Diastology with Cardiac MRI: A Practical Guide.

Diastolic filling of the ventricle is a complex interplay of volume and pressure, contingent on active energy-dependent myocardial relaxation and myocardial stiffness. Abnormal diastolic function is the hallmark of the clinical entity of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), which is now the dominant type of heart failure and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Although echocardiography is the current first-line imaging modality used in evaluation of diastolic function, cardiac MRI (CMR) is emerging as an important technique. The principal role of CMR is to categorize the cause of diastolic dysfunction (DD) and distinguish other entities that manifest similarly to HFpEF, particularly infiltrative and pericardial disorders. CMR also provides prognostic information and risk stratification based on late gadolinium enhancement and parametric mapping techniques. Advances in hardware, sequences, and postprocessing software now enable CMR to diagnose and grade DD accurately, a role traditionally assigned to echocardiography. Two-dimensional or four-dimensional velocity-encoded phase-contrast sequences can measure flow and velocities at the mitral inflow, mitral annulus, and pulmonary veins to provide diastolic functional metrics analogous to those at echocardiography. The commonly used cine steady-state free-precession sequence can provide clues to DD including left ventricular mass, left ventricular filling curves, and left atrial size and function. MR strain imaging provides information on myocardial mechanics that further aids in diagnosis and prognosis of diastolic function. Research sequences such as MR elastography and MR spectroscopy can help evaluate myocardial stiffness and metabolism, respectively, providing additional insights on diastolic function. The authors review the physiology of diastolic function, mechanics of diastolic heart failure, and CMR techniques in the evaluation of diastolic function. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

Noninvasive echocardiographic cardiac power output predicts mortality in cardiac intensive care unit patients.

BACKGROUND: Low cardiac power output (CPO), measured invasively, can identify critically ill patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes, including mortality. We sought to determine whether non-invasive, echocardiographic CPO measurement was associated with mortality in cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) patients. METHODS: Patients admitted to CICU between 2007 and 2018 with echocardiography performed within one day (before or after) admission and who had available data necessary for calculation of CPO were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression determined the relationship between CPO and adjusted hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 5,585 patients (age of 68.3 ± 14.8 years, 36.7% female) were evaluated with admission diagnoses including acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in 56.7%, heart failure (HF) in 50.1%, cardiac arrest (CA) in 12.2%, shock in 15.5%, and cardiogenic shock (CS) in 12.8%. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 47.3 ± 16.2%, and the mean CPO was 1.04 ± 0.37 W. There were 419 in-hospital deaths (7.5%). CPO was inversely associated with the risk of hospital mortality, an association that was consistent among patients with ACS, HF, and CS. On multivariable analysis, higher CPO was associated with reduced hospital mortality (OR 0.960 per 0.1 W, 95CI 0.0.926-0.996, P = .03). Hospital mortality was particularly high in patients with low CPO coupled with reduced LVEF, increased vasopressor requirements, or higher admission lactate. CONCLUSIONS: Echocardiographic CPO was inversely associated with hospital mortality in unselected CICU patients, particularly among patients with increased lactate and vasopressor requirements. Routine calculation and reporting of CPO should be considered for echocardiograms performed in CICU patients.

Prognostic value of peak stress cardiac power in patients with normal ejection fraction undergoing exercise stress echocardiography.

AIMS: Cardiac power is a measure of cardiac performance that incorporates both pressure and flow components. Prior studies have shown that cardiac power predicts outcomes in patients with reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF). We sought to evaluate the prognostic significance of peak exercise cardiac power and power reserve in patients with normal EF. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective analysis in 24 885 patients (age 59 ± 13 years, 45% females) with EF ≥50% and no significant valve disease or right ventricular dysfunction, undergoing exercise stress echocardiography between 2004 and 2018. Cardiac power and power reserve (developed power with stress) were normalized to LV mass and expressed in W/100 g of LV myocardium. Endpoints at follow-up were all-cause mortality and diagnosis of heart failure (HF). Patients in the higher quartiles of power/mass (rest, peak stress, and power reserve) were younger and had higher peak blood pressure and heart rate, lower LV mass, and lower prevalence of comorbidities. During follow-up [median 3.9 (0.6-8.3) years], 929 patients died. After adjusting for age, sex, metabolic equivalents (METs) achieved, ischaemia/infarction on stress test results, medication, and comorbidities, peak stress power/mass was independently associated with mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (HR), highest vs. lowest quartile, 0.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.4-0.6, P < 0.001] and HF at follow-up [adjusted HR, highest vs. lowest quartile, 0.4, 95% CI (0.3, 0.5), P < 0.001]. Power reserve showed similar results. CONCLUSION: The assessment of cardiac power during exercise stress echocardiography in patients with normal EF provides valuable prognostic information, in addition to stress test findings on inducible myocardial ischaemia and exercise capacity.

What Is New in Low Gradient Aortic Stenosis: Surgery, TAVR, or Medical Therapy?

