Institutes
Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
Language
- English (3) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- obesity (3) (remove)
Institute
- Medizin (3)
The coronavirus disease 2019 COVID-19 pandemic is rapidly spreading worldwide and is becoming a major public health crisis. Increasing evidence demonstrates a strong correlation between obesity and the COVID-19 disease. We have summarized recent studies and addressed the impact of obesity on COVID-19 in terms of hospitalization, severity, mortality, and patient outcome. We discuss the potential molecular mechanisms whereby obesity contributes to the pathogenesis of COVID-19. In addition to obesity-related deregulated immune response, chronic inflammation, endothelium imbalance, metabolic dysfunction, and its associated comorbidities, dysfunctional mesenchymal stem cells/adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells may also play crucial roles in fueling systemic inflammation contributing to the cytokine storm and promoting pulmonary fibrosis causing lung functional failure, characteristic of severe COVID-19. Moreover, obesity may also compromise motile cilia on airway epithelial cells and impair functioning of the mucociliary escalators, reducing the clearance of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Obese diseased adipose tissues overexpress the receptors and proteases for the SARS-CoV-2 entry, implicating its possible roles as virus reservoir and accelerator reinforcing violent systemic inflammation and immune response. Finally, anti-inflammatory cytokines like anti-interleukin 6 and administration of mesenchymal stromal/stem cells may serve as potential immune modulatory therapies for supportively combating COVID-19. Obesity is conversely related to the development of COVID-19 through numerous molecular mechanisms and individuals with obesity belong to the COVID-19-susceptible population requiring more protective measures.
Obstructive Sleep Apnea is emerging as a global health epidemic, particularly due to the obesity pandemic. However, comprehensive prevalence data are still lacking and global OSA research has not yet been structurally evaluated. Using the latest comprehensive age/gender-specific BMI and obesity data, a global landscape estimating the risk/burden of OSA was created. Results were presented in relation to an in-depth analysis of OSA research and countries’ socioeconomic/scientific background. While the USA, Canada, and Japan are the highest publishing countries on OSA, Iceland, Greece, and Israel appeared at the forefront when relating the scientific output to socioeconomic parameters. Conversely, China, India, and Russia showed relatively low performances in these relations. Analysis of the estimated population at risk (EPR) of OSA showed the USA, China, India, and Brazil as the leading countries. Although the EPR and OSA research correlated strongly, major regional discrepancies between the estimated demand and actual research performances were identified, mainly in, but not limited to, developing nations. Our study highlights regional challenges/imbalances in the global activity on OSA and allows targeted measures to mitigate the burden of undiagnosed/untreated OSA. Furthermore, the inclusion of disadvantaged countries in international collaborations could stimulate local research efforts and provide valuable insights into the regional epidemiology of OSA.
Lifestyle interventions, including meal replacement, are effective in the prevention and treatment of type-2-diabetes and obesity. Since insulin is the key weight regulator, we hypothesised that the addition of meal replacement to a lifestyle intervention reduces insulin levels more effectively than lifestyle intervention alone. In the international multicentre randomised controlled ACOORH (Almased Concept against Overweight and Obesity and Related Health Risk) trial, overweight or obese persons who meet the criteria for metabolic syndrome (n = 463) were randomised into two groups. Both groups received nutritional advice focusing on carbohydrate restriction and the use of telemonitoring devices. The intervention group substituted all three main meals per day in week 1, two meals per day in weeks 2–4, and one meal per day in weeks 5–26 with a protein-rich, low-glycaemic meal replacement. Data were collected at baseline and after 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. All datasets providing insulin data (n = 446) were included in this predefined subanalysis. Significantly higher reductions in insulin (−3.3 ± 8.7 µU/mL vs. −1.6 ± 9.8 µU/mL), weight (−6.1 ± 5.2 kg vs. −3.2 ± 4.6 kg), and inflammation markers were observed in the intervention group. Insulin reduction correlated with weight reduction and the highest amount of weight loss (−7.6 ± 4.9 kg) was observed in those participants with an insulin decrease > 2 µU/mL. These results underline the potential for meal replacement-based lifestyle interventions in diabetes prevention, and measurement of insulin levels may serve as an indicator for adherence to carbohydrate restriction.