Abstract
Background
Nutritional status is related to the prognosis and length of hospital stay (LOHS) of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). This study aimed to assess how nutritional status affects LOHS for patients with AF.
Methods
We performed retrospective analysis of the medical records of 1,813 patients admitted urgently with a diagnosis of AF to the Institute of Heart Diseases of the University Clinical Hospital in Wroclaw, Poland.
Results
In total, 1,813 patients were included in the analysis. The average LOHS in the entire group was 3.53 ± 3.41 days. The mean BMI was 28.7 kg/m2 (SD: 5.02). Patients who were hospitalized longer were statistically more likely to have a Nutritional Risk Score (NRS) ≥3 (p = 0.028). A higher percentage of longer hospitalized patients with LDL levels below 70 mg/dl (p < 0.001) and those with HDL ≥40 mg/dl (p < 0.001) were observed. Study participants with NRS ≥3 were an older group (M = 76.3 years), with longer mean LOHS (M = 4.44 days). The predictors of LOHS in the univariate model were age (OR = 1.04), LDL (OR = 0.99), HDL (OR = 0.98), TC (OR = 0.996), CRP (OR = 1, 02, p < 0.001), lymphocytes (OR = 0.97, p = 0.008) and in the multivariate model were age, LDL (mg/dl), HDL (mg/dl), Na, and K.
Conclusion
For nutritional status, factors indicating the risk of prolonged hospitalization in patients with AF are malnutrition, lower serum LDL, HDL, potassium, and sodium levels identified at the time of admission to the cardiology department. Assessment of nutritional status in patients with AF is important both in the context of evaluating obesity and malnutrition status, as both conditions can alter the prognosis of patients. Further studies are needed to determine the exact impact of the above on the risk of prolonged hospitalization.
Keywords: nutritional status, malnutrition, obesity, atrial fibrillation, length of hospital stay, BMI
1 Introduction
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common heart rhythm disorder worldwide. AF deaths in 2017 totaled 287,200 worldwide (1). As many as 37.6 million cases of AF were reported in 2017, and the Global Burden of Disease Project estimated that the size of the AF patient population in 2016 was 46.3 million (2). Data from the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) indicated that the incidence of AF has increased threefold over the past 50 years (3). However, it should be remembered that one third of the total AF population is asymptomatic, making the data presented here certainly an underestimate (4). The reasons for the increase in the number of patients with AF include an aging population, longer survival times for those with heart conditions (e.g., ischemic heart disease, cardiomyopathies, and heart failure) that predispose to AF, and the increasing prevalence of risk factors that include obesity and hypertension (5, 6). In new AF diagnosis, the prevalence of comorbidities, including obesity, hypertension, diabetes, and chronic lung disease, increased over time (7, 8). It is believed that screening advanced-age patients with AF for nutritional disorders may be beneficial for the early detection of patients at high risk of adverse clinical outcomes, thereby improving their prognosis (9).
According to the research, obesity gradually increases the risk of AF, and depending on body mass index (BMI), it can also increase the risk of ischemic stroke, thromboembolic complications and death. Although there is a phenomenon called the “obesity paradox” among AF patients concerning all-cause and cardiovascular deaths, there is an opposite relationship between overweight/obesity and better cardiovascular prognosis in long-term follow-up. Therefore, it is essential to assess the nutritional status of this group of patients (10–12). Poor nutritional status of the patient is also a reason for prolonged length of hospital stay (LOHS) (13). When a patient is malnourished, the risk of complications increases, the effectiveness of treatment decreases and the cost of hospitalization increases (14). Consequently, it is necessary to properly assess the patient’s nutritional status on admission to the hospital (14). In Poland, under current legislation, a screening tool such as the Nutritional Risk Score 2002 (NRS 2002) or Subjective Global Assessment (SGA) is used to assess nutritional status during hospital admission, which is in line with the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition guidelines (GLIM) (15).
This study aims to evaluate the impact of nutritional status upon admission to the hospital on the LOHS of patients with atrial fibrillation.
2 Materials and methods
2.1 Study design and setting
A retrospective analysis of the medical records of 1,813 patients admitted urgently with a diagnosis of AF (ICD10: I48) to the Institute of Heart Diseases (University Clinical Hospital in Wroclaw, Poland) between January 2017 and June 2021 was conducted.
2.2 Study population and data
Record analysis was performed on all patients who met the inclusion criteria, i.e., a diagnosis of AF (primary reason for hospital admission) and age older than 18 years old. Data from 1,813 medical records were analyzed, on categories such as sex, age, classification of AF-related symptoms (EHRA score), and type of AF (paroxysmal, persistent, and permanent) (16), BMI (kg/m2) score, nutritional risk by NRS 2002 and LOHS. In comorbidities, the categories studied were diabetes mellitus (DM), heart failure (HF), hypertension (HT), chronic kidney disease (CKD), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), cerebral stroke (CS), hyperthyroidism, and hypothyroidism. Analysis was conducted on laboratory test results such as N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), triglycerides (TGs), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL), total cholesterol (TC), C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT), transferrin, albumins, lymphocytes, potassium (K), sodium (Na), thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), free triiodothyronine (FT3), free thyroxine (FT4), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Blood for laboratory tests was drawn by a nurse at the time of admission to the cardiology department. The doctor admitting the patient to the cardiology department decided which test the patient had. The tests were performed in the hospital’s laboratory (Alinity C, Abbott) in accordance with the principles of Good Laboratory Practice.
2.3 Nutritional screening
Nutritional status was assessed using NRS 2002. This tool is based on disease severity, impaired nutritional status (BMI, weight loss, and food intake in the preceding week) and age. A patient can obtain a score of 0 to 7 points. A score of ≥3 indicates that a patient is at nutritional risk (17). Criteria for assessing BMI were used according to the guidelines Word Health Organization (WHO), i.e., underweight (BMI <18.5), normal body mass (BMI 18.5–24.9), pre-obese (BMI 25–29.9), and obese (BMI ≥30) (18). The NRS 2002 and BMI were assessed by the physician admitting the patient to the cardiology department.
2.4 Ethical considerations
The study was conducted following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the independent Bioethics Committee of Wroclaw Medical University, protocol no. KB-205/2021. The study followed the STROBE guidelines (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology).
2.5 Statistical analysis
For measurable variables, means, medians, quartiles, minimum and maximum values, and standard deviations were calculated. Due to the lack of data on some parameters, these numbers are smaller and provide for each variable. All quantitative-type variables studied were checked using the Shapiro–Wilk test to determine the type of distribution. Inter-group comparisons of the results of quantitative variables were carried out using the t-test or Mann–Whitney U test (depending on whether the assumptions were met). A comparison of the results of more than two groups was carried out using a one-way analysis of variance or the Kruskal–Wallis test (depending on whether the assumptions were met). A Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test was used to compare qualitative variables. In addition, an analysis of the effect of selected factors on the LOHS (days) was performed using linear regression (a univariate model of the predictors included in the analysis). The unstandardized and standardized regression coefficient, standard error, and level of statistical significance were determined. The next step was to build a multivariate model (stepwise progressive method), considering variables whose p-value in the univariate model was less than or equal to 0.3. An analysis of the effect of selected factors on the LOHS categorized as <5 days and ≥5 (≥75th centile) was also performed using logistic regression (univariate model of predictors included in the analysis). Odds quotients and confidence intervals were determined. The next step was to build a multivariate model. The model-building process was carried out using progressive stepwise regression and a set of standard measures of goodness of fit (AIC, BIC, and Hosmer–Lemeshow test) was used to evaluate the model. Statistical analysis was performed using Statistica 13.1 software (Tibco, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA).
3 Results
3.1 Group comparison
The characteristics of the entire group and the comparison of these characteristics between the group of patients who were hospitalized for less than 5 days and for 5 days or more are shown in Table 1 (qualitative and quantitative variables). A total of 1,813 people were included in the analysis. The average LOHS in the entire group was 3.53 ± 3.41 days. Statistically significant differences between groups were noted when comparing against sex, type of AF, EHRA class, NRS, DM, CS, HT, LDL, or HDL levels. Patients who were hospitalized longer were statistically more likely to have: permanent AF (24% vs. 16%; p < 0.001), EHRA class III (64% vs. 48%; p < 0.001), NRS ≥3 (10 vs. 6%; p = 0.028). The following were not established: DM (82 vs. 78%; p = 0.037), CS (93 vs. 87%; p = 0.001), and HT (56 vs. 39%; p < 0.001). In addition, a higher percentage of longer hospitalized patients with LDL levels below 70 mg/dl (28 vs. 21%; p < 0.001) and those with HDL ≥40 mg/dl (35 vs. 23%; p < 0.001) were observed. For quantitative variables, the age of patients hospitalized for longer than 5 days was statistically higher. In addition, this group had statistically significant higher results for parameters such as CRP, BNP, and HbA1c. Statistically lower results in this group were for variables such as LDL, HDL, TC, lymphocytes, K, and Na (Table 1). Due to the lack of data on some parameters, these numbers are smaller and provide for each variable.
TABLE 1.