BACKGROUND: A significant proportion of patients with aortic stenosis (AS) have discordance in severity by mean gradient/peak velocity and aortic valve area. Low gradient aortic stenosis (LG-AS) is defined when the aortic valve area is < 1 cm2 consistent with severe AS and mean aortic gradient is < 40 mmHg consistent with non-severe AS. LG-AS represents a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize the different categories, diagnosis, management, and prognosis of LG-AS. LG-AS is classified as classical (ejection fraction (EF) < 50%, indexed stroke volume (SVi) < 35 ml/m2), paradoxical (EF > 50%, SVi < 35 ml/m2), pseudo-severe (moderate AS with reduced EF), or normal flow low gradient AS. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent findings emphasize the importance of low-dose dobutamine stress echocardiography and CT calcium score in the assessment of aortic valve. In addition, flow reserve (increase in SV > 50%) can be evaluated during dobutamine stress echocardiography and helps predict perioperative prognosis. Patients with LG-AS have better survival with aortic valve replacement (AVR) compared to medical therapy, irrespective of presence or absence of flow reserve. Some recent studies suggest that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be superior to surgical AVR for patients with a lack of contractile flow reserve or those with paradoxical LG-AS, but further investigation is needed to clarify optimal treatment. The role of TAVR in patients with moderate AS and reduced EF is also under investigation.

Implications of Frailty among Men with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty is associated with adverse outcomes, but little is known of the impact of frailty on patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). This study sought to determine the prevalence of frailty, based on quantitative assessment, and assessed its potential impact on outcomes among community-dwelling men with ICDs. METHODS: A total of 124 ICD-treated men presenting for a routine device clinic appointment between May and October 2016 underwent frailty assessment consisting of three components: shrinking (weight loss ≥5% during the past year), weakness (inability to rise from a chair without using their arms), and self-reported poor energy level. Patients who had no components were considered robust, those with 1 component were intermediate stage, and those with ≥2 components were deemed frail. RESULTS: Mean age was 70.4 (±9.7) years. Of the 124 men, 31 (25%) were considered to be frail, 65 (52%) were intermediate, and 28 (23%) were robust. Frail men were older and were more likely to have symptomatic heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and hypertension (P < 0.05 for all) compared with nonfrail men. During a follow-up of 16 months, frail men were significantly more likely to die compared with nonfrail men (29% vs 5.4%, P < 0.0003). The incidence of appropriate ICD shocks (16.1% vs 6.5%) or hospitalizations (38.7% vs 23.7%) tended to be higher among frail versus nonfrail patients, but neither reached statistical significance (P = 0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Almost one-fourth of men with ICD are frail. Almost one-third of frail ICD patients died within 16 months. It may be useful to assess frailty in patients with ICD.

Trends of hospitalizations for syncope/collapse in the United States from 2004 to 2013-An analysis of national inpatient sample.

INTRODUCTION: Syncope/collapse is a common reason for emergency department visits, and approximately 30-40% of these individuals are hospitalized. We examined changes in hospitalization rates, in-hospital mortality, and cost of syncope/collapse-related hospital care in the United States from 2004 to 2013. METHODS: We used the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) from 2004 to 2013 to identify syncope/collapse-related hospitalizations using ICD-9, code 780.2, as the principal discharge diagnosis. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. RESULTS: From 2004 to 2013, there was a 42% reduction in hospitalizations with a principal discharge diagnosis of syncope/collapse from 54,259 (national estimate 253,591) in 2004 to 31,427 (national estimate 156,820) in 2013 (P < 0.0001). The mean length of hospital stays decreased (2.88 ± 0.04 days in 2004 vs. 2.54 ± 0.02 in 2013; P < 0.0001), while in-hospital mortality did not change (0.28% in 2004 vs. 0.18% in 2013; P  =  0.12). However, mean charges (inflation adjusted) for syncope/collapse-related hospitalization increased by 43.6% from $17,514 in 2004 to $25,160 in 2013 (P < 0.0001). The rates of implantation of permanent pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillator remained low during these hospitalizations, and decreased over time (P for both < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalization rates for syncope/collapse have decreased significantly in the US from 2004 to 2013. Despite a modest reduction in length of stay, the cost of syncope/collapse-related hospital care has increased.

Clobazam monotherapy for focal or generalized seizures.

