition assessment due to its utility, simplicity, widespread adoption in literature and healthcare, and endorsement by groups such as the World Health Organization.^2,24 Overall, in our own study, we have demonstrated a strong pattern of inpatient mortality rates in HF patients of varying BMI, but we are still unable to say with confidence what the underlying physiology of the obesity paradox is to explain our findings. Now that the pattern of the obesity paradox has been mapped out by the largest study to date, further prospective studies with other measures of adiposity and lean mass are warranted to analyze the physiological relationship of HF and obesity and distinguish which metabolic processes are at play to generate these patterns. Obesity is an incredibly complex disease, and the pattern witnessed in the obesity paradox is likely multifaceted with physiology that cannot be explained by a single mechanism.

It should be noted that although we have confirmed and further characterized the obesity paradox in SHF and DHF, this should not be interpreted as a reason to promote habits leading to overweight or obese individuals in any population. Since obesity is a significant risk factor in the pathogenesis of many chronic health conditions, including CVD and specifically HF, individuals who endorse healthy habits are practicing primary prevention of the development of HF in the first place.

Lastly, by analyzing the demographics of our study, particularly race and median household income, we observe a clear example of the social determinants of health and take this opportunity to advocate for more equitable healthcare. It is apparent that White and Asian/Pacific Islander populations make up a larger proportion of the normal weight category, whereas those who are Black or Native American and make up a much larger proportion of the obese and morbidly obese categories. This is the pattern we expect to see,^25,26,27,28 serving as a source of external validity of our study, but more importantly highlights the importance of equitable healthcare. It is critical to be mindful of how these communities are disproportionately affected by systemic issues, such as limited access to healthcare, less educational opportunities, food deserts, and decreased economic stability,^1,25,27 which all lead to a worsened overall health of an individual. An expected pattern is also witnessed with median household income. We see a strong inverse relationship between median household income and rates of obesity and morbid obesity. This further emphasizes just how much of a role that economic stability and healthcare access play in an individual’s overall health. It is essential that healthcare workers and researchers alike continue to advocate for more equitable healthcare to address these disparities.

Conclusion

Our data concludes that after multivariate adjustment for comorbidities, all-cause inpatient mortality in SHF and DHF is lowest in overweight patients. Obese and morbidly obese SHF and DHF patients also have lower all-cause inpatient mortality compared to normal-weight patients but to a lesser extent than those that are overweight. Although we confirmed the obesity paradox in HF patients, we found that increasing weight above the overweight threshold reduces the beneficial effect of additional weight in this population. Patients with cachexia by far have the highest all-cause inpatient mortality, nearly tripling the mortality rates of HF patients of normal weight. Further prospective studies with other measures of adiposity and lean mass are warranted to analyze the physiological relationship of HF and obesity and distinguish which metabolic processes are at play to generate these patterns.

Conflict of interest

None

Funding

None