Study group characteristics and comparison of quantitative and qualitative variables relative to length of hospital stay.
| Parameter | Total (N = 1,813) N (%) | Length of hospital stay (days) | P-value* | ||
|
|
|||||
| <5 | ≥5 | ||||
| Sex | Female | 791 (44%) | 552 (42%) | 239 (49%) | 0.006* |
| Male | 1,022 (56%) | 772 (58%) | 250 (51%) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 18.5–24.9 | 328 (25%) | 238 (23%) | 90 (27%) | 0.513 |
| 25.0–29.9 | 502 (37%) | 380 (38%) | 122 (36%) | ||
| ≥30.0 | 512 (38%) | 388 (39%) | 124 (37%) | ||
| Type of AF | Paroxysmal | 702 (39%) | 528 (40%) | 174 (36%) | <0.001* |
| Persistent | 783 (43%) | 588 (44%) | 195 (40%) | ||
| Permanent | 328 (18%) | 208 (16%) | 120 (24%) | ||
| EHRA AF | I | 33 (6%) | 29 (7%) | 4 (4%) | 0.005* |
| IIa | 239 (27%) | 107 (26%) | 32 (30%) | ||
| IIb | 169 (32%) | 148 (36%) | 21 (19%) | ||
| III | 174 (33%) | 125 (30%) | 49 (45%) | ||
| IV | 9 (2%) | 7 (2%) | 2 (2%) | ||
| NRS | <3 | 1,484 (93%) | 1,091 (94%) | 393 (90%) | 0.028* |
| ≥3 | 117 (7%) | 75 (6%) | 42 (10%) | ||
| HF | No | 1,478 (82%) | 1,080 (82%) | 398 (81%) | 0.930 |
| Yes | 335 (18%) | 244 (18%) | 91 (19%) | ||
| DM | No | 1,431 (79%) | 1,029 (78%) | 402 (82%) | 0.037* |
| Yes | 382 (21%) | 295 (22%) | 87 (18%) | ||
| CKD | No | 1,569 (87%) | 1,156 (87%) | 413 (84%) | 0.114 |
| Yes | 244 (13%) | 168 (13%) | 76 (16%) | ||
| CS | No | 1,609 (89%) | 1,156 (87%) | 453 (93%) | 0.001* |
| Yes | 204 (11%) | 168 (13%) | 36 (7%) | ||
| HT | No | 783 (43%) | 511 (39%) | 272 (56%) | <0.001* |
| Yes | 1,030 (57%) | 813 (61%) | 217 (44%) | ||
| ACS | No | 1,627 (90%) | 1,183 (89%) | 444 (91%) | 0.367 |
| Yes | 186 (10%) | 141 (11%) | 45 (9%) | ||
| TD | No | 1,461 (81%) | 1,083 (82%) | 378 (77%) | 0.066 |
| Hyperthyroidism | 125 (7%) | 82 (6%) | 43 (9%) | ||
| Hypothyroidism | 227 (12%) | 159 (12%) | 68 (14%) | ||
| TG | <135 mg/dl | 1,135 (67%) | 816 (66%) | 319 (68%) | 0.805 |
| 135–200 mg/dl | 416 (24%) | 306 (25%) | 110 (23%) | ||
| >200 mg/dl | 153 (9%) | 110 (9%) | 43 (9%) | ||
| LDL | <70 mg/dl | 394 (23%) | 262 (21%) | 132 (28%) | <0.001* |
| 70–116 mg/dl | 681 (40%) | 464 (38%) | 217 (46%) | ||
| >116 mg/dl | 624 (37%) | 501 (41%) | 123 (26%) | ||
| HDL | <40 mg/dl | 446 (26%) | 282 (23%) | 164 (35%) | <0.001* |
| ≥40 mg/dl | 1,256 (74%) | 947 (77%) | 309 (65%) | ||
| Age (years) | Mean ± SD | 68.72 ± 12.09 | 67.37 ± 12.12 | 72.35 ± 11.25 | <0.001* |
| Median | 70.00 | 69.00 | 72.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 63.00–76.00 | 62.00–74.00 | 66.00–81.00 | ||
| NRS (points) | Mean ± SD | 0.94 ± 0.95 | 0.92 ± 0.94 | 1.00 ± 0.96 | 0.122 |
| Median | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.00–2.00 | 0.00–2.00 | 0.00–1.00 | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | Mean ± SD | 28.78 ± 5.02 | 28.82 ± 4.98 | 28.70 ± 5.12 | 0.706 |
| Median | 28.30 | 28.30 | 28.10 | ||
| Quartiles | 25.00–32.00 | 25.10–32.00 | 24.70–31.75 | ||
| TG (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 124.17 ± 61.38 | 124.38 ± 61.09 | 123.62 ± 62.19 | 0.818 |
| Median | 110.00 | 111.00 | 108.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 83.00–149.00 | 82.50–149.50 | 83.50–147.00 | ||
| LDL (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 106.20 ± 45.57 | 110.23 ± 47.08 | 95.72 ± 39.55 | <0.001* |
| Median | 97.00 | 102.00 | 87.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 71.00–134.00 | 73.00–141.00 | 67.50–118.00 | ||
| HDL (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 48.57 ± 13.18 | 49.59 ± 13.06 | 45.91 ± 13.15 | <0.001* |
| Median | 47.00 | 48.00 | 44.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 39.00–57.00 | 40.00–57.00 | 37.00–55.00 | ||
| TC (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 167.68 ± 61.38 | 169.91 ± 46.50 | 161.89 ± 42.71 | 0.001* |
| Median | 159.00 | 161.00 | 155.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 135.00–197.00 | 136.00–199.00 | 132.00–188.00 | ||
| CRP (mg/L) | Mean ± SD | 7.06 ± 22.15 | 4.77 ± 17.18 | 12.04 ± 29.68 | <0.001* |
| Median | 1.77 | 1.58 | 2.66 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.93–4.38 | 0.85–3.42 | 1.15–7.78 | ||
| Albumin (g/dl) | Mean ± SD | 3.46 ± 0.58 | 3.35 ± 0.67 | 3.52 ± 0.52 | 0.160 |
| Median | 3.60 | 3.50 | 3.60 | ||
| Quartiles | 3.20–3.90 | 2.85–3.80 | 3.30–3.90 | ||
| Transferrin (g/L) | Mean ± SD | 2.54 ± 0.62 | 2.57 ± 0.60 | 2.52 ± 0.64 | 0.598 |
| Median | 2.49 | 2.48 | 2.50 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.14–2.89 | 2.16–2.87 | 2.11–2.90 | ||
| Lymphocytes (%) | Mean ± SD | 26.42 ± 9.26 | 27.37 ± 8.54 | 24.97 ± 10.13 | 0.007* |
| Median | 26.75 | 27.40 | 24.45 | ||
| Quartiles | 19.70–32.80 | 22.20–32.30 | 17.35–33.10 | ||
| PCT (ng/ml) | Mean ± SD | 0.68 ± 4.23 | 0.13 ± 0.21 | 0.89 ± 4.96 | 0.313 |
| Median | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.08 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.03–0.18 | 0.03–0.15 | 0.03–0.22 | ||
| TSH (uIU/ml) | Mean ± SD | 1.65 ± 1.28 | 1.62 ± 1.24 | 1.73 ± 1.37 | 0.107 |
| Median | 1.32 | 1.32 | 1.31 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.88–2.06 | 0.88–2.02 | 0.87–2.13 | ||
| FT3 (pg/ml) | Mean ± SD | 2.98 ± 1.22 | 2.93 ± 0.60 | 3.04 ± 1.74 | 0.538 |
| Median | 2.90 | 2.96 | 2.86 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.57–3.19 | 2.61–3.24 | 2.52–3.13 | ||
| FT4 (ng/dl) | Mean ± SD | 1.43 ± 1.15 | 1.46 ± 1.43 | 1.38 ± 0.54 | 0.622 |
| Median | 1.33 | 1.32 | 1.34 | ||
| Quartiles | 1.13–1.54 | 1.14–1.53 | 1.09–1.57 | ||
| BNP (pg/ml) | Mean ± SD | 353.81 ± 563.52 | 294.67 ± 440.11 | 420.72 ± 671.35 | 0.014* |
| Median | 200.45 | 159.55 | 243.50 | ||
| Quartiles | 94.70–387.00 | 67.20–328.80 | 124.95–459.10 | ||
| NT-proBNP | Mean ± SD | 2,180.59 ± 4,561.61 | 1,827.13 ± 4,275.26 | 3,836.27 ± 5,434.93 | <0.001* |
| Median | 931.75 | 816.60 | 2,315.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 341.00–2,183.55 | 307.60–1,754.00 | 678.80–4,268.80 | ||
| K (mmol/L) | Mean ± SD | 4.38 ± 0.47 | 4.40 ± 0.43 | 4.33 ± 0.57 | 0.002* |
| Median | 4.37 | 4.40 | 4.29 | ||
| Quartiles | 4.09–4.63 | 4.11–4.66 | 4.00–4.59 | ||
| Na (mmol/L) | Mean ± SD | 140.09 ± 3.07 | 140.30 ± 2.75 | 139.54 ± 3.72 | <0.001* |
| Median | 140.00 | 141.00 | 140.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 139.00–142.00 | 139.00–142.00 | 138.00–142.00 | ||
| HbA1c (%) | Mean ± SD | 6.17 ± 0.91 | 6.13 ± 0.84 | 6.26 ± 1.05 | 0.026* |
| Median | 6.00 | 6.00 | 6.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 5.60–6.50 | 5.60–6.40 | 5.60–6.50 | ||
LOHS, length of hospital stay; N, number of patients; AF, atrial fibrillation; EHRA, European Heart Rhythm Association; NRS, Nutritional Risk Score 2002; BMI, body mass index; HF, heart failure; DM, diabetes mellitus; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CS, cerebral stroke; HT, hypertension; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; TD, thyroid disease; TG, triglycerides; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; TC, total cholesterol; CRP, C-reactive protein; PCT, procalcitonin; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone; FT3, free triiodothyronine; FT4, free thyroxine; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; K, potassium; Na, sodium; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; p, t-test or Mann–Whitney U test for quantitative variables, Chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test for qualitative variables.
*Statistically significant (p < 0.05).
3.2 Characteristics of the study group by BMI (kg/m2)
A comparison of the evaluated variables between groups according to BMI (kg/m2) is shown in Table 2. Based on BMI score, three groups were identified: normal (18.5–24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0–29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30 kg/m2) subjects. In the study group, there were no patients with a BMI less than 18.5 kg/m2. Statistically differences were found by age, TG, HDL, lymphocyte, BNP, TSH, or HbA1c levels, and by type of AF, NRS, DM, CKD, CS, and HT. Participants in the study with BMI ≥30 were the youngest group (M = 66.5 years), with the highest levels of TG (M = 138.2 mg/dl) and HbA1c (M = 6.26%), the lowest levels of HDL (M = 46.33 mg/dl), BNP (M = 228.8 pg/ml) relative to the other groups. This group also had the highest percentage of subjects with NRS >3 score (98%), persistent AF (56%), DM (25%), HT (61%), TG levels 135–200 mg/dl (29%), and >200 mg/dl (13%) and HDL levels <40 mg/dl (31%). In addition, the lowest percentages of CKD (11%), CS (9%) were observed in this group (Table 2).
TABLE 2.