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 10, 2014. There is a need to expand monotherapy options available to a clinician for the treatment of new focal or generalized seizures. A Cochrane systematic review for clobazam monotherapy is expected to define its place in the treatment of new-onset or untreated seizures and highlight gaps in evidence. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness, tolerability and safety of clobazam as monotherapy in people with new-onset focal or generalized seizures. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update we searched the following databases on 19 March 2018: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946- ), BIOSIS Previews (1969- ), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing clobazam monotherapy versus placebo or other anti-seizure medication in people with two or more unprovoked seizures or single acute symptomatic seizure requiring short-term continuous anti-seizure medication, were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcome measure was time on allocated treatment (retention time), reflecting both efficacy and tolerability. Secondary outcomes included short- and long-term effectiveness measures, tolerability, quality of life, and tolerance measures. Two authors independently extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: We identified three trials fulfilling the review criteria, which included 206 participants. None of the identified studies reported the preselected primary outcome measure. A meta-analysis was not possible. Lack of detail regarding allocation concealment and a high risk of performance and detection bias in two studies prompted us to downgrade the quality of evidence (by using the GRADE approach) for some of our results due to risk of bias.Regarding retention at 12 months, we detected no evidence of a statistically significant difference between clobazam and carbamazepine (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.12; low-quality evidence). There was low-quality evidence that clobazam led to better retention compared with phenytoin (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.90). We could not determine whether participants receiving clobazam were found to be less likely to discontinue it due to adverse effects as compared to phenytoin (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.65, low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no advantage for clobazam over carbamazepine for retention at 12 months in drug-naive children and a slight advantage of clobazam over phenytoin for retention at six months in adolescents and adults with neurocysticercosis in a single clinical trial each. At present, the available evidence is insufficient to inform clinical practice.

Intravenous versus inhalational techniques for rapid emergence from anaesthesia in patients undergoing brain tumour surgery.

BACKGROUND: Brain tumour surgery usually is carried out with the patient under general anaesthesia. Over past years, both intravenous and inhalational anaesthetic agents have been used, but the superiority of one agent over the other is a topic of ongoing debate. Early and rapid emergence from anaesthesia is desirable for most neurosurgical patients. With the availability of newer intravenous and inhalational anaesthetic agents, all of which have inherent advantages and disadvantages, we remain uncertain as to which technique may result in more rapid early recovery from anaesthesia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of intravenous versus inhalational techniques for rapid emergence from anaesthesia in patients undergoing brain tumour surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 6) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid SP (1966 to June 2014) and Embase via Ovid SP (1980 to June 2014). We also searched specific websites, such as www.indmed.nic.in, www.cochrane-sadcct.org and www.Clinicaltrials.gov (October 2014). We reran the searches for all databases in March 2016, and when we update the review, we will deal with the two studies of interest found through this search that are awaiting classification. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of intravenous anaesthetic agents such as propofol and thiopentone with inhalational anaesthetic agents such as isoflurane and sevoflurane for maintenance of general anaesthesia during brain tumour surgery. Primary outcomes were emergence from anaesthesia (assessed by time to follow verbal commands, in minutes) and adverse events during emergence, such as haemodynamic changes, agitation, desaturation, muscle weakness, nausea and vomiting, shivering and pain. Secondary outcomes were time to eye opening, recovery from anaesthesia using the Aldrete or Modified Aldrete score (i.e. time to attain score ≥ 9, in minutes), opioid consumption, brain relaxation (as assessed by the surgeon on a 4- or 5-point scale) and complications of anaesthetic techniques, such as intraoperative haemodynamic instability in terms of hypotension or hypertension (mmHg), increased or decreased heart rate (beats/min) and brain swelling. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standardized methods in conducting the systematic review, as described by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Two review authors independently extracted details of trial methods and outcome data from reports of all trials considered eligible for inclusion. We performed all analyses on an intention-to-treat basis. We used a fixed-effect model when we found no evidence of significant heterogeneity between studies, and a random-effects model when heterogeneity was likely. For assessments of the overall quality of evidence for each outcome that included pooled data from RCTs only, we downgraded the evidence from 'high quality' by one level for serious (or by two levels for very serious) study limitations (risk of bias), indirectness of evidence, serious inconsistency, imprecision of effect or potential publication bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 RCTs with 1833 participants. We determined that none of the RCTs were of high methodological quality. For our primary outcomes, pooled results from two trials suggest that time to emergence from anaesthesia, that is, time needed to follow verbal commands, was longer with isoflurane than with propofol (mean difference (MD) -3.29 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.41 to -1.18, low-quality evidence), and time to emergence from anaesthesia was not different with sevoflurane compared with propofol (MD 0.28 minutes slower with sevoflurane, 95% CI -0.56 to 1.12, four studies, low-quality evidence). Pooled analyses for adverse events suggest lower risk of nausea and vomiting with propofol than with sevoflurane (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.91, low-quality evidence) or isoflurane (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.78) and greater risk of haemodynamic changes with propofol than with sevoflurane (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.17), but no differences in the risk of shivering or pain. Pooled analyses for brain relaxation suggest lower risk of tense brain with propofol than with isoflurane (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.17, low-quality evidence), but no difference when propofol is compared with sevoflurane. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The finding of our review is that the intravenous technique is comparable with the inhalational technique of using sevoflurane to provide early emergence from anaesthesia. Adverse events with both techniques are also comparable. However, we derived evidence of low quality from a limited number of studies. Use of isoflurane delays emergence from anaesthesia. These results should be interpreted with caution. Randomized controlled trials based on uniform and standard methods are needed. Researchers should follow proper methods of randomization and blinding, and trials should be adequately powered.

Methadone maintenance dose/weight ratio, long QTc, and EKG screening.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Electrocardiogram (EKG) monitoring during methadone maintenance treatment (MMT) has been recommended to prevent potentially fatal prolonged computed QT intervals (QTc). However, risk indicators for obtaining EKGs do not exist. This study assessed 23 variables that might help identify prolonged QTc during MMT. METHODS: EKGs concurrent with methadone serum levels were obtained from 69 veterans during a 5-year study, encompassing 302.8 person-years. Two cardiologists hand-measured QT intervals, selecting each patient's longest QTc. QTc categories included: normal duration <440 ms; borderline duration of 440-469 ms; and abnormal duration ≥470 ms. QTc's were compared with seven methadone parameters and 16 bio-psycho-social variables using two QTc cut-offs (440 and 470 ms). RESULTS: Among the 69 patients, 19 had normal QTc's, 28 had borderline QTc's, and 22 had abnormal QTc's. Methadone dose/weight was moderately correlated with QTc, and independently associated with longer QTc at both 440 and 470 cut-offs. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Dose/weight ≥.49 is useful for screening EKGs for QTc's ≥440 cut-off. Dose/weight ≥.65 produces high-yield abnormal QTc's ≥470 cut-off. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Methadone dose/weight provides moderately reliable thresholds for making routine screening decisions and urgent clinical decisions to obtain an EKG for prolonged QTc. (Am J Addict 2016;25:499-507).

Janus kinase-1 and Janus kinase-2 inhibitors for treating myelofibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Myelofibrosis is a bone marrow disorder characterized by excessive production of reticulin and collagen fiber deposition caused by hematological and non-hematological disorders. The prognosis of myelofibrosis is poor and treatment is mainly palliative. Janus kinase inhibitors are a novel strategy to treat people with myelofibrosis. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical benefits and harms of Janus kinase-1 and Janus kinase-2 inhibitors for treating myelofibrosis secondary to hematological or non-hematological conditions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 11), Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946 to 13 November 2014), EMBASE (from 1980 to 12 January 2013), and LILACS (from 1982 to 20 November 2014). We searched WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and The metaRegister of Controlled Trials. We also searched for conference proceedings of the American Society of Hematology (from 2009 to October 2013), European Hematology Association (from 2009 to October 2013), American Society of Clinical Oncology (from 2009 to October 2013), and European Society of Medical Oncology (from 2009 to October 2013). We included searches in FDA, European Medicines Agency, and Epistemonikos. We handsearched the references of all identified included trials, and relevant review articles. We did not apply any language restrictions. Two review authors independently screened search results. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized clinical trials comparing Janus kinase-1 and Janus kinase-2 inhibitors with placebo or other treatments. Both previously treated and treatment naive patients were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for overall survival, progression-free survival and leukemia-free survival, risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI for reduction in spleen size and adverse events binary data, and standardized mean differences (SMD) and 95% CI for continuous data (health-related quality of life). Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included trials. Primary outcomes were overall survival, progression-free survival and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: We included two trials involving 528 participants, comparing ruxolitinib with placebo or best available therapy (BAT). As the two included trials had different comparators we did not pool the data. The confidence in the results estimates of these trials was low due to the bias in their design, and their limited sample sizes that resulted in imprecise results.There is low quality evidence for the effect of ruxolitinib on survival when compared with placebo at 51 weeks of follow-up (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.98) and compared with BAT at 48 weeks of follow-up (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.20 to 2.47). Similarly there was very low quality evidence for the effect of ruxolitinib on progression free survival compared with BAT (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.39).There is low quality evidence for the effect of ruxolitinib in terms of quality of life. Compared with placebo, the drug achieved a greater proportion of patients with a significant reduction of symptom scores (RR 8.82, 95% CI 4.40 to 17.69), and treated patients with ruxolitinib obtained greater MFSAF scores at the end of follow-up (MD -87.90, 95% CI -139.58 to -36.22). An additional trial showed significant differences in EORTC QLQ-C30 scores when compared ruxolitinib with best available therapy (MD 7.60, 95% CI 0.35 to 14.85).The effect of ruxolitinib on reduction in the spleen size of participants compared with placebo or BAT was uncertain (versus placebo: RR 64.58, 95% CI 9.08 to 459.56, low quality evidence; versus BAT: RR 41.78, 95% CI 2.61 to 669.75, low quality evidence).There is low quality evidence for the effect of the drug compared with placebo on anemia (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.62 to 3.41), neutropenia (RR 3.57, 95% CI 1.02 to 12.55) and thrombocytopenia (RR 9.74, 95% CI 2.32 to 40.96). Ruxolitinib did not result in differences versus BAT in the risk of anemia (RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.99, low quality evidence) or thrombocytopenia (RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.44 to 3.28, low quality evidence). The risk of non-hematologic grade 3 or 4 adverse events (including fatigue, arthralgia, nausea, diarrhea, extremity pain and pyrexia) was similar when ruxolitinib was compared with placebo or BAT. The rate of neutropenia comparing ruxolitinib with standard medical treatment was not reported by the trial. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to allow any conclusions regarding the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib for treating myelofibrosis. The findings of this Cochrane review should be interpreted with caution as they are based on trials sponsored by industry, and include a small number of patients. Unless powered randomized clinical trials provide strong evidence of a treatment effect, and the trade-off between potential benefits and harms is established, clinicians should be cautious when administering ruxolitinib for treating patients with myelofibrosis.

