The Efficacy of Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor Versus Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Angiotensin Receptor Blocker Post Myocardial Infarction: A Meta-Analysis.

Acute myocardial infarction (MI) is one of the leading global healthcare emergencies, contributing to over three million global deaths. The purpose of this study is to investigate further the efficacy of sacubitril/valsartan over angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) in reducing the risk of heart failure (HF) in post-MI patients and providing a clear evidence-based medicine guideline for future use. An electronic database search was conducted on English databases. Eight articles were included, fulfilling our inclusion criteria, i.e., adult patients of ≥18 years with a recent diagnosis of acute MI. Pooled analysis was done using Review Manager version 5.4.1 (Cochrane Collaboration, London, England), and the data for each outcome were analyzed as dichotomous variables. A total of eight clinical trials were included in the meta-analysis. Six studies analyzed the sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI combination. The pooled analysis reported a significant increase in the risk of hypotension (relative risk {RR}: 1.29 {1.18, 1.41}) in the sacubitril/valsartan compared to the ACEI alone group. In addition, a significant increase was observed in the left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) after using the sacubitril/valsartan combination compared to using ACEI alone (RR: 3.08 {2.68, 4.48}). Furthermore, no significant difference was observed between the groups in terms of mortality rate (RR: 0.86 {0.73, 1.02}), the risk of heart failure (RR: 0.62 {0.39, 1.00}), the frequency of recurrent MI (RR: 0.86 {0.27, 2.76}), and the mean difference of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (weighted mean difference {WMD}: -174.36 {-414.18, 65.46}) between both the groups. However, the sacubitril/valsartan combination proved to be beneficial in significantly reducing the risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (RR: 0.64 {0.48, 0.84}) and rehospitalizations (RR: 0.53 {0.39, 0.71}) as compared to ACEI post MI. Additionally, sacubitril/valsartan and ARB's combination was reported in two studies. This led to a significant decrease in NT-proBNP concentration (WMD: -71.91 {-138.43, -5.39}) post MI in the sacubitril/valsartan combination group compared to the ARB usage alone. However, no significant difference was observed in the improvement of LVEF (WMD: 0.88 {-5.11, 6.87}) between both groups. Although the sacubitril/valsartan combination has no difference in mortality and outcomes compared to ACEI, there is evidence that using it proves to be more beneficial post MI compared to ACEI and ARB usage alone.

Distal radius chondrosarcoma in a 35-year-old female patient: A case report.

Key Clinical Message: Chondrosarcoma, although rare in the distal radius, poses significant challenges. Early diagnosis through incisional biopsy is essential. Surgical resection with margin control and fibular grafting can be effective, but vigilant surveillance is crucial due to its aggressive nature. Metastasis demands consideration of additional interventions or palliative care. Abstract: Chondrosarcomas constitute a rarity in the upper limbs, and their occurrence in the distal radius is even rarer with only one case previously documented. We report a case of distal radius chondrosarcoma in a 35-year-old female patient who presented with pain and swelling in her left wrist. Following an initial examination, an incisional biopsy was performed, confirming the diagnosis of dedifferentiated chondrosarcoma. The patient underwent a marginal resection of the distal radius and first carpal with ipsilateral fibular and locking compression plate fixation. Unfortunately, despite the interventions, the patient experienced recurrent swelling and ultimately required below-elbow amputation, followed by above elbow amputation due to metastasis. Unfortunately, the patient passed away due to recurrence and metastasis.

Short- and long-term cardiovascular outcomes in insulin-treated versus non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: This study aims to assess differences in severity of short-term (<1 year) and long-term (≥1 year) adverse CV outcomes after PCI in insulin-treated vs. non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (DM) patients. METHODS: A systematic search on Pubmed and Embase led to the incorporation of 29 studies that compared post-percutaneous coronary interventional outcomes in insulin-treated and non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus. Diabetes mellitus (type 2) was defined as fasting blood glucose (FBG) level of >7.0 mmol/L or with an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) level of >11.1 mmol/L at least on two separate occasions. Adverse CV outcomes were assessed in insulin-treated and non-insulin-treated DM after the PCI procedure considered for the analyses were mortality, MACE, TLR, TVR, MI, stent thrombosis, target lesion failure (TLF), and need for-post PCI CABG. Data were pooled and analyzed using Review Manager 5.3, and risk ratios (RR) with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.The statistical analyses were carried out by Review Manager v.5.3, and the data were pooled using a random-effects model. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported along with forest plots. The chi-square test was performed to assess for differences between the subgroups. Heterogeneity across studies was evaluated using Higgins I2 statistics. Visual inspection of the funnel plot and Begg's regression test were used to assess publication bias. RESULTS: A total of 40,527 patients (11742 in the Insulin-treated diabetes mellitus group and 28785 in the non-insulin-treated DM group) who underwent PCI were included. The pooled analysis of short-term follow up outcomes preceding PCI demonstrated a significantly higher risk of mortality (RR = 1.75 [1.24,2.47]; p = 0.002), MI (RR = 1.81[1.14,2.87]; p = 0.01], stent thrombosis (RR = 1.63[1.13, 2.35]; p = 0.009) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR = 1.29[1.02,1.63]; p = 0.03) in insulin-treated DM patients. Similarly, analysis of long-term follow-up studies depicted a significantly higher risk mortality (RR = 1.55 [1.22, 1.97]; p = 0.0003), MI (RR = 1.63 [1.35, 1.97]; p=<0.00001), MACE (R = 1.47 [1.31, 1.65]; p=<0.00001), stent thrombosis (RR = 1.54 [1.19,1.99]; p = 0.001), TLR (RR = 1.40 [1.18, 1.66]; p = 0.0001), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR = 1.35 [1.11, 1.64]; p = 0.003) in insulin-treated DM group after PCI versus non-insulin-treated DM patients. CONCLUSION: Despite a tremendous technical success rate of multi-vessel stenting, people living with diabetes who were being treated with insulin had higher long-term, and short-term mortality rates, MI, TLR, TVR, and stroke compared to people living with diabetes who were being treated with means other than insulin and are more prone to detrimental cardiovascular outcomes.