Comparison of the assessed parameters by BMI status (qualitative and quantitative variables).
| Parameter | BMI (kg/m2) | P-value | |||
|
|
|||||
| 18.5–24.9328 (24%) | 25.0–29.9502 (37%) | ≥30512 (38%) | |||
| Sex | Female | 153 (47%) | 194 (39%) | 221 (43%) | 0.066 |
| Male | 175 (53%) | 308 (61%) | 291 (57%) | ||
| NRS | <3 | 262 (83%) | 416 (93%) | 434 (98%) | <0.001* |
| ≥3 | 55 (17%) | 31 (7%) | 7 (2%) | ||
| Type of AF | Paroxysmal | 146 (45%) | 213 (42%) | 158 (31%) | <0.001* |
| Persistent | 109 (33%) | 194 (39%) | 287 (56%) | ||
| Permanent | 73 (22%) | 95 (19%) | 67 (13%) | ||
| EHRA class | I | 6 (9%) | 4 (3%) | 16 (9%) | 0.009 |
| IIa | 13 (19%) | 37 (26%) | 57 (32%) | ||
| IIb | 24 (34%) | 55 (39%) | 53 (30%) | ||
| III | 23 (33%) | 45 (32%) | 50 (28%) | ||
| IV | 4 (6%) | 1 (1%) | 1 (1%) | ||
| HF | No | 267 (81%) | 421 (84%) | 400 (78%) | 0.065 |
| Yes | 61 (19%) | 81 (16%) | 112 (22%) | ||
| DM | No | 280 (85%) | 396 (79%) | 386 (75%) | 0.002* |
| Yes | 48 (15%) | 106 (21%) | 126 (25%) | ||
| CKD | No | 267 (81%) | 441 (88%) | 454 (89%) | 0.006* |
| Yes | 61 (19%) | 61 (12%) | 58 (11%) | ||
| CS | No | 281 (86%) | 440 (88%) | 467 (91%) | 0.036* |
| Yes | 47 (14%) | 62 (12%) | 45 (9%) | ||
| HT | No | 165 (50%) | 212 (42%) | 202 (39%) | 0.007* |
| Yes | 163 (50%) | 290 (58%) | 310 (61%) | ||
| ACS | No | 286 (87%) | 454 (90%) | 461 (90%) | 0.289 |
| Yes | 42 (13%) | 48 (10%) | 51 (10%) | ||
| TD | No | 262 (80%) | 408 (81%) | 423 (83%) | 0.137 |
| Hyperthyroidism | 31 (9%) | 34 (7%) | 25 (5%) | ||
| Hypothyroidism | 35 (11%) | 60 (12%) | 64 (12%) | ||
| TG | <135 mg/dl | 261 (82%) | 327 (70%) | 287 (58%) | <0.001* |
| 135–200 mg/dl | 43 (14%) | 109 (23%) | 144 (29%) | ||
| >200 mg/dl | 12 (4%) | 35 (7%) | 66 (13%) | ||
| LDL | <70 mg/dl | 65 (21%) | 108 (23%) | 127 (26%) | 0.186 |
| 70–116 mg/dl | 143 (45%) | 184 (39%) | 185 (37%) | ||
| >116 mg/dl | 107 (34%) | 177 (38%) | 185 (37%) | ||
| HDL | <40 mg/dl | 45 (14%) | 123 (26%) | 154 (31%) | <0.001* |
| ≥40 mg/dl | 270 (86%) | 347 (74%) | 344 (69%) | ||
| Age (years) | Mean ± SD | 71.06 ± 13.45 | 68.69 ± 13.44 | 66.47 ± 9.71 | <0.001* |
| Median | 72.00 | 71.00 | 68.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 65.00–81.00 | 63.00–78.00 | 61.00–72.00 | ||
| LOHS (days) | Mean ± SD | 3.61 ± 3.57 | 3.40 ± 3.52 | 3.14 ± 2.90 | 0.128 |
| Median | 3.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.00–5.00 | 1.00–4.00 | 1.00–4.00 | ||
| TG (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 101.54 ± 42.32 | 121.66 ± 57.16 | 138.20 ± 70.37 | <0.001* |
| Median | 90.00 | 109.00 | 123.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 72.00–119.50 | 84.00–146.00 | 91.00–166.00 | ||
| LDL (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 105.21 ± 44.37 | 109.04 ± 49.10 | 104.27 ± 44.73 | 0.250 |
| Median | 98.00 | 97.00 | 95.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 73.00–128.00 | 72.00–141.00 | 69.00–132.00 | ||
| HDL (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 53.83 ± 14.66 | 48.42 ± 12.46 | 46.33 ± 12.05 | <0.001* |
| Median | 52.00 | 47.00 | 45.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 43.00–63.00 | 39.00–57.00 | 38.00–54.00 | ||
| TC (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 169.21 ± 44.73 | 167.14 ± 46.75 | 165.11 ± 44.24 | 0.448 |
| Median | 160.00 | 157.00 | 95.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 137.00–198.00 | 133.00–196.00 | 69.00–132.00 | ||
| CRP (mg/L) | Mean ± SD | 5.28 ± 15.93 | 5.29 ± 14.06 | 7.13 ± 20.57 | 0.244 |
| Median | 1.41 | 1.60 | 2.02 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.74–3.78 | 0.83–3.45 | 1.18–5.02 | ||
| Albumin (g/dl) | Mean ± SD | 3.28 ± 0.70 | 3.50 ± 0.52 | 3.57 ± 0.59 | 0.320 |
| Median | 3.35 | 3.50 | 3.80 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.85–3.85 | 3.40–3.70 | 3.40–4.00 | ||
| Transferrin (g/L) | Mean ± SD | 2.48 ± 0.71 | 2.52 ± 0.61 | 2.65 ± 0.60 | 0.408 |
| Median | 2.43 | 2.54 | 2.52 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.04–2.90 | 2.16–2.88 | 2.23–3.16 | ||
| Lymphocytes (%) | Mean ± SD | 23.97 ± 9.87 | 27.08 ± 9.99 | 27.96 ± 8.80 | 0.021* |
| Median | 23.40 | 27.25 | 27.40 | ||
| Quartiles | 16.30–31.60 | 19.10–34.90 | 22.40–33.70 | ||
| PCT (ng/ml) | Mean ± SD | 0.72 ± 1.71 | 0.15 ± 0.30 | 1.56 ± 8.38 | 0.435 |
| Median | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.08 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.04–0.57 | 0.02–0.16 | 0.04–0.22 | ||
| BNP (pg/ml) | Mean ± SD | 444.29 ± 668.86 | 331.55 ± 427.12 | 228.81 ± 287.89 | 0.003* |
| Median | 257.40 | 178.00 | 143.30 | ||
| Quartiles | 141.10–486.60 | 88.50–391.70 | 80.30–264.20 | ||
| NT-proBNP (pg/ml) | Mean ± SD | 3,128.16 ± 6,984.10 | 2,154.17 ± 4,593.89 | 1,428.10 ± 2,241.54 | 0.002* |
| Median | 1,135.30 | 925.75 | 742.90 | ||
| Quartiles | 317.40–2,534.50 | 325.40–2,103.75 | 314.50–1,544.80 | ||
| TSH (uIU/ml) | Mean ± SD | 1.69 ± 1.49 | 1.50 ± 0.98 | 1.68 ± 1.24 | 0.014* |
| Median | 2.98 | 3.03 | 2.94 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.64–3.23 | 2.69–3.30 | 2.56–3.27 | ||
| FT4 (ng/dl) | Mean ± SD | 1.39 ± 0.33 | 1.66 ± 2.44 | 1.41 ± 0.60 | 0.461 |
| Median | 1.38 | 1.32 | 1.33 | ||
| Quartiles | 1.15–1.57 | 1.08–1.49 | 1.23–1.47 | ||
| K (mmol/L) | Mean ± SD | 4.37 ± 0.50 | 4.38 ± 0.45 | 4.38 ± 0.44 | 0.998 |
| Median | 4.35 | 4.39 | 4.36 | ||
| Quartiles | 4.08–4.62 | 4.10–4.63 | 4.10–4.61 | ||
| Na (mmol/L) | Mean ± SD | 139.86 ± 3.00 | 140.05 ± 3.02 | 140.22 ± 2.75 | 0.223 |
| Median | 140.00 | 140.00 | 140.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 138.00–142.00 | 139.00–142.00 | 139.00–142.00 | ||
| HbA1c (%) | Mean ± SD | 5.95 ± 0.75 | 6.13 ± 0.85 | 6.26 ± 0.92 | <0.001* |
| Median | 5.80 | 6.00 | 6.10 | ||
| Quartiles | 5.50–6.20 | 5.60–6.40 | 5.70–6.60 | ||
LOHS, length of hospital stay; N, number of patients; AF, atrial fibrillation; EHRA, European Heart Rhythm Association; NRS, Nutritional Risk Score 2002; BMI, body mass index; HF, heart failure; DM, diabetes mellitus; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CS, cerebral stroke; HT, hypertension; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; TD, thyroid disease; TG, triglycerides; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; TC, total cholesterol; CRP, C-reactive protein; PCT, procalcitonin; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone; FT3, free triiodothyronine; FT4, free thyroxine; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP, N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; K, potassium; Na, sodium; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; p, ANOVA test or Kruskal–Wallis test + post hoc analysis (Dunn’s test) for quantitative variables, Chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test for qualitative variables.
*Statistically significant (p < 0.05).
3.3 Characteristics of the study group by NRS 2002
A comparison of evaluated parameters between groups according to NRS 2002 score is shown in Table 3. Based on the NRS score, two groups were identified: NRS 2002 <3 and ≥3. Statistically significant differences were found according to age, LOHS, BMI, TG, CRP, albumin levels, sex, BMI (categories), CKD, and HT. Study participants with NRS ≥3 were an older group (M = 76.3 years), with longer mean LOHS (M = 4.44 days), lower BMI (M = 24.49 kg/m2), lower TG (M = 112.2 mg/dl), and albumin levels (M = 3.09 g/dl), and higher CRP (M = 15.35 mg/dl). This group also had a higher percentage of women (72%), those with a BMI between 18.5 and 24.9 kg/m2 (59%), and those with CKD (28%). In addition, a lower percentage of people with HT (44%) was observed in this group.