Treatment for disseminated intravascular coagulation in patients with acute and chronic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) is an acquired syndrome characterized by systemic intravascular activation of coagulation, leading to deposition of fibrin in the bloodstream. It may occur in patients with acute and chronic leukemia and is particularly associated with acute promyelocytic leukemia (a subtype of acute myeloid leukemia). OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical benefits and harms of any pharmacological intervention for treating DIC in patients with acute or chronic leukemia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2015, Issue 05), MEDLINE (1946 to 7 May 2015), LILACS (1982 to 7 May 2015) and African Index Medicus (7 May 2015). There was no language restrictions. We sought additional randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the reference lists of primary studies identified. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs assessing the clinical benefits and harms of interventions for treating DIC in patients with acute and chronic leukemia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently performed trial selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment and data extraction. Primary outcomes were overall mortality, in-hospital mortality from any cause (15-day and 30-day) and adverse events. MAIN RESULTS: In this Cochrane Review update we did not include any new RCT compared with the first review version. Accordingly, four RCTs (388 participants) met the inclusion criteria. These trials evaluated the human activated protein C, recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin, tranexamic acid and dermatan sulphate. Included trials reported data on mortality and bleeding. The studies were conducted in Japan, Italy and the Netherlands. We classified the included trials as: 1) including patients with or without leukemia which did not report data for the leukemia subgroup (366 participants); and 2) only including patients with leukemia (22 participants). Overall, the risk of bias of the included trials was high, since the trial authors did not provide a detailed description about trial design and execution.According to the GRADE recommendations, we judged the overall quality of the body of evidence for all prefixed outcomes as 'very low', due to methodological limitations and very small sample size.One trial, including 10 participants with leukemia and comparing dermatan sulphate with heparin, reported no deaths during trial treatment.In terms of bleeding data, we were unable to pool results from two studies that were only conducted with leukemia patients due to the inconsistency in the measurement and reporting of this outcome. One trial, including 12 participants with leukemia, found very low quality evidence that tranexamic acid can reduce the cumulative hemorrhagic score in participants compared with those assigned to placebo (P = 0.0015, very low quality evidence). On the contrary, there is no evidence that dermatan sulphate compared with placebo reduces new events of hemorrhagic diathesis (1/5 (20%) versus 2/5 (40%); RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.06 to 3.91; P = 0.51, very low quality evidence).No thromboembolic complications were reported in either trial that included patients with leukemia only (very low quality evidence). The safety profile was inconclusive.The included trials did not assess overall mortality, resolution of respiratory failure, renal failure or shock. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to a lack of new RCTs, our conclusions in this Cochrane Review update are the same as the previous review version. We included four RCTs which reported mortality and bleeding data. It is not possible to determine whether human activated protein C, recombinant human soluble thrombomodulin, tranexamic acid and dermatan sulphate are effective or harmful for patients presenting with DIC related to acute or chronic leukemia. The quality of the evidence was low to very low. Therefore, prescription of these interventions for treating DIC in patients with acute and chronic leukemia can neither be supported nor rejected, unless new evidence from a large high-quality trial alters this conclusion.

