Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Cardiooncology ; 9(1): 19, 2023 Apr 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37020260

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Though the incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is increased in patients with cancer, the effectiveness of catheter ablation (CA) for AF in patients with cancer is not well studied. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent CA for AF. Patients with a history of cancer within 5-years prior to, or those with an exposure to anthracyclines and/or thoracic radiation at any time prior to the index ablation were compared to patients without a history of cancer who underwent AF ablation. The primary outcome was freedom from AF [with or without anti-arrhythmic drugs (AADs), or need for repeat CA at 12-months post-ablation]. Secondary endpoints included freedom from AF at 12 months post-ablation with AADs and without AADs. Safety endpoints included bleeding, pulmonary vein stenosis, stroke, and cardiac tamponade. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to identify independent risk predictors of the primary outcome. RESULTS: Among 502 patients included in the study, 251 (50%) had a history of cancer. Freedom from AF at 12 months did not differ between patients with and without cancer (83.3% vs 72.5%, p 0.28). The need for repeat ablation was also similar between groups (20.7% vs 27.5%, p 0.29). Multivariable regression analysis did not identify a history of cancer or cancer-related therapy as independent predictors of recurrent AF after ablation. There was no difference in safety endpoints between groups. CONCLUSION: CA is a safe and effective treatment for AF in patients with a history of cancer and those with exposure to potentially cardiotoxic therapy.

2.
J Natl Compr Canc Netw ; : 1-10, 2020 Nov 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33142266

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are independently associated with adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with both cancer and comorbid CVD are unknown. METHODS: This retrospective study included 2,476 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at 4 Massachusetts hospitals between March 11 and May 21, 2020. Patients were stratified by a history of either cancer (n=195) or CVD (n=414) and subsequently by the presence of both cancer and CVD (n=82). We compared outcomes between patients with and without cancer and patients with both cancer and CVD compared with patients with either condition alone. The primary endpoint was COVID-19-associated severe disease, defined as a composite of the need for mechanical ventilation, shock, or death. Secondary endpoints included death, shock, need for mechanical ventilation, need for supplemental oxygen, arrhythmia, venous thromboembolism, encephalopathy, abnormal troponin level, and length of stay. RESULTS: Multivariable analysis identified cancer as an independent predictor of COVID-19-associated severe disease among all infected patients. Patients with cancer were more likely to develop COVID-19-associated severe disease than were those without cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 2.02; 95% CI, 1.53-2.68; P<.001). Furthermore, patients with both cancer and CVD had a higher likelihood of COVID-19-associated severe disease compared with those with either cancer (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.11-3.10; P=.02) or CVD (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.21-2.66; P=.004) alone. Patients died more frequently if they had both cancer and CVD compared with either cancer (35% vs 17%; P=.004) or CVD (35% vs 21%; P=.009) alone. Arrhythmias and encephalopathy were also more frequent in patients with both cancer and CVD compared with those with cancer alone. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a history of both cancer and CVD are at significantly higher risk of experiencing COVID-19-associated adverse outcomes. Aggressive public health measures are needed to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 infection in this vulnerable patient population.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA