Techniques improving electrical cardioversion success for patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: Electrical cardioversion is commonly used to restore sinus rhythm in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but procedural technique and clinical success vary. We sought to identify techniques associated with electrical cardioversion success for AF patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and the grey literature from inception to October 2022. We abstracted data on initial and cumulative cardioversion success. We pooled data using random-effects models. From 15 207 citations, we identified 45 randomized trials and 16 observational studies. In randomized trials, biphasic when compared with monophasic waveforms resulted in higher rates of initial [16 trials, risk ratio (RR) 1.71, 95% CI 1.29-2.28] and cumulative success (18 trials, RR 1.10, 95% CI 1.04-1.16). Fixed, high-energy (≥200 J) shocks when compared with escalating energy resulted in a higher rate of initial success (four trials, RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.33-1.98). Manual pressure when compared with no pressure resulted in higher rates of initial (two trials, RR 2.19, 95% CI 1.21-3.95) and cumulative success (two trials, RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.06-1.34). Cardioversion success did not differ significantly for other interventions, including: antero-apical/lateral vs. antero-posterior positioned pads (initial: 11 trials, RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.97-1.39; cumulative: 14 trials, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.96-1.06); rectilinear/pulsed biphasic vs. biphasic truncated exponential waveform (initial: four trials, RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91-1.34; cumulative: four trials, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89-1.08) and cathodal vs. anodal configuration (cumulative: two trials, RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92-1.07). CONCLUSIONS: Biphasic waveforms, high-energy shocks, and manual pressure increase the success of electrical cardioversion for AF. Other interventions, especially pad positioning, require further study.

Medical cannabis and cannabinoids for impaired sleep: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic review to explore the effectiveness of medical cannabis for impaired sleep. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PsychINFO to January 2021 for randomized trials of medical cannabis or cannabinoids for impaired sleep vs. any non-cannabis control. When possible, we pooled effect estimates for all patient-important sleep-related outcomes and used the GRADE approach to appraise the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Thirty-nine trials (5100 patients) were eligible for review, of which 38 evaluated oral cannabinoids and 1 administered inhaled cannabis. The median follow-up was 35 days, and most trials (33 of 39) enrolled patients living with chronic cancer or noncancer chronic pain. Among patients with chronic pain, moderate certainty evidence found that medical cannabis probably results in a small improvement in sleep quality versus placebo (modeled risk difference [RD] for achieving the minimally important difference [MID], 8% [95% CI, 3 to 12]). Moderate to high certainty evidence shows that medical cannabis vs. placebo results in a small improvement in sleep disturbance for chronic non-cancer pain (modeled RD for achieving the MID, 19% [95% CI, 11 to 28]) and a very small improvement in sleep disturbance for chronic cancer pain (weighted mean difference of -0.19 cm [95%CI, -0.36 to -0.03 cm]; interaction p = .03). Moderate to high certainty evidence shows medical cannabis, versus placebo, results in a substantial increase in the risk of dizziness (RD 29% [95%CI, 16 to 50], for trials with ≥3 months follow-up), and a small increase in the risk of somnolence, dry mouth, fatigue, and nausea (RDs ranged from 6% to 10%). CONCLUSION: Medical cannabis and cannabinoids may improve impaired sleep among people living with chronic pain, but the magnitude of benefit is likely small.

The effects of dietary nitrate supplementation on endurance exercise performance and cardiorespiratory measures in healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Nitrate supplementation is thought to improve performance in endurance sports. OBJECTIVE: To meta-analyze studies evaluating the effect of nitrate supplementation on endurance sports performance among adults. DATA SOURCES: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and CINAHL without language restrictions. METHODS: We included studies that: 1) compared nitrate supplementation with placebo; 2) enrolled adults engaging in an endurance-based activity; and 3) reported a performance measure or surrogate physiologic outcome. We evaluated risk of bias using the Cochrane Collaboration tool and pooled data with a random-effects model. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to evaluate confidence in estimates. RESULTS: We included 73 studies (n = 1061). Nitrate supplementation improved power output (MD 4.6 watts, P < 0.0001), time to exhaustion (MD 25.3 s, P < 0.00001), and distance travelled (MD 163.7 m, P = 0.03). We found no significant difference on perceived exertion, time trial performance and work done. Nitrate supplementation decreased VO2 (MD - 0.04 L/min, P < 0.00001) but had no significant effect on VO2max or blood lactate levels. CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests that dietary nitrate supplementation benefits performance-related outcomes for endurance sports.