Prophylactic lidocaine for myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is a major public health problem affecting both developed and developing countries. Acute coronary syndromes include unstable angina and myocardial infarction with or without ST-segment elevation (electrocardiogram sector is higher than baseline). Ventricular arrhythmia after myocardial infarction is associated with high risk of mortality. The evidence is out of date, and considerable uncertainty remains about the effects of prophylactic use of lidocaine on all-cause mortality, in particular, in patients with suspected myocardial infarction. OBJECTIVES: To determine the clinical effectiveness and safety of prophylactic lidocaine in preventing death among people with myocardial infarction. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 3), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 13 April 2015), EMBASE (1947 to 13 April 2015) and Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) (1986 to 13 April 2015). We also searched Web of Science (1970 to 13 April 2013) and handsearched the reference lists of included papers. We applied no language restriction in the search. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials assessing the effects of prophylactic lidocaine for myocardial infarction. We considered all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality and overall survival at 30 days after myocardial infarction as primary outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We performed study selection, risk of bias assessment and data extraction in duplicate. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and measured statistical heterogeneity using I(2). We used a random-effects model and conducted trial sequential analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 37 randomised controlled trials involving 11,948 participants. These trials compared lidocaine versus placebo or no intervention, disopyramide, mexiletine, tocainide, propafenone, amiodarone, dimethylammonium chloride, aprindine and pirmenol. Overall, trials were underpowered and had high risk of bias. Ninety-seven per cent of trials (36/37) were conducted without an a priori sample size estimation. Ten trials were sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. Trials were conducted in 17 countries, and intravenous intervention was the most frequent route of administration.In trials involving participants with proven or non-proven acute myocardial infarction, lidocaine versus placebo or no intervention showed no significant differences regarding all-cause mortality (213/5879 (3.62%) vs 199/5848 (3.40%); RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.27; participants = 11727; studies = 18; I(2) = 15%); low-quality evidence), cardiac mortality (69/4184 (1.65%) vs 62/4093 (1.51%); RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.50; participants = 8277; studies = 12; I(2) = 12%; low-quality evidence) and prophylaxis of ventricular fibrillation (76/5128 (1.48%) vs 103/4987 (2.01%); RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.12; participants = 10115; studies = 16; I(2) = 18%; low-quality evidence). In terms of sinus bradycardia, lidocaine effect is imprecise compared with effects of placebo or no intervention (55/1346 (4.08%) vs 49/1203 (4.07%); RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.80; participants = 2549; studies = 8; I(2) = 21%; very low-quality evidence). In trials involving only participants with proven acute myocardial infarction, lidocaine versus placebo or no intervention showed no significant differences in all-cause mortality (148/2747 (5.39%) vs 135/2506 (5.39%); RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.30; participants = 5253; studies = 16; I(2) = 9%; low-quality evidence). No significant differences were noted between lidocaine and any other antiarrhythmic drug in terms of all-cause mortality and ventricular fibrillation. Data on overall survival 30 days after myocardial infarction were not reported. Lidocaine compared with placebo or no intervention increased risk of asystole (35/3393 (1.03%) vs 14/3443 (0.41%); RR 2.32, 95% CI 1.26 to 4.26; participants = 6826; studies = 4; I(2) = 0%; very low-quality evidence) and dizziness/drowsiness (74/1259 (5.88%) vs 16/1274 (1.26%); RR 3.85, 95% CI 2.29 to 6.47; participants = 2533; studies = 6; I(2) = 0%; low-quality evidence). Overall, safety data were poorly reported and adverse events may have been underestimated. Trial sequential analyses suggest that additional trials may not be needed for reliable conclusions to be drawn regarding these outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This Cochrane review found evidence of low quality to suggest that prophylactic lidocaine has very little or no effect on mortality or ventricular fibrillation in people with acute myocardial infarction. The safety profile is unclear. This conclusion is based on randomised controlled trials with high risk of bias. However (disregarding the risk of bias), trial sequential analysis suggests that additional trials may not be needed to disprove an intervention effect of 20% relative risk reduction. Smaller risk reductions might require additional higher trials.

Mannitol versus hypertonic saline for brain relaxation in patients undergoing craniotomy.

BACKGROUND: Patients with brain tumour usually suffer from increased pressure in the skull due to swelling of brain tissue. A swollen brain renders surgical removal of the brain tumour difficult. To ease surgical tumour removal, measures are taken to reduce brain swelling, often referred to as brain relaxation. Brain relaxation can be achieved with intravenous fluids such as mannitol or hypertonic saline. This review was conducted to find out which of the two fluids may have a greater impact on brain relaxation. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to compare the effects of mannitol versus those of hypertonic saline on intraoperative brain relaxation in patients undergoing craniotomy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 10), MEDLINE via Ovid SP (1966 to October 2013) and EMBASE via Ovid SP (1980 to October 2013). We also searched specific websites, such as www.indmed.nic.in, www.cochrane-sadcct.org and www.Clinicaltrials.gov. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of hypertonic saline versus mannitol for brain relaxation. We also included studies in which any other method used for intraoperative brain relaxation was compared with mannitol or hypertonic saline. Primary outcomes were longest follow-up mortality, Glasgow Outcome Scale score at three months and any adverse events related to mannitol or hypertonic saline. Secondary outcomes were intraoperative brain relaxation, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, hospital stay and quality of life. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standardized methods for conducting a systematic review, as described by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Two review authors independently extracted details of trial methodology and outcome data from reports of all trials considered eligible for inclusion. All analyses were made on an intention-to-treat basis. We used a fixed-effect model when no evidence was found of significant heterogeneity between studies, and a random-effects model when heterogeneity was likely. MAIN RESULTS: We included six RCTs with 527 participants. Only one RCT was judged to be at low risk of bias. The remaining five RCTs were at unclear or high risk of bias. No trial mentioned the primary outcomes of longest follow-up mortality, Glasgow Outcome Scale score at three months or any adverse events related to mannitol or hypertonic saline. Three trials mentioned the secondary outcomes of intraoperative brain relaxation, hospital stay and ICU stay; quality of life was not reported in any of the trials. Brain relaxation was inadequate in 42 of 197 participants in the hypertonic saline group and in 68 of 190 participants in the mannitol group. The risk ratio for brain bulge or tense brain in the hypertonic saline group was 0.60 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.83, low-quality evidence). One trial reported ICU and hospital stay. The mean (standard deviation (SD)) duration of ICU stay in the mannitol and hypertonic saline groups was 1.28 (0.5) and 1.25 (0.5) days (P value 0.64), respectively; the mean (SD) duration of hospital stay in the mannitol and hypertonic saline groups was 5.7 (0.7) and 5.7 (0.8) days (P value 1.00), respectively AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: From the limited data available on the use of mannitol and hypertonic saline for brain relaxation during craniotomy, it is suggested that hypertonic saline significantly reduces the risk of tense brain during craniotomy. A single trial suggests that ICU stay and hospital stay are comparable with the use of mannitol or hypertonic saline. However, focus on other related important issues such as long-term mortality, long-term outcome, adverse events and quality of life is needed.