TABLE 3.
Comparison of the assessed parameters by NRS 2002.
| Parameter | NRS 2002 | P-value | ||
|
|
||||
| <3 (N = 1,484) | ≥3 (N = 117) | |||
| Sex | Female | 630 (42%) | 84 (72%) | <0.001* |
| Male | 854 (58%) | 33 (28%) | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 18.5–24.9 | 262 (24%) | 55 (59%) | <0.001* |
| 25.0–29.9 | 416 (37%) | 31 (33%) | ||
| ≥30.0 | 434 (39%) | 7 (8%) | ||
| Type of AF | Paroxysmal | 584 (39%) | 44 (38%) | 0.381 |
| Persistent | 622 (42%) | 45 (38%) | ||
| Permanent | 278 (19%) | 28 (24%) | ||
| EHRA class | I | 24 (75) | 2 (10%) | 0.036 |
| IIa | 114 (26%) | 1 (5%) | ||
| IIb | 156 (36%) | 3 (14%) | ||
| III | 135 (31%) | 14 (67%) | ||
| IV | 8 (2%) | 1 (5%) | ||
| HF | No | 1,205 (81%) | 93 (79%) | 0.649 |
| Yes | 279 (19%) | 24 (21%) | ||
| DM | No | 1,175 (79%) | 97 (83%) | 0.337 |
| Yes | 309 (21%) | 20 (17%) | ||
| CKD | No | 1,290 (87%) | 84 (72%) | <0.001* |
| Yes | 194 (13%) | 33 (28%) | ||
| CS | No | 1,310 (88%) | 102 (87%) | 0.724 |
| Yes | 174 (12%) | 15 (13%) | ||
| HT | No | 624 (42%) | 65 (56%) | 0.005* |
| Yes | 860 (58%) | 52 (44%) | ||
| ACS | No | 1,331 (90%) | 103 (88%) | 0.573 |
| Yes | 153 (10%) | 14 (12%) | ||
| TD | No | 1,182 (80%) | 99 (85%) | 0.419 |
| Hyperthyroidism | 107 (7%) | 7 (6%) | ||
| Hypothyroidism | 195 (13%) | 11 (9%) | ||
| TG | <135 mg/dl | 916 (66%) | 79 (73%) | 0.057 |
| 135–200 mg/dl | 341 (25%) | 26 (24%) | ||
| >200 mg/dl | 131 (9%) | 3 (3%) | ||
| LDL | <70 mg/dl | 329 (24%) | 22 (20%) | 0.547 |
| 70–116 mg/dl | 558 (40%) | 49 (45%) | ||
| >116 mg/dl | 498 (36%) | 37 (35%) | ||
| HDL | <40 mg/dl | 354 (26%) | 30 (28%) | 0.566 |
| ≥40 mg/dl | 1,033 (74%) | 77 (72%) | ||
| Age (years) | Mean ± SD | 68.50 ± 11.98 | 76.27 ± 13.06 | <0.001* |
| Median | 70.00 | 79.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 63.00–76.00 | 72.00–85.00 | ||
| LOHS (days) | Mean ± SD | 3.53 ± 3.36 | 4.44 ± 4.21 | 0.005* |
| Median | 3.00 | 3.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.00–5.00 | 2.00–6.00 | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | Mean ± SD | 28.89 ± 4.90 | 24.49 ± 4.21 | <0.001* |
| Median | 28.35 | 24.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 25.20–32.00 | 21.30–26.80 | ||
| TG (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 124.97 ± 62.26 | 112.20 ± 40.77 | 0.036* |
| Median | 111.00 | 107.50 | ||
| Quartiles | 82.00–152.00 | 81.50–138.00 | ||
| LDL (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 105.23 ± 45.48 | 105.06 ± 42.67 | 0.971 |
| Median | 95.00 | 97.50 | ||
| Quartiles | 70.00–133.00 | 74.00 + 133.50 | ||
| HDL (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 48.85 ± 13.31 | 48.13 ± 13.47 | 0.589 |
| Median | 48.00 | 46.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 39.00–57.00 | 38.00–58.00 | ||
| TC (mg/dl) | Mean ± SD | 168.61 ± 46.16 | 164.64 ± 40.94 | 0.386 |
| Median | 160.00 | 156.50 | ||
| Quartiles | 135.00–198.00 | 137.50–188.00 | ||
| CRP (mg/L) | Mean ± SD | 6.23 ± 18.25 | 15.35 ± 44.29 | <0.001* |
| Median | 1.76 | 2.21 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.89–4.26 | 1.02–5.45 | ||
| Albumin (g/dl) | Mean ± SD | 3.59 ± 0.51 | 3.09 ± 0.63 | 0.001* |
| Median | 3.70 | 3.30 | ||
| Quartiles | 3.40–3.90 | 2.40–3.50 | ||
| Transferrin (g/L) | Mean ± SD | 2.59 ± 0.61 | 2.37 ± 0.74 | 0.108 |
| Median | 2.53 | 2.49 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.16–2.93 | 2.01–2.89 | ||
| Lymphocytes (%) | Mean ± SD | 26.43 ± 9.13 | 25.40 ± 10.69 | 0.544 |
| Median | 26.90 | 24.40 | ||
| Quartiles | 19.95–33.10 | 18.85–32.60 | ||
| PCT (ng/ml) | Mean ± SD | 0.81 ± 4.81 | 0.29 ± 0.78 | 0.618 |
| Median | 0.08 | 0.08 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.03–0.18 | 0.04–0.17 | ||
| TSH (uIU/ml) | Mean ± SD | 1.65 ± 1.31 | 1.74 ± 1.38 | 0.474 |
| Median | 1.30 | 1.38 | ||
| Quartiles | 0.85–2.07 | 0.93–2.17 | ||
| FT3 (pg/ml) | Mean ± SD | 3.02 ± 1.31 | 2.77 ± 0.69 | 0.495 |
| Median | 2.92 | 2.80 | ||
| Quartiles | 2.59–3.17 | 2.26–3.25 | ||
| FT4 (ng/dl) | Mean ± SD | 1.44 ± 1.25 | 1.52 ± 0.41 | 0.826 |
| Median | 1.32 | 1.46 | ||
| Quartiles | 1.13–1.55 | 1.35–1.71 | ||
| BNP (pg/ml) | Mean ± SD | 336.91 ± 516.22 | 407.98 ± 360.56 | 0.369 |
| Median | 182.45 | 315.90 | ||
| Quartiles | 90.00–361.10 | 199.60–507.60 | ||
| NT-proBNP (pg/ml) | Mean ± SD | 2,132.35 ± 3,998.84 | 5,122.75 ± 10,651.01 | <0.001* |
| Median | 939.00 | 2,715.90 | ||
| Quartiles | 314.20–2,196.40 | 1,143.00–4,476.10 | ||
| K (mmol/L) | Mean ± SD | 4.37 ± 0.46 | 4.38 ± 0.61 | 0.810 |
| Median | 140.00 | 140.00 | ||
| Quartiles | 139.00–142.00 | 138.00–142.00 | ||
| HbA1c (%) | Mean ± SD | 6.16 ± 0.92 | 6.14 ± 0.85 | 0.834 |
| Median | 6.00 | 5.90 | ||
| Quartiles | 5.60–6.40 | 5.60–6.30 | ||
LOHS, length of hospital stay; N, number of patients; AF, atrial fibrillation; EHRA, European Heart Rhythm Association; NRS, Nutritional Risk Score 2002; BMI, body mass index; HF, heart failure; DM, diabetes mellitus; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CS, cerebral stroke; HT, hypertension; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; TD, thyroid disease; TG, triglycerides; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; TC, total cholesterol; CRP, C-reactive protein; PCT, procalcitonin; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone; FT3, free triiodothyronine; FT4, free thyroxine; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP, N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; K, potassium; Na, sodium; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; p, t-test or Mann–Whitney U test for quantitative variables, Chi-squared or Fisher’s exact test for qualitative variables.
*Statistically significant (p < 0.05).
3.4 Length of hospital stay
A comparison of the LOHS according to selected parameters is shown in Table 4. A statistically significant longer length of hospitalization was observed in those with NRS ≥3, persistent AF, EHRA AF Grade II, those without DM, CS, HT, and subjects with LDL levels <70 mg/dl and HDL level <40 mg/dl (Table 4).
TABLE 4.
Length of hospital stay across groups (qualitative variables): Univariate analysis.
