38 research outputs found

    Breastfeeding Is Associated With a Reduced Maternal Cardiovascular Risk:Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Involving Data From 8 Studies and 1 192 700 Parous Women

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Breastfeeding has been robustly linked to reduced maternal risk of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and type 2 diabetes. We herein systematically reviewed the published evidence on the association of breastfeeding with maternal risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Our systematic search of PubMed and Web of Science of articles published up to April 16, 2021, identified 8 relevant prospective studies involving 1 192 700 parous women (weighted mean age: 51.3 years at study entry, 24.6 years at first birth; weighted mean number of births: 2.3). A total of 982 566 women (82%) reported having ever breastfed (weighted mean lifetime duration of breastfeeding: 15.6 months). During a weighted median follow‐up of 10.3 years, 54 226 CVD, 26 913 coronary heart disease, 30 843 stroke, and 10 766 fatal CVD events were recorded. In a random‐effects meta‐analysis, the pooled multivariable‐adjusted hazard ratios comparing parous women who ever breastfed to those who never breastfed were 0.89 for CVD (95% CI, 0.83–0.95; I(2)=79.4%), 0.86 for coronary heart disease (95% CI, 0.78–0.95; I(2)=79.7%), 0.88 for stroke (95% CI, 0.79–0.99; I(2)=79.6%), and 0.83 for fatal CVD (95% CI, 0.76–0.92; I(2)=47.7%). The quality of the evidence assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool ranged from very low to moderate, which was mainly driven by high between‐studies heterogeneity. Strengths of associations did not differ by mean age at study entry, median follow‐up duration, mean parity, level of adjustment, study quality, or geographical region. A progressive risk reduction of all CVD outcomes with lifetime durations of breastfeeding from 0 up to 12 months was found, with some uncertainty about shapes of associations for longer durations. CONCLUSIONS: Breastfeeding was associated with reduced maternal risk of CVD outcomes

    Associations between Physical Activity, Sitting Time, and Time Spent Outdoors with Mental Health during the First COVID-19 Lock Down in Austria.

    Get PDF
    Measures implemented to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 have resulted in a decrease in physical activity (PA) while sedentary behaviour increased. The aim of the present study was to explore associations between PA and mental health in Austria during COVID-19 social restrictions. In this web-based cross-sectional study (April-May 2020) moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), sitting time, and time spent outdoors were self-reported before and during self-isolation. Mental well-being was assessed with the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale, and the Beck depression and anxiety inventories. The majority of the participants (n = 652) were female (72.4%), with a mean age of 36.0 years and a standard deviation (SD) of 14.4. Moreover, 76.5% took part in ≄30 min/day of MVPA, 53.5% sat ≄10 h/day, and 66.1% spent ≄60 min/day outdoors during self-isolation. Thirty-eight point five percent reported high mental well-being, 40.5% reported depressive symptoms, and 33.9% anxiety symptoms. Participating in higher levels of MVPA was associated with higher mental well-being (odds ratio = OR: 3.92; 95% confidence interval = 95%CI: 1.51-10.15), less depressive symptoms (OR: 0.44; 95%CI: 0.29-0.66) and anxiety symptoms (OR = 0.62; 95%CI: 0.41-0.94), and less loneliness (OR: 0.46; 95%CI: 0.31-0.69). Participants sitting <10 h/day had higher odds of mental well-being (OR: 3.58; 95%CI: 1.13-11.35). Comparable results were found for spending ≄60 min/day outdoors. Maintaining one's MVPA levels was associated with higher mental well-being (OR = 8.61, 95%CI: 2.68-27.62). In conclusion, results show a positive association between PA, time spent outdoors and mental well-being during COVID-19 social restrictions. Interventions aiming to increase PA might mitigate negative effects of such restrictions

    Carotid Intima-Media Thickness Progression as Surrogate Marker for Cardiovascular Risk Meta-Analysis of 119 Clinical Trials Involving 100 667 Patients

    No full text
    Background: To quantify the association between effects of interventions on carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) progression and their effects on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Methods: We systematically collated data from randomized, controlled trials. cIMT was assessed as the mean value at the common-carotid-artery; if unavailable, the maximum value at the common-carotid-artery or other cIMT measures were used. The primary outcome was a combined CVD end point defined as myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization procedures, or fatal CVD. We estimated intervention effects on cIMT progression and incident CVD for each trial, before relating the 2 using a Bayesian meta-regression approach. Results: We analyzed data of 119 randomized, controlled trials involving 100 667 patients (mean age 62 years, 42% female). Over an average follow-up of 3.7 years, 12 038 patients developed the combined CVD end point. Across all interventions, each 10 ÎŒm/y reduction of cIMT progression resulted in a relative risk for CVD of 0.91 (95% Credible Interval, 0.87-0.94), with an additional relative risk for CVD of 0.92 (0.87-0.97) being achieved independent of cIMT progression. Taken together, we estimated that interventions reducing cIMT progression by 10, 20, 30, or 40 ÎŒm/y would yield relative risks of 0.84 (0.75-0.93), 0.76 (0.67-0.85), 0.69 (0.59-0.79), or 0.63 (0.52-0.74), respectively. Results were similar when grouping trials by type of intervention, time of conduct, time to ultrasound follow-up, availability of individual-participant data, primary versus secondary prevention trials, type of cIMT measurement, and proportion of female patients. Conclusions: The extent of intervention effects on cIMT progression predicted the degree of CVD risk reduction. This provides a missing link supporting the usefulness of cIMT progression as a surrogate marker for CVD risk in clinical trials
    corecore