Long-term air pollution exposure and cardiovascular risk factors in older Americans

Abstract Several studies have already explored individual and environmental risk factors for COVID-19 morality, however most study populations consisted of the overall population and mainly from China or the US. Our study focused on COVID-19 mortality in the elderly in seven European cities. Long-term exposure to air pollution was estimated through annual pollutant concentrations at the residential address averaged over the last two years of the study period between February and May 2020. We focused on the main outdoor air pollutants PM10, PM2.5, NO2 and O3. Short-term variations in air pollutants and weather parameters (e.g. temperature, UV, relative humidity) were also examined through a 20-day period before the confirmed PCR diagnostic of COVID-19. Individual risk factors such as smoking status, sex, body mass index (BMI), ischemic heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, chronic renal failure, history of cancer, COPD, and lung fibrosis, were taken into account. We found positive associations for diabetes and COVID-19 mortality (OR 2.2 CI 95% :1.1, 4.4). Using a multivariate logistic regression model adjusted for all patient characteristics and city, we fail to reject the null hypothesis of no association between COVID-19 mortality and long-term and short-term increase in PM2.5, PM10, NO2 and O3. Our study suffers from the fact that patient profiles strongly differ between high-polluted and less-polluted cities. Strong differences in COVID-19 mortalities were observed between cities, which could be due to differences in COVID-19 management and treatment, such as accessibility to reanimation and intensive units between cities. Overall, our study highlights the need to improve estimation of individual exposure to air pollution. Indeed, even with the high-efficiency modelisation systems used in our study, we were unable to estimate the effect of air pollution within each city, because variations in air pollution exposure were too small. Individual markers of air pollution exposure such as recently demonstrated with urinary black carbon or passive individual samplers, would be most suitable for future explorations. Concerning weather parameters, although previous studies concluded that increase in temperature and UV index could decrease COVID-19 morality, our data did not allow us to reject the null hypotheses.

Download Full-text

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Association between degenerative aortic valve disease and long-term exposure to cardiovascular risk factors: results of the longitudinal population-based KORA/MONICA survey.

Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature ◽

10.3410/f.1208971.674076 ◽

2009 ◽

Author(s):

Melvin Cheitlin

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Cardiovascular Risk ◽

Aortic Valve ◽

Cardiovascular Risk Factors ◽

Aortic Valve Disease ◽

Population Based ◽

Valve Disease

Download Full-text

Long-term effects (>24 months) of multiple lifestyle intervention on major cardiovascular risk factors among high risk subjects: a meta-analysis

European Journal of Preventive Cardiology ◽

10.1093/eurjpc/zwab061.253 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 28 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

H Bergum ◽

I Sandven ◽

TO Klemsdal

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Blood Pressure ◽

Cardiovascular Risk ◽

Systolic Blood Pressure ◽

Total Cholesterol ◽

Cardiovascular Risk Factors ◽

Lifestyle Intervention ◽

Small Study ◽

Long Term Effects

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): The Norwegian health department Background The evidence of the long-term effects of multiple lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular risk is uncertain. We aimed to summarize the evidence from randomized clinical trials examining the efficacy of lifestyle intervention on major cardiovascular risk factors in subjects at high cardiovascular risk. Methods Eligible trials investigated the impact of lifestyle intervention versus usual care with minimum 24 months follow-up, reporting more than one major cardiovascular risk factor. A literature search updated April 15, 2020 identified 12 eligible studies. The results from individual trials were combined using fixed and random effect models, using the standardized mean difference (SMD) to estimate effect sizes. Small-study effect was evaluated, and heterogeneity between studies examined by subgroup and meta-regression analyses considering patient- and study-level variables. Results Small-study effect was not identified. Lifestyle intervention reduced systolic blood pressure modestly with an estimated SMD of -0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.21 to -0.04, with moderate heterogeneity (I² = 59%), corresponding to a mean difference of approximately 2 mmHg (MD = -1.86, 95% CI: -3.14 to -0.57, p = 0.0046). This effect disappeared in the subgroup of trials judged at low risk of bias (SMD = 0.02, 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.11). For the outcome total cholesterol SMD was -0.06, 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.00, with no heterogeneity (I² = 0%), indicating no effect of the intervention. Conclusion Lifestyle intervention resulted in only a modest effect on systolic blood pressure and no effect on total cholesterol after 24 months. Further lifestyle trials should consider the challenge of maintaining larger long-term benefits to ensure impact on cardiovascular outcomes.

Download Full-text