| Parameter | Group | Hospitalization (days) [length of stay (days)] | P-value | ||
|
|
|||||
| Mean ± SD | Median | Quartiles | |||
| Sex | Female | 3.70 ± 3.41 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.066 |
| Male | 3.40 ± 3.40 | 2.00 | 2.00–4.00 | ||
| NRS | <3 | 3.53 ± 3.36 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.005* |
| ≥3 | 4.44 ± 4.21 | 3.00 | 2.00–6.00 | ||
| BMI | 18.5–24.9 | 3.61 ± 3.57 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.128 |
| 25.0–29.9 | 3.40 ± 3.52 | 2.00 | 1.00–4.00 | ||
| ≥30.0 | 3.14 ± 2.90 | 2.00 | 1.00–4.00 | ||
| Type of AF | Paroxysmal | 3.34 ± 3.00 | 3.00 | 2.00–4.00 | < 0.001* |
| Persistent | 3.38 ± 3.21 | 2.00 | 2.00–4.00 | ||
| Permanent | 4.28 ± 4.43 | 3.00 | 2.00–6.00 | ||
| EHRA class | I | 2.36 ± 3.94 | 1.00 | 0.00–3.00 | 0.003* |
| IIa | 3.04 ± 2.38 | 3.00 | 2.00–4.00 | ||
| IIb | 2.78 ± 1.77 | 2.00 | 2.00–4.00 | ||
| III | 3.71 ± 2.76 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | ||
| IV | 3.44 ± 2.83 | 2.00 | 2.00–4.00 | ||
| HF | No | 3.53 ± 3.35 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.935 |
| Yes | 3.54 ± 3.64 | 3.00 | 1.00–5.00 | ||
| DM | No | 3.66 ± 3.53 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.001* |
| Yes | 3.02 ± 2.87 | 2.00 | 1.00–4.00 | ||
| CKD | No | 3.52 ± 3.37 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.735 |
| Yes | 3.59 ± 3.63 | 3.00 | 1.00–5.00 | ||
| CS | No | 3.67 ± 3.44 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | < 0.001* |
| Yes | 2.45 ± 2.93 | 2.00 | 0.00–4.00 | ||
| HT | No | 4.24 ± 3.75 | 3.00 | 2.00–6.00 | < 0.001* |
| Yes | 2.99 ± 3.02 | 2.00 | 1.00–4.00 | ||
| ACS | No | 3.58 ± 3.43 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.078 |
| Yes | 3.11 ± 3.17 | 2.00 | 1.00–4.00 | ||
| TD | No | 3.48 ± 3.38 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.418 |
| Hyperthyroidism | 3.82 ± 3.24 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | ||
| Hypothyroidism | 3.70 ± 3.66 | 2.00 | 1.00–5.00 | ||
| TG | <135 mg/dl | 3.60 ± 3.50 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | 0.865 |
| 135–200 mg/dl | 3.57 ± 3.38 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | ||
| >200 mg/dl | 3.75 ± 2.68 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | ||
| LDL | <70 mg/dl | 4.10 ± 3.85 | 3.00 | 2.00–6.00 | < 0.001* |
| 70–116 mg/dl | 4.00 ± 3.67 | 3.00 | 2.00–5.00 | ||
| >116 mg/dl | 2.85 ± 2.52 | 2.00 | 1.00–4.00 | ||
| HDL | <40 mg/dl | 4.52 ± 4.21 | 3.50 | 2.00–6.00 | < 0.001* |
| ≥40 mg/dl | 3.28 ± 2.98 | 2.00 | 0.00–3.00 | ||
LOHS, length of hospital stay; N, number of patients; AF, atrial fibrillation; EHRA, European Heart Rhythm Association; NRS, Nutritional Risk Score 2002; BMI, body mass index; HF, heart failure; DM, diabetes mellitus; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CS, cerebral stroke; HT, hypertension; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; TD, thyroid disease; TG, triglycerides; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; 2-group comparison, p, t-test or Mann–Whitney U test; >2-group comparison, ANOVA test or Kruskal–Wallis test + post hoc analysis (Dunn’s test).
*Statistically significant (p < 0.05).
Table 5 shows the assessment of the effect of selected parameters on the LOHS (days) (univariate model of predictors included in the analysis). The variables included in the analysis were age (years), NRS (points, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. <3), BMI (kg/m2, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. 18.5–24.9), TG (mg/dl), LDL (mg/dl, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. <70 mg/dl), HDL (mg/dl, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. <40 mg/dl), TC (mg/dl, as a quantitative as well as qualitative variable ref. <135 mg/dl), CRP (mg/L), albumin (g/dl), transferrin (g/L), lymphocytes (%), PCT (ng/ml), TSH (uIU/ml), FT3 (pg/ml), FT4 (ng/dl), BNP (pg/ml), K (mmol/L), Na (mmol/L), HbA1c (%), sex (ref. male), type of AF (ref. permanent), EHRA AF (ref. I), HF, DM, CKD, CS, HT, ACS, and thyroid disease (TD). Linear regression analysis in the univariate model showed the effect of age (B = 0.04, p < 0.001), LDL (B = −0.01, p < 0.001), HDL (B = −0.04, p < 0.001), TC (B = −0.01, p < 0.001), CRP (B = 0.03, p < 0.001), transferrin (B = −1.23, p = 0.032), lymphocytes (B = −0.09, p < 0.001), BNP (B = 0.00, p < 0.001), Na (B = −0.13, p < 0.001), and HbA1c (B = 0.27, p = 0.015) on LOHS. In addition, factors such as NRS (ref. <3, B = 0.46, p = 0.005), type of AF (ref. permanent, paroxysmal: B = −0.33, p = 0.004, persistent: B = −0.28, p = 0.010), DM (ref. no; B = −0.32, p = 0.001), CS (ref. no; B = −0.61, p < 0.001), HT (ref. no; B = −0.63, p < 0.001), LDL (ref. <70; 70–116 mg/dl: B = 0.35, p < 0.002; >116 mg/dl: B = −0.90, p < 0.001), and HDL (ref. <40 mg/dl; B = −0.62, p < 0.001) had an impact. Variables included in the multivariate model were age, LDL (mg/dl), HDL (mg/dl), Na, K, presence of CS, and HT (Table 5).
TABLE 5.
Effect of selected parameters on length of hospital stay (days) (univariate model and multivariate predictors included in the linear regression analysis).
| Parameter | Unadjusted model | Adjusted model | |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
| B | SE | t | P-value | β | B | SE | t | P-value | β | ||
| Age (years) | 0.04 | 0.01 | 6.60 | 0.000 | 0.15 | 0.04 | 0.01 | 5.77 | 0.000 | 0.17 | |
| NRS (points) | –0.06 | 0.09 | –0.64 | 0.519 | –0.02 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | –0.03 | 0.02 | –1.46 | 0.146 | –0.04 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| TG (mg/dl) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.60 | 0.551 | 0.01 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| LDL (mg/dl) | –0.01 | 0.00 | –7.40 | 0.000 | –0.18 | –0.01 | 0.00 | –2.78 | 0.006 | –0.08 | |
| HDL (mg/dl) | –0.04 | 0.01 | –7.04 | 0.000 | –0.17 | –0.04 | 0.01 | –5.06 | 0.000 | –0.15 | |
| TC (mg/dl) | –0.01 | 0.00 | –4.05 | 0.000 | –0.10 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| CRP (mg/L) | 0.03 | 0.00 | 7.56 | 0.000 | 0.20 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Albumin (g/dl) | –0.55 | 1.04 | –0.53 | 0.596 | –0.06 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Transferrin (g/L) | –1.23 | 0.57 | –2.16 | 0.032 | –0.16 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Lymphocytes (%) | –0.09 | 0.02 | –4.46 | 0.000 | –0.21 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| PCT (ng/ml) | 0.11 | 0.10 | 1.08 | 0.282 | 0.09 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| TSH (uIU/ml) | 0.09 | 0.06 | 1.35 | 0.177 | 0.03 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| FT3 (pg/ml) | –0.06 | 0.28 | –0.20 | 0.841 | –0.01 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| FT4 (ng/dl) | 0.02 | 0.28 | 0.08 | 0.940 | 0.01 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| BNP (pg/ml) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 3.88 | 0.000 | 0.17 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| NT-proBNP (pg/ml) | 0.00 | 0.00 | 5.37 | 0.000 | 0.19 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| K (mmol/L) | –0.33 | 0.17 | –1.94 | 0.053 | –0.05 | –0.45 | 0.20 | –2.19 | 0.028 | –0.06 | |
| Na (mmol/L) | –0.13 | 0.03 | –5.14 | 0.000 | –0.12 | –0.14 | 0.03 | –4.34 | 0.000 | –0.12 | |
| HbA1c (%) | 0.27 | 0.11 | 2.43 | 0.015 | 0.07 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Sex (ref. male) | Female | 0.15 | 0.08 | 1.84 | 0.066 | 0.04 | − | − | − | − | − |
| NRS (ref. <3) | ≥3 | 0.46 | 0.16 | 2.79 | 0.005 | 0.07 | − | − | − | − | − |
| BMI (kg/m2) (ref. 18.5–24.9) | 25.0—29.9 | 0.02 | 0.13 | 0.13 | 0.893 | 0.00 | − | − | − | − | − |
| ≥30.0 | –0.24 | 0.13 | –1.93 | 0.054 | –0.06 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Type of AF (ref. permanent) | Paroxysmal | –0.33 | 0.11 | –2.88 | 0.004 | –0.07 | − | − | − | − | − |
| Persistent | –0.28 | 0.11 | –2.56 | 0.010 | –0.06 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| EHRA class (ref. I) | IIa | –0.03 | 0.26 | –1.15 | 0.249 | –0.01 | − | − | − | − | − |
| IIb | –0.29 | 0.28 | –1.04 | 0.298 | –0.07 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| III | 0.63 | 0.28 | 2.26 | 0.024 | 0.16 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| IV | 0.37 | 0.64 | 0.56 | 0.564 | 0.47 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| HF | Yes | 0.01 | 0.10 | 0.08 | 0.935 | 0.00 | − | − | − | − | − |
| DM | Yes | –0.32 | 0.10 | –3.27 | 0.001 | –0.08 | − | − | − | − | − |
| CKD | Yes | 0.04 | 0.12 | 0.30 | 0.765 | 0.01 | − | − | − | − | − |
| CS | Yes | –0.61 | 0.13 | –4.85 | 0.000 | –0.11 | –0.49 | 0.15 | –3.27 | 0.001 | –0.09 |
| HT | Yes | –0.63 | 0.08 | –7.88 | 0.000 | –0.18 | –0.52 | 0.10 | –5.37 | 0.000 | –0.16 |
| ACS | Yes | –0.23 | 0.13 | –1.76 | 0.078 | –0.04 | − | − | − | − | − |
| Thyroid disease | Hyperthyroidism | 0.15 | 0.22 | 0.70 | 0.487 | 0.03 | − | − | − | − | − |
| Hypothyroidism | 0.03 | 0.18 | 0.18 | 0.861 | 0.01 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| TG (ref. <135 mg/dl) | 135–200 mg/dl | –0.07 | 0.15 | –0.45 | 0.655 | –0.02 | − | − | − | − | − |
| >200 mg/dl | 0.10 | 0.19 | 0.54 | 0.592 | 0.02 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| LDL (ref. <70 mg/dl) | 70–116 mg/dl | 0.35 | 0.11 | 3.16 | 0.002 | 0.08 | − | − | − | − | − |
| >116 mg/dl | –0.80 | 0.11 | –7.08 | 0.000 | –0.18 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| HDL (ref. <40 mg/dl) | ≥40 mg/dl | –0.62 | 0.09 | –6.72 | 0.000 | –0.16 | − | − | − | − | − |
LOHS, length of hospital stay; N, number of patients; AF, atrial fibrillation; EHRA, European Heart Rhythm Association; NRS, Nutritional Risk Score 2002; BMI, body mass index; HF, heart failure; DM, diabetes mellitus; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CS, cerebral stroke; HT, hypertension; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; TD, thyroid disease; TG, triglycerides; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; TC, total cholesterol; CRP, C-reactive protein; PCT, procalcitonin; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone; FT3, free triiodothyronine; FT4, free thyroxine; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP, N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; K, potassium; Na, sodium; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; B, unstandardized regression coefficient B; SE, standard error; t, B/standard error; β, standardized regression coefficient β.
