2 European Heart Journal: Acute Cardiovascular Care
disagreement about the nature of the obesity paradox,
whether it exists, and if it does by what mechanism is this
beneficial effect manifested.
The goal of this review is to evaluate the potential mech-
anisms behind the obesity paradox, and its implications in
the management of patients with CAD and undergoing PCI.
Methods
A series of database searches using Medline, EMBASE, and
PubMed were performed using the following key words:
obesity, acute coronary syndrome, coronary revasculariza-
tion, myocardial infarction, obesity paradox, body mass
index, percutaneous coronary intervention, atherosclerosis,
reverse epidemiology.
Definition of obesity
The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies obesity
based on BMI as follows: underweight (<18.5 kg/m2), nor-
mal range (18.5–24.99 kg/m2), overweight (25–29.99 kg/
m2), obese class I (30–34.99 kg/m2), obese class II (35–
39.99 kg/m2), and obese class III (≥40 kg/m2).10
The obesity paradox
The obesity paradox was first observed in 1996 in a study
involving 3571 consecutive patients with CAD undergoing
PCI.11 Overweight and obese patients had lower in-hospital
mortality rates compared to normal-weight patients (mor-
tality rates: 2.8% for BMI ≤25 kg/m2, 3.7% for BMI >35
kg/m2, and 0.9% for BMI 26–34 kg/m2; p<0.001).11 Since
then, several contemporary studies have been carried out to
shed more light on this phenomenon. The results of these
studies are summarized in Table 1.
In a robust 5-year study by Gruberg and colleagues,7
involving 9633 consecutive patients undergoing PCI, the
rate of major in-hospital complications, including cardiac
mortality, was significantly lower in overweight (0.7%) or
obese patients (0.4%) compared to their normal-weight
(1.0%) counterparts (p=0.001). In addition, the overweight
or obese patients had nearly one-half the in-hospital and
1-year mortality rates post PCI compared with normal-
weight patients (1 year all-cause mortality rates: normal
BMI cohort 10.6%, overweight cohort 5.7%, and obese
cohort 4.9%; p<0.0001).7 More recently, Dhoot et al.6
investigated the effect of morbid obesity (BMI ≥40 kg/m2)
on in-hospital mortality and outcomes post revasculariza-
tion in 413,673 patients presenting with STEMI and
NSTEMI. The study demonstrated that morbidly obese
patients had an unadjusted mortality rate of 3.5 vs. 5.5%
(p<0.0001) in those patients who were not classed as obese.
After adjustment, patients with morbid obesity were still
found to have lower odds of in-hospital mortality, com-
pared to those who were not classed as morbidly obese.6
A study by Timoteo and colleagues12 evaluating in-
hospital and long-term mortality in 539 consecutive patients
undergoing primary PCI for STEMI demonstrated that, in
fact, overweight patients have a better prognosis compared
with patients in the normal-weight and obese groups.
In-hospital mortality was 8.0% for patients with normal
BMI, 4.4% for overweight patients and 5.9% for obese
patients (p=0.296). At 30 days, mortality rate was 9.6, 5.2,
and 6.9% (p=0.212), and at 1-year follow up, 11.2, 5.2, and
6.9% (p=0.064), respectively.12
A multicentre German Drug-Eluting Stent (DES.DE)
registry13 comparing in-hospital and 1-year outcomes
among unselected patients undergoing PCI with drug-
eluting stent (DES) implantation demonstrated no signifi-
cant difference in major adverse cardiovascular or
cerebrovascular events (MACCE; the composite of death,
MI, and stroke) or target vessel revascularization (TVR)
outcomes based on BMI. Rates of MACCE in normal-
weight, overweight, and obese patients were 7.1, 5.6, and
5.5% (p=0.09) and rates of TVR in survivors were 10.9,
11.7, and 11.6% (p=0.56), respectively.13 In a Japanese
study, Ikeda et al.14 followed 121 patients for 8 years after
they underwent PCI for MI of the left anterior descending
artery for MACCE (all causes of death, stroke, target lesion
revascularization, TVR, nonfatal MI, and hospitalization).
Those with BMI >25 kg/m2 had on average longer MACCE-
free survival than those with BMI <25 kg/m2. Further analysis
demonstrated that a higher BMI with lower insulin resistance
was the best indicator of MACCE-free survival.14
Sarno and colleagues15 assessed the effect of BMI on car-
diovascular outcomes in patients enrolled in a PCI trial com-
paring a sirolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer to a
biolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer. In this
study, at follow up after 1 year, the cumulative rate of car-
diac death, MI, and TVR was significantly higher in the
obese group (8.7% in normal-weight, 11.3% in overweight,
and 14.5% in obese patients). BMI was also found to be an
independent predictor of stent thrombosis. Interestingly, in
this study, all patients received DES, compared to other
studies confirming the obesity paradox where the patient
cohort were described to have PCI. It was not specified
whether PCI involved balloon angioplasty or a type of stent-
ing.15 In fact, most of the studies utilized bare metal stents
(BMS). A similar study in the Chinese population16 demon-
strated that long-term cardiovascular thrombotic events
were significantly higher in the obese group (5.9 vs. 3.2% in
normal-weight and 3.8% in overweight patients; p=0.001).
The incidence of stent thrombosis increased with increasing
BMI (0.9, 1.0, and 1.9% in normal, overweight, and obese
patients, respectively; p=0.029); again, DES were specifi-
cally used in all patients.16 DES were primarily developed to
reduce the incidence of restenosis, the major disadvantage
of BMS. Clinical trials have confirmed a reduction of 50–
70% in target lesion revascularization by DES compared to
BMS. However, DES requires a longer period of dual
at Uni of Southern Queensland on October 9, 2014acc.sagepub.comDownloaded from