Eculizumab for treating patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria.

BACKGROUND: Paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH) is a chronic, not malignant, disease of the hematopoietic stem cells, associated with significant morbidity and mortality. It is a rare disease with an estimated incidence of 1.3 new cases per one million individuals per year. The treatment of PNH has been largely empirical and symptomatic, with blood transfusions, anticoagulation, and supplementation with folic acid or iron. Eculizumab, a biological agent that inhibits complement cascade, was developed for preventing hemolytic anemia and severe thrombotic episodes. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical benefits and harms of eculizumab for treating patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH). SEARCH METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search strategy. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE (from 1946 to 15 May 2014), EMBASE (from 1980 to 25 June 2014), and LILACS (from 1982 to 25 June 2014). We did not apply any language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) irrespective of their publication status or language. No limits were applied with respect to period of follow-up. We excluded quasi-RCTs. We included trials comparing eculizumab with placebo or best available therapy. We included any patient with a confirmed diagnosis of PNH. Primary outcome was overall survival. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently performed a duplicate selection of eligible trials, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence interval (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) and 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. We used a random-effects model for analysis. MAIN RESULTS: We identified one multicenter (34 sites) phase III RCT involving 87 participants. The trial compared eculizumab versus placebo, and was conducted in the US, Canada, Europe, and Australia with 26 weeks of follow-up. This small trial had high risk of bias in many domains (attrition and selective reporting). It was sponsored by a pharmaceutical company. No patients died during the study. By using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (scores can range from 0 to 100, with higher scores on the global health status and functioning scales indicating improvement), the trial showed improvement in health-related quality of life in patients treated with eculizumab (mean difference (MD) 19.4, 95% CI 8.25 to 30.55; P = 0.0007; low quality of evidence). By using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue instrument (scores can range from 0 to 52, with higher scores indicating improvement in fatigue), the trial showed a reduction in fatigue (MD 10.4, 95% CI 9.97 to 10.83; P = 0.00001; moderate quality of evidence) in the eculizumab group compared with placebo. Eculizumab compared with placebo showed a greater proportion of patients with transfusion independence: 51% (22/43) versus 0% (0/44); risk ratio (RR) 46.02, 95% CI 2.88 to 735.53; P = 0.007; moderate quality of evidence; and withdrawal for any reason: 4.7% (2/43) versus 22.72% (10/44); RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.88; P = 0.03; moderate quality of evidence. Due to the low rate of events observed, the included trial did not show any difference between eculizumab and placebo in terms of serious adverse events: 9.3% (4/43) versus 20.4% (9/44); RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.37; P = 0.16; low quality of evidence. We did not observe any difference between intervention and placebo for the most frequent adverse events. One participant receiving placebo showed an episode of thrombosis. The trial did not assess overall survival, transformation to myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myelogenous leukemia, or development or recurrence of aplastic anemia on treatment. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review has detected an absence of evidence for eculizumab compared with placebo for treating paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), in terms of overall survival, nonfatal thrombotic events, transformation to myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myelogenous leukemia, and development and recurrence of aplastic anemia on treatment. Current evidence indicates that compared with placebo, eculizumab increases health-related quality of life and increases transfusion independence. During the execution of the included trial, no patients died. Furthermore, the intervention seems to reduce fatigue and withdrawals for any reason. The safety profile of eculizumab is unclear. These conclusions are based on one small trial with risk of attrition and selective reporting bias.Therefore, prescription of eculizumab for treating patients with PNH can neither be supported nor rejected, unless new evidence from a large high quality trial alters this conclusion. Therefore, we urge the reader to interpret the trial results with much caution. Future trials on this issue should be conducted according to the SPIRIT statement and reported according to the CONSORT statement by independent investigators, and using the Foundation of Patient-Centered Outcomes Research recommendations.