Table 6 shows the evaluation of the effect of selected parameters on the LOHS (<5 vs. ≥5 days) (univariate and multivariate models of the predictors included in the logistic regression analysis). The variables included in the analysis were age (years), NRS (points, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. <3), BMI (kg/m2, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. 18.5–24.9), TG (mg/dl), LDL (mg/dl, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. <70 mg/dl), HDL (mg/dl, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. <40 mg/dl), TC (mg/dl, as a quantitative and qualitative variable ref. <135 mg/dl), CRP (mg/L), albumin (g/dl), transferrin (g/L), lymphocytes (%), PCT (ng/ml), TSH (uIU/ml), FT3 (pg/ml), FT4 (ng/dl), BNP (pg/ml), K (mmol/L), Na (mmol/L), HbA1c (%), sex (ref. male), type of AF (ref. permanent), EHRA AF (ref. I), HF, DM, CKD, CS, HT, ACS, and TD. Logistic regression analysis in the univariate model showed the effect of age (OR = 1.04, p < 0.001), LDL (OR = 0.99, p < 0.001), HDL (OR = 0.98, p < 0.001), TC (OR = 0.996, p < 0.001), CRP (OR = 1, 02, p < 0.001), lymphocytes (OR = 0.97, p = 0.008), BNP (OR = 0.00, p < 0.001), K (OR = 0.70, p = 0.002), Na (OR = 0.93, p < 0.001), and HbA1c (OR = 1.16, p = 0.027) on LOHS. In addition, factors such as sex (ref. male, OR = 1.34, p = 0.006), NRS (ref. <3, OR = 1.55, p = 0.029), type of AF (ref. permanent, paroxysmal: OR = 0.57, p < 0.001, persistent: OR = 0.57, ≤0.001), DM (ref. no; OR = 0.75, p = 0.038), CS (ref. no; OR = 0.55, p = 0.002), HT (ref. no; OR = 0.50, p < 0.001), TD (ref. no; hyperthyroidism: OR = 1.50, p = 0.039), LDL (ref. <70; >116 mg/dl: OR = 0.49, p < 0.001), and HDL (ref. <40 mg/dl; OR = 0.56, p < 0.001) had an impact on LOHS. The age, HDL (mg/dl), and HT variables were included in the multivariate model (Table 6).
TABLE 6.
Effect of selected parameters on length of hospital stay (<5 vs. ≥5 days) (univariate model and multivariate predictors included in logistic regression analysis).
| Parameter | Unadjusted model | Adjusted model | |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
| B | P-value | OR | −95% CI | +95% CI | B | P-value | OR | −95% CI | +95% CI | ||
| Age (years) | 0.04 | 0.000 | 1.04 | 1.03 | 1.05 | 0.04 | 0.000 | 1.04 | 1.03 | 1.05 | |
| NRS (points) | 0.09 | 0.122 | 1.09 | 0.98 | 1.23 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 0.00 | 0.706 | 1.00 | 0.97 | 1.02 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| TG (mg/dl) | 0.00 | 0.818 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| LDL (mg/dl) | –0.01 | 0.000 | 0.99 | 0.99 | 0.99 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| HDL (mg/dl) | –0.02 | 0.000 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.99 | –0.03 | 0.000 | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.98 | |
| TC (mg/dl) | 0.00 | 0.001 | 0.996 | 0.994 | 0.998 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| CRP (mg/L) | 0.02 | 0.000 | 1.02 | 1.01 | 1.02 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Albumin (g/dl) | 0.52 | 0.162 | 1.68 | 0.81 | 3.47 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Transferrin (g/L) | –0.13 | 0.596 | 0.88 | 0.55 | 1.41 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Lymphocytes (%) | –0.03 | 0.008 | 0.97 | 0.95 | 0.99 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| PCT (ng/ml) | 0.95 | 0.128 | 2.58 | 0.76 | 8.78 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| TSH (uIU/ml) | 0.06 | 0.109 | 1.07 | 0.99 | 1.15 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| FT3 (pg/ml) | 0.07 | 0.550 | 1.08 | 0.85 | 1.37 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| FT4 (ng/dl) | –0.07 | 0.633 | 0.93 | 0.70 | 1.25 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| BNP (pg/ml) | 0.00 | 0.021 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| NT-proBNP (pg/ml) | 0.00 | <0.001 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| K (mmol/L) | –0.35 | 0.002 | 0.70 | 0.56 | 0.88 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Na (mmol/L) | –0.08 | 0.000 | 0.93 | 0.90 | 0.96 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| HbA1c (%) | 0.15 | 0.027 | 1.16 | 1.02 | 1.32 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Sex (ref. male) | Female | 0.29 | 0.006 | 1.34 | 1.09 | 1.65 | − | − | − | − | − |
| NRS (ref. <3) | ≥3 | 0.44 | 0.029 | 1.55 | 1.05 | 2.31 | − | − | − | − | − |
| BMI (kg/m2) (ref. 18.5–24.9) | 25.0—29.9 | –0.16 | 0.311 | 0.85 | 0.62 | 1.17 | − | − | − | − | − |
| ≥30.0 | –0.17 | 0.296 | 0.85 | 0.62 | 1.16 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| Type of AF (ref. permanent) | Paroxysmal | –0.56 | 0.000 | 0.57 | 0.43 | 0.76 | − | − | − | − | − |
| Persistent | –0.55 | 0.000 | 0.57 | 0.44 | 0.76 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| EHRA class (ref. I) | IIa | 0.77 | 0.175 | 2.17 | 0.71 | 6.62 | − | − | − | − | − |
| IIb | 0.28 | 0.961 | 1.03 | 0.33 | 3.22 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| III | 1.05 | 0.062 | 2.84 | 0.95 | 8.51 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| IV | 0.73 | 0.450 | 2.07 | 0.31 | 13.77 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| HF | Yes | 0.01 | 0.930 | 1.01 | 0.78 | 1.32 | − | − | − | − | − |
| DM | Yes | –0.28 | 0.038 | 0.75 | 0.58 | 0.98 | − | − | − | − | − |
| CKD | Yes | 0.24 | 0.115 | 1.27 | 0.94 | 1.70 | − | − | − | − | − |
| CS | Yes | –0.60 | 0.002 | 0.55 | 0.38 | 0.80 | − | − | − | − | − |
| HT | Yes | –0.69 | 0.000 | 0.50 | 0.41 | 0.62 | –0.55 | 0.000 | 0.58 | 0.44 | 0.76 |
| ACS | Yes | –0.16 | 0.368 | 0.85 | 0.60 | 1.21 | − | − | − | − | − |
| Thyroid disease | Hyperthyroidism | 0.41 | 0.039 | 1.50 | 1.02 | 2.21 | − | − | − | − | − |
| Hypothyroidism | 0.20 | 0.195 | 1.23 | 0.90 | 1.67 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| TG (ref. <135 mg/dl) | 135–200 mg/dl | –0.08 | 0.517 | 0.92 | 0.71 | 1.18 | − | − | − | − | − |
| >200 mg/dl | 0.00 | 1.000 | 1.00 | 0.69 | 1.46 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| LDL (ref. <70 mg/dl) | 70–116 mg/dl | –0.07 | 0.581 | 0.93 | 0.71 | 1.21 | − | − | − | − | − |
| >116 mg/dl | –0.72 | 0.000 | 0.49 | 0.37 | 0.65 | − | − | − | − | − | |
| HDL (ref. <40 mg/dl) | ≥40 mg/dl | –0.58 | 0.000 | 0.56 | 0.45 | 0.71 | − | − | − | − | − |
LOHS, length of hospital stay; N, number of patients; AF, atrial fibrillation; EHRA, European Heart Rhythm Association; NRS, Nutritional Risk Score 2002; BMI, body mass index; HF, heart failure; DM, diabetes mellitus; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CS, cerebral stroke; HT, hypertension; ACS, acute coronary syndrome; TD, thyroid disease; TG, triglycerides; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; TC, total cholesterol; CRP, C-reactive protein; PCT, procalcitonin; TSH, thyroid-stimulating hormone; FT3, free triiodothyronine; FT4, free thyroxine; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; NT-proBNP, N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide; K, potassium; Na, sodium; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; B, regression coefficient B; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence intervals.
4 Discussion
Abnormal nutritional status is a common problem in hospitalized patients and can affect up to 30%. In hospitalized patients, it is associated with a prolonged hospital stay, increased risk of re-hospitalization, hospital infections, medical treatment complications, and thus increased hospital costs (19–21). Poor nutritional status in CVD, such as ACS and HF, has also been shown to be associated with a higher risk of in-hospital death (22, 23). In our sample, the average LOHS in patients with AF was 3.5 days. This result is consistent with the observations of other researchers, where it was 3–4 days (24, 25). Unfortunately, nutritional status, especially malnutrition, is often ignored in clinical practice, and many patients with CVD are not properly diagnosed, which can result in a worsened disease course. Malnutrition in patients with CVD is particularly problematic, as in many situations it can even lead to cardiac cachexia, which can worsen the course of the underlying disease, creating a vicious cycle. It is also worth noting that patients with CVD typically take multiple medications, and polypharmacy is another element that can affect nutritional status. Medications, among other things, can interfere with the absorption of nutrients and even disrupt the sense of taste (26).
In this study, patients at risk of malnutrition stayed in the hospital significantly longer (Me: 4.44 days). They also constituted a larger group of patients hospitalized for longer than 5 days than those hospitalized for less than 5 days. Malnutrition more often affected women, and the mean age of patients affected was 76 ± 13 years. Additionally, the univariate linear analysis showed that the risk of malnutrition, according to the NRS 2002, was associated with more extended hospitalization (by 0.46 days). The univariate logistic regression model showed that the risk of hospitalization for longer than 5 days was 55% higher in these patients. Not many papers evaluate the effect of nutritional status on the LOHS of patients with AF. Regarding length in general, the study by Guha et al. showed that the LOHS in the case of primary AF was 1.9 ± 0.002 and in the case of concomitant cancer was 2.9 ± 0.1 days. A significantly longer stay was characterized in this study by the group of patients who underwent direct current cardioversion (27). In the Vijan et al. study, independent factors affecting LOHS (≥7 days for this study) included ACS, decompensated HF, increased NT-proBNP levels and infections (25). Researchers studying nutritional status confirm that malnutrition upon hospital admission is quite common and is associated not only with prolonged hospital stay but also with worse prognosis (28–31). Malnutrition also increases the risk of re-hospitalization in patients with AF. In Budzyński and Anaszewicz’s study, the average LOHS was 3.7 days, and patients with NRS 2002 ≥3 accounted for 3.6% of patients. In our group of patients, the LOHS was similar, NRS 2002 ≥3 represented 7% of patients. The patients’ BMIs were also similar. In both our study and that of Budzynski et al., 75% of patients struggled with overweight and obesity. Both studies were conducted in Poland (32). BMI is not a perfect tool for assessing nutritional status because it does not assess individual components of body weight. Patients with multimorbidity, such as those with HF or CKD, may have edema, which overestimates body mass (33, 34). For overweight individuals, an increase in the heart’s minute volume contributes to remodeling of the heart’s structure, which is the basis for this cardiac arrhythmia (35). In addition, chronic inflammation typical of both obesity and malnutrition is a significant factor strongly associated with the occurrence of AF (36). In malnutrition, inflammation leads to increased oxidative stress and thus endothelial dysfunction, which can lead to serious cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (37). In a study by Zhu et al., patients who are malnourished after ablation are at a higher risk of AF recurrence, which may be associated with both longer hospital stays and re-hospitalization (38).
Although in our study, BMI scores were not a factor in the LOHS, it should be noted that many publications show a positive correlation between the occurrence of AF and underweight, overweight and obesity (39–41). The authors also emphasize that obesity, as measured by BMI, is associated with increased morbidity and death from various causes (42).
In this study, in the multivariate linear regression model, the factors influencing shorter LOHS were higher LDL and HDL levels, and in the multivariate logistic regression model, the risk of hospitalization for longer than 5 days was lower for higher HDL levels. As mentioned earlier, in the study group, 75% of patients suffered from overweight and obesity. Bora et al. showed that 79.8% of the decrease in HDL in the study population was associated with an increase in BMI in those who were overweight or obese (43). These patients may also have been previously diagnosed with CVD risk, which may have influenced the earlier initiation of treatment and, for example, the recommendation to take LDL-lowering drugs (44). The study by Barkas et al. found that patients with AF had lower LDL and HDL levels than patients without AF. The researchers also found that low HDL levels may be a predictor of AF (45). According to Suzuki, both older age and a decrease in blood lipids can cause AF due to abnormal SA node conduction, left atrial enlargement, and myocardial degeneration (46). In the case of coexisting hyperthyroidism, LDL concentrations will also be lower. Thyroxine induces the activity of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme and what is associated with this is a reduction in LDL concentrations (47). In the study group, hyperthyroidism affected 7% of patients. The low LDL and HDL levels could also have been caused by malnutrition (48). However, in the study group, they occurred in only 7% of the subjects. The occurrence of AF is also influenced by inflammation and oxidative stress, which occurs when HDL levels are low (49). Numerous studies show that patients taking lipid-lowering drugs have a significantly reduced risk of AF (50, 51). Lee et al. showed that lower cholesterol levels were associated with a higher risk of incident AF and cholesterol variability with AF development. Their findings confirm the occurrence of the “cholesterol paradox” (52).
In this study, higher potassium and sodium concentrations were also associated with shorter hospitalization. Studies by other authors confirm that lower potassium concentrations in patients with atrial arrhythmias are associated with an increased risk of AF (53–55). Hyponatremia is also independently associated with the occurrence of AF. Low potassium and sodium levels-induced slowing of sinoatrial node beating rate and genesis of pulmonary vein burst firing which could contribute to the higher occurrence of AF during hyponatremia or hypokalemia. Electrolyte disturbances play an important role in the pathogenesis of AF and they too may be related to malnutrition (56–58).
The study had its strengths and weaknesses. Undoubtedly, the strengths included the size of the study group. One of the limitations of the study was the small number of malnourished patients. They accounted for 7% of the study group. Sometimes the NRS 2002 or BMI score was missing from the patient’s medical records. Waist-Hip Ratio measurement or electrical bioelectrical impedance analysis was not performed on admission to the hospital. Medical records also lacked information on patients’ previous treatment, such as drugs to reduce lipids.
5 Conclusion
For nutritional status, factors indicating the risk of prolonged hospitalization in patients with AF are malnutrition, lower serum LDL, HDL, potassium, and sodium levels determined at the time of admission to the cardiology department. Assessment of nutritional status in patients with AF is important both in the context of evaluating obesity and malnutrition status, as both conditions can alter the prognosis of patients. Further studies are needed to determine the exact impact of the above on the risk of prolonged hospitalization.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Independent Bioethics Committee of Wroclaw Medical University, protocol no. KB-205/2021. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.
Author contributions
MC, IU, and RJ-V: conceptualization and formal analysis. MC, IU, RJ-V, and JS: methodology. IU, AD, and MK-O: software. MC, IU, RJ-V, JS, MK-O, and AD: investigation and writing—original draft preparation. MC, KŁ, RJ-V, and RB-T: writing—review and editing. MC, KŁ, AD, and RB-T: visualization. JS: supervision. MC and IU: project administration. All authors read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was funded by the University of La Rioja and the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland under the statutory grant of the Wroclaw Medical University (SUBZ.E250.22.095).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
- 1.James SL, Abate D, Abate KH, Abay SM, Abbafati C, Abbasi N, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2017. Lancet. (2018) 392:1789–858. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32279-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Benjamin EJ, Muntner P, Alonso A, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, Carson AP, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2019 update: a report from the American heart association. Circulation. (2019) 139:e56–528. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000659 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Schnabel RB, Yin X, Gona P, Larson MG, Beiser AS, McManus DD, et al. 50 year trends in atrial fibrillation prevalence, incidence, risk factors, and mortality in the Framingham heart study: a cohort study. Lancet. (2015) 386:154–62. 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61774-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Dilaveris P, Kennedy H. Silent atrial fibrillation: epidemiology, diagnosis, and clinical impact. Clin Cardiol. (2017) 40:413–8. 10.1002/clc.22667 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Chugh SS, Havmoeller R, Narayanan K, Singh D, Rienstra M, Benjamin EJ, et al. Worldwide epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: a global burden of disease 2010 study. Circulation. (2014) 129:837–47. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.005119 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Staerk L, Sherer J, Ko D, Benjamin E, Helm R. Atrial fibrillation: epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical outcomes. Circ Res. (2017) 120:1501–17. 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.117.309732 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Lane DA, Skjøth F, Lip GYH, Larsen TB, Kotecha D. Temporal trends in incidence, prevalence, and mortality of atrial fibrillation in primary care. J Am Heart Assoc. (2017) 6:e005155. 10.1161/JAHA.116.005155 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Schmidt M, Ulrichsen SP, Pedersen L, Bøtker HE, Nielsen JC, Sørensen HT. 30-year nationwide trends in incidence of atrial fibrillation in Denmark and associated 5-year risk of heart failure, stroke, and death. Int J Cardiol. (2016) 225:30–6. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.09.071 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Guigoz Y, Vellas B, Garry PJ. Assessing the nutritional status of the elderly: the mini nutritional assessment as part of the geriatric evaluation. Nutr Rev. (1996) 54:S59–65. 10.1111/j.1753-4887.1996.tb03793.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Overvad TF, Rasmussen LH, Skjøth F, Overvad K, Lip GYH, Larsen TB. Body mass index and adverse events in patients with incident atrial fibrillation. Am J Med. (2013) 126:640.e9–17. 10.1016/j.amjmed.2012.11.024 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Huxley RR, Misialek JR, Agarwal SK, Loehr LR, Soliman EZ, Chen LY, et al. Physical activity, obesity, weight change, and risk of atrial fibrillation: the atherosclerosis risk in communities study. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. (2014) 7:620–5. 10.1161/CIRCEP.113.001244 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Murphy NF, MacIntyre K, Stewart S, Hart CL, Hole D, McMurray JJV. Long-term cardiovascular consequences of obesity: 20-year follow-up of more than 15 000 middle-aged men and women (the renfrew-paisley study). Eur Heart J. (2006) 27:96–106. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi506 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Kyle UG, Genton L, Pichard C. Hospital length of stay and nutritional status. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. (2005) 8:397–402. 10.1097/01.mco.0000172579.94513.db [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Tangvik RJ, Guttormsen AB, Tell GS, Ranhoff AH. Implementation of nutritional guidelines in a university hospital monitored by repeated point prevalence surveys. Eur J Clin Nutr. (2012) 66:388–93. 10.1038/ejcn.2011.149 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Cederholm T, Jensen GL, Correia MITD, Gonzalez MC, Fukushima R, Higashiguchi T, et al. GLIM criteria for the diagnosis of malnutrition–A consensus report from the global clinical nutrition community. Clin Nutr. (2019) 38:1–9. 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.08.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Hindricks G, Potpara T, Dagres N, Arbelo E, Bax JJ, Blomström-Lundqvist C, et al. Corrigendum to: 2020 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with the European association for cardio-thoracic surgery (EACTS): the task force for the diagnosis and management of atrial fibrillation of the European society of cardiology (ESC) developed with the special contribution of the European heart rhythm association (EHRA) of the ESC. Eur Heart J. (2021) 42:4194. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab648 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Kondrup J, Johansen N, Plum LM, Bak L, Larsen IH, Martinsen A, et al. Incidence of nutritional risk and causes of inadequate nutritional care in hospitals. Clin Nutr. (2002) 21:461–8. 10.1054/clnu.2002.0585 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Weir C, Jan A. BMI Classification Percentile and cut Off Points. Treasure Island, FL: StatPearls Publishing; (2022). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Uhl S, Siddique SM, Bloschichak A, McKeever W, D’Anci K, Leas B, et al. Interventions for malnutrition in hospitalized adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hosp Med. (2022) 17:556–64. 10.1002/jhm.12891 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Correia MITD, Waitzberg D. The impact of malnutrition on morbidity, mortality, length of hospital stay and costs evaluated through a multivariate model analysis. Clin Nutr. (2003) 22:235–9. 10.1016/s0261-5614(02)00215-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Boban M, Bulj N, Kolačević Zeljković M, Radeljić V, Krcmar T, Trbusic M, et al. Nutritional considerations of cardiovascular diseases and treatments. Nutr Metab Insights. (2019) 12:1178638819833705. 10.1177/1178638819833705 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Czapla M, Karniej P, Juárez-Vela R, Łokieć K. The association between nutritional status and in-hospital mortality among patients with acute coronary syndrome-a result of the retrospective nutritional status heart study (NSHS). Nutrients. (2020) 12:E3091. 10.3390/nu12103091 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Czapla M, Juárez-Vela R, Łokieć K, Karniej P. The association between nutritional status and in-hospital mortality among patients with heart failure-a result of the retrospective nutritional status heart study 2 (NSHS2). Nutrients. (2021) 13:1669. 10.3390/nu13051669 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Sheikh A, Patel NJ, Nalluri N, Agnihotri K, Spagnola J, Patel A, et al. Trends in hospitalization for atrial fibrillation: epidemiology, cost, and implications for the future. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. (2015) 58:105–16. 10.1016/j.pcad.2015.07.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Vîjan AE, Daha IC, Delcea C, Dan GA. Determinants of prolonged length of hospital stay of patients with atrial fibrillation. J Clin Med. (2021) 10:3715. 10.3390/jcm10163715 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Little M. Updates in nutrition and polypharmacy. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. (2018) 21:4–9. 10.1097/MCO.0000000000000425 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Guha A, Jain A, Aggarwal A, Dey AK, Dani S, Ganatra S, et al. Length of stay and cost of care associated with admissions for atrial fibrillation among patients with cancer. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. (2022) 22:272. 10.1186/s12872-022-02697-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Nigatu YD, Gebreyesus SH, Allard JP, Endris BS. The effect of malnutrition at admission on length of hospital stay among adult patients in developing country: a prospective cohort study. Clin Nutr ESPEN. (2021) 41:217–24. 10.1016/j.clnesp.2020.12.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Badosa EL, Tahull MB, Casas NV, Sangrador GE, Méndez CF, Meseguer IH, et al. Hospital malnutrition screening at admission: malnutrition increases mortality and length of stay. Nutr Hosp. (2017) 34:907–13. 10.20960/nh.657 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Czapla M, Juárez-Vela R, Łokieć K, Wleklik M, Karniej P, Smereka J. The association between nutritional status and length of hospital stay among patients with hypertension. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2022) 19:5827. 10.3390/ijerph19105827 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Kim D, Shim J, Kim YG, Yu HT, Kim TH, Uhm JS, et al. Malnutrition and risk of procedural complications in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing catheter ablation. Front Cardiovasc Med. (2021) 8:736042. 10.3389/fcvm.2021.736042 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Budzyński J, Anaszewicz M. The associations between atrial fibrillation and parameters of nutritional status assessment in the general hospital population–a cross-sectional analysis of medical documentation. Kardiol Pol. (2017) 75:231–9. 10.5603/KP.a2016.0182 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Sharma A, Lavie CJ, Borer JS, Vallakati A, Goel S, Lopez-Jimenez F, et al. Meta-analysis of the relation of body mass index to all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization in patients with chronic heart failure. Am J Cardiol. (2015) 115:1428–34. 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.02.024 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Lu JL, Kalantar-Zadeh K, Ma JZ, Quarles LD, Kovesdy CP. Association of body mass index with outcomes in patients with CKD. J Am Soc Nephrol. (2014) 25:2088–96. 10.1681/ASN.2013070754 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Stritzke J, Markus MR, Duderstadt S, Lieb W, Luchner A, Döring A, et al. The aging process of the heart: obesity is the main risk factor for left atrial enlargement during aging the MONICA/KORA (monitoring of trends and determinations in cardiovascular disease/cooperative research in the region of Augsburg) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. (2009) 54:1982–9. 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.07.034 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Ma M, Zhi H, Yang S, Yu EY, Wang L. Body mass index and the risk of atrial fibrillation: a Mendelian randomization study. Nutrients. (2022) 14:1878. 10.3390/nu14091878 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Arikawa R, Kanda D, Ikeda Y, Tokushige A, Sonoda T, Anzaki K, et al. Prognostic impact of malnutrition on cardiovascular events in coronary artery disease patients with myocardial damage. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. (2021) 21:479. 10.1186/s12872-021-02296-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Zhu S, Zhao H, Zheng M, Peng J. The impact of malnutrition on atrial fibrillation recurrence post ablation. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. (2021) 31:834–40. 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.12.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Shi JH, Ji CP, Xing AJ, Zhu CR, Du X, Lin LM, et al. [Impact of combined systolic blood pressure and body mass index on the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation]. Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. (2016) 44:231–7. 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3758.2016.03.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Sun X, Boyce SW, Hill PC, Bafi AS, Xue Z, Lindsay J, et al. Association of body mass index with new-onset atrial fibrillation after coronary artery bypass grafting operations. Ann Thorac Surg. (2011) 91:1852–8. 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.03.022 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Perez MV, Wang PJ, Larson JC, Soliman EZ, Limacher M, Rodriguez B, et al. Risk factors for atrial fibrillation and their population burden in postmenopausal women: the women’s health initiative observational study. Heart. (2013) 99:1173–8. 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-303798 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Global BMI Mortality Collaboration, Di Angelantonio E, Bhupathiraju S, Wormser D, Gao P, Kaptoge S, et al. Body-mass index and all-cause mortality: individual-participant-data meta-analysis of 239 prospective studies in four continents. Lancet. (2016) 388:776–86. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30175-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Bora K, Pathak MS, Borah P, Das D. Association of decreased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) with obesity and risk estimates for decreased HDL-C attributable to obesity. J Prim Care Community Health. (2017) 8:26–30. 10.1177/2150131916664706 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Niedziela J, Hudzik B, Niedziela N, Gąsior M, Gierlotka M, Wasilewski J, et al. The obesity paradox in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol. (2014) 29:801–12. 10.1007/s10654-014-9961-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Barkas F, Elisaf M, Korantzopoulos P, Tsiara S, Liberopoulos E. The CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores predict atrial fibrillation in dyslipidemic individuals: role of incorporating low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. Int J Cardiol. (2017) 241:194–9. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.04.062 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Suzuki S. “Cholesterol paradox” in atrial fibrillation. Circ J. (2011) 75:2749–50. 10.1253/circj.cj-11-1134 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Li ZZ, Du X, Guo XY, Tang RB, Jiang C, Liu N, et al. Association between blood lipid profiles and atrial fibrillation: a case-control study. Med Sci Monit. (2018) 24:3903–8. 10.12659/MSM.907580 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Wang J, Okoli CT, He H, Feng F, Li J, Zhuang L, et al. Factors associated with compassion satisfaction, burnout, and secondary traumatic stress among Chinese nurses in tertiary hospitals: a cross-sectional study. Int J Nurs Stud. (2020) 102:103472. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103472 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Goette A, Bukowska A, Lillig CH, Lendeckel U. Oxidative stress and microcirculatory flow abnormalities in the ventricles during atrial fibrillation. Front Physiol. (2012) 3:236. 10.3389/fphys.2012.00236 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Bang CN, Greve AM, Abdulla J, Køber L, Gislason GH, Wachtell K. The preventive effect of statin therapy on new-onset and recurrent atrial fibrillation in patients not undergoing invasive cardiac interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. (2013) 167:624–30. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.08.056 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Anzai T, Grandinetti A, Katz AR, Hurwitz EL, Wu YY, Masaki K. Paradoxical association between atrial fibrillation/flutter and high cholesterol over age 75 years: the Kuakini Honolulu heart program and Honolulu-Asia aging study. J Electrocardiol. (2021) 65:37–44. 10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2020.12.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Lee HJ, Lee SR, Choi EK, Han KD, Oh S. Low lipid levels and high variability are associated with the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation. J Am Heart Assoc. (2019) 8:e012771. 10.1161/JAHA.119.012771 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Krijthe BP, Heeringa J, Kors JA, Hofman A, Franco OH, Witteman JC, et al. Serum potassium levels and the risk of atrial fibrillation: the Rotterdam Study. Int J Cardiol. (2013) 168:5411–5. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2013.08.048 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.Campbell NG, Allen E, Sanders J, Swinson R, Birch S, Sturgess J, et al. The impact of maintaining serum potassium ≥ 3.6 mEq/L vs ≥ 4.5 mEq/L on the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation in the first 120 hours after isolated elective coronary artery bypass grafting–study protocol for a randomised feasibility trial for the proposed Tight K randomized non-inferiority trial. Trials. (2017) 18:618. 10.1186/s13063-017-2349-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Farah R, Nassar M, Aboraya B, Nseir W. Low serum potassium levels are associated with the risk of atrial fibrillation. Acta Cardiol. (2021) 76:887–90. 10.1080/00015385.2020.1799573 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Lu YY, Cheng CC, Chen YC, Lin YK, Chen SA, Chen YJ. Electrolyte disturbances differentially regulate sinoatrial node and pulmonary vein electrical activity: a contribution to hypokalemia- or hyponatremia-induced atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm. (2016) 13:781–8. 10.1016/j.hrthm.2015.12.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Cavusoglu Y, Kaya H, Eraslan S, Yilmaz MB. Hyponatremia is associated with occurrence of atrial fibrillation in outpatients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Hellenic J Cardiol. (2019) 60:117–21. 10.1016/j.hjc.2018.03.006 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Rafaqat S, Rafaqat S, Khurshid H, Rafaqat S. Electrolyte’s imbalance role in atrial fibrillation: pharmacological management. Int J Arrhythm. (2022) 23:15. 10.1186/s42444-022-00065-z [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.