Effect of catheter ablation versus medical therapy on mental health and quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and mental health is well-documented, but the relative benefits of catheter ablation versus medical therapy on mental health and quality of life are not clearly understood. This study assesses the impact of these interventions on AF patients' mental health and quality of life. METHODS: Through a systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing catheter ablation to medical therapy for AF were analyzed. The study focused on a range of outcomes, particularly mental health and quality of life, measured by tools including the SF-36 mental component, HADS, SF-36 physical component, and AFEQT scores, among others. Analyses were stratified by AF type (paroxysmal versus persistent) and synthesized using random or fixed-effects models to calculate mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: From 24 RCTs totaling 6,353 patients (51.4% receiving catheter ablation, 71.1% male, average age 59), catheter ablation was found to significantly improve mental health (SMD 0.34; 95% CI 0.05-0.63; p = 0.02) and quality of life as indicated by PCS SF-36 (MD 2.64; 95% CI 1.06-4.26; p < 0.01) and AFEQT scores (MD 6.24; 95% CI 4.43-8.05; p < 0.01), with no significant difference in outcomes between AF subtypes. CONCLUSION: Catheter ablation offers significant improvements in mental health and quality of life over medical therapy for AF patients, demonstrating its efficacy across different types of AF.

Complete versus partial revascularization for older adults with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized and multivariable adjusted data.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from randomized studies support complete over culprit-only revascularization for patients with acute coronary artery syndrome (ACS) and multivessel coronary artery diseases (MVD). Whether these findings extend to elderly patients, however, has not been thoroughly explored. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes of elderly individuals (defined as age ≥75 years) with ACS and MVD submitted to complete vs partial-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched. We computed pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to preserve time time-to-event data. RESULTS: We included 7 studies, of which 2 were RCT and 5 were multivariable adjusted cohorts, comprising a total 10 147, of whom 43.8% underwent complete revascularization. As compared with partial-only PCI, complete revascularization was associated with a lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 0.71; 95% CI 0.60-0.85; P < 0.01), cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.79; P < 0.01), and recurrent myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.85; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups regarding the risk of revascularizations (hazard ratio 0.80; 95% CI 0.53-1.20; P = 0.28). CONCLUSION: Among elderly patients with ACS and multivessel CAD, complete revascularization is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and recurrent myocardial infarction.

Cardiovascular Benefits of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Patients Living with Obesity or Overweight: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have emerged as an effective therapeutic class for weight loss. However, the efficacy of these agents in reducing cardiovascular endpoints among patients living with obesity or overweight is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing GLP-1 RAs versus placebo in patients with obesity or overweight. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs were included, with 30,512 patients. Compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs reduced systolic blood pressure (MD - 4.76 mmHg; 95% CI - 6.03, - 3.50; p < 0.001; I2 = 100%) and diastolic blood pressure (MD - 1.41 mmHg; 95% CI - 2.64, - 0.17; p = 0.03; I2 = 100%). GLP-1 RA significantly reduced the occurrence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.61, 0.85; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%). There were no significant differences between groups in unstable angina (UA; RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.65, 1.07; p = 0.16; I2 = 0%), stroke (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.74, 1.12; p = 0.38; I2 = 0%), atrial fibrillation (AF; RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.17, 1.43; p = 0.19; I2 = 22%), and deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.06, 1.40; p = 0.13; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients living with obesity or overweight, GLP-1 RA reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure and the occurrence of myocardial infarction, with a neutral effect on the occurrence of UA, stroke, AF, and deep vein thrombosis. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO identifier number CRD42023475226.

Catheter ablation versus medical therapy for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare catheter ablation and medical therapy (antiarrhythmics for rhythm or rate control) in patients with AF and HFpEF. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Outcomes were the composite end points of death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization, all-cause death, cardiovascular death, all-cause rehospitalization, and HF hospitalization. Statistical analysis was performed using R statistical software, version 4.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. RESULTS: We included 20,257 patients from 8 studies. Of those, 3 were derived from RCTs, either through post hoc analysis or subgroup analysis, and 5 were observational studies. The median follow-up ranged from 24.6 to 61.2 months. Compared with medical therapy, catheter ablation was associated with a statistically significant lower risk of death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.83; P = .001; I2 = 66%), all-cause death (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46-0.99; P = .047; I2 = 61%), cardiovascular death (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.21-0.84; P = .014; I2 = 22%), and HF hospitalization (HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23-0.82; P = .011; I2 = 87%). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, catheter ablation was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and all-cause rehospitalization in comparison to medical therapy in patients with AF and HFpEF.

Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a promising alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and ventricular dyssynchrony, but its benefits are uncertain. In this study, we aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes of CSP vs BVP for cardiac resynchronization in patients with HFrEF. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing CSP to BVP for resynchronization therapy in patients with HFrEF. Heterogeneity was examined with I2 statistics. A random-effects model was used for all outcomes. We included 7 randomized controlled trials with 408 patients, of whom 200 (49%) underwent CSP. Compared to BVP, CSP resulted in a significantly greater reduction in QRS duration (MD -13.34 ms; 95% confidence interval [CI] -24.32 to -2.36, P = .02; I2 = 91%) and New York Heart Association functional class (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.37; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.05; P = .02; I2 = 41%), and a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (mean difference [MD] 2.06%; 95% CI 0.16 to 3.97; P = .03; I2 = 0%). No statistical difference was noted for left ventricular end-systolic volume (SMD -0.51 mL; 95% CI -1.26 to 0.24; P = .18; I2 = 83%), lead capture threshold (MD -0.08 V; 95% CI -0.42 to 0.27; P = .66; I2 = 66%), and procedure time (MD 5.99 minutes; 95% CI -15.91 to 27.89; P = .59; I2 = 79%). These findings suggest that CSP may have electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and symptomatic benefits over BVP for patients with HFrEF requiring cardiac resynchronization.