Clobazam monotherapy for partial-onset or generalized-onset seizures.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to expand monotherapy options available to a clinician for the treatment of new partial-onset or generalized-onset seizures. A Cochrane systematic review for clobazam monotherapy is expected to define its place in the treatment of new-onset or untreated seizures and highlight gaps in evidence. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy, effectiveness, tolerability and safety of clobazam as monotherapy in people with new-onset partial or generalized seizures. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (5 March 2013), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, January 2013, Issue 1), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to July 1, 2014), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE, January 2013, Issue 1), BIOSIS Previews (all years, searched on 5 March 2013). There were no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing clobazam monotherapy versus placebo or other anti-seizure medication in people with two or more unprovoked seizures or single acute symptomatic seizure requiring short-term continuous anti-seizure medication, were eligible for inclusion. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcome measure was time on allocated treatment (retention time), reflecting both efficacy and tolerability. Secondary outcomes included short- and long-term effectiveness measures, tolerability, quality of life, and tolerance measures. Two authors independently extracted the data. MAIN RESULTS: We identified two trials fulfilling the review criteria, which included 163 participants. None of the identified studies reported the preselected primary outcome measure. A meta-analysis was not possible. Lack of detail regarding concealment of allocation and a high risk of performance and detection bias in one study prompted us to downgrade the quality of evidence for some of our results due to risk of bias.Regarding retention at 12 months, we detected no evidence of a statistically significant difference between clobazam and carbamazepine (risk ratio (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.12); low quality evidence. There was low quality evidence that clobazam led to better retention compared with phenytoin (RR 1.43, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.90). We could not determine whether participants receiving clobazam were found to be less likely to discontinue it due to adverse effects as compared to phenytoin (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.65, low quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found no advantage for clobazam over carbamazepine for retention at 12 months in drug-naïve children and a slight advantage of clobazam over phenytoin for retention at six months in adolescents and adults with neurocysticercosis in a single clinical trial each. At present, the available evidence is insufficient to inform clinical practice.

Machine Learning for Diagnosis of Pulmonary Hypertension by Echocardiography.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a machine learning (ML)-based model for pulmonary hypertension (PH) prediction using measurements and impressions made during echocardiography. METHODS: A total of 7853 consecutive patients with right-sided heart catheterization and transthoracic echocardiography performed within 1 week from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2019, were included. The data were split into training (n=5024 [64%]), validation (n=1275 [16%]), and testing (n=1554 [20%]). A gradient boosting machine with enumerated grid search for optimization was selected to allow missing data in the boosted trees without imputation. The training target was PH, defined by right-sided heart catheterization as mean pulmonary artery pressure above 20 mm Hg; model performance was maximized relative to area under the receiver operating characteristic curve using 5-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: Cohort age was 64±14 years; 3467 (44%) were female, and 81% (6323/7853) had PH. The final trained model included 19 characteristics, measurements, or impressions derived from the echocardiogram. In the testing data, the model had high discrimination for the detection of PH (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.85). The model's accuracy, sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 82% (1267/1554), 88% (1098/1242), 89% (1098/1241), and 54% (169/313), respectively. CONCLUSION: By use of ML, PH could be predicted on the basis of clinical and echocardiographic variables, without tricuspid regurgitation velocity. Machine learning methods appear promising for identifying patients with low likelihood of PH.

Prevalence and Prognostic Implications of Pulmonary Hypertension in Patients With Severe Aortic Regurgitation.

Background: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been shown to be associated with worse outcomes in patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) in small older studies. Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate the prevalence of PH in patients with severe AR, its impact on mortality and symptoms, and regression after aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods: A total of 821 consecutive patients with chronic ≥ moderate-severe AR on echocardiography from 2004 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. PH was defined as right ventricular systolic pressure (RVSP) >40 mm Hg on transthoracic echocardiogram (mild-moderate PH: RVSP 40-59 mm Hg, severe PH: RVSP > 60 mm Hg). Clinical and echocardiographic data were extracted from the electronic medical record and echocardiographic reports. The diastolic function and filling pressures were manually assessed and checked, and the left ventricular (LV) volumes were traced by a level 3-trained echocardiographer. The primary objectives were prevalence of PH in patients with ≥ moderate-severe AR, its risk associations and impact on all-cause mortality as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were impact of PH on symptoms and change in RVSP at discharge post-AVR. Logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to analyze these outcomes. Results: The mean age was 61.2 ± 17 years, and 162 (20%) were women. Mild-moderate PH was present in 91 (11%) patients and severe PH in 27 (3%). Larger LV size, elevated LV filling pressures, and ≥ moderate tricuspid regurgitation were associated with PH. During follow-up of 7.3 (6.3-7.9) years, 188 patients died. Compared to those without PH, risk of mortality was higher in mild-moderate PH (adjusted HR: 1.59 (95% CI: 1.07-2.36) (P = 0.021)) and severe PH (adjusted HR: 2.90 (95% CI: 1.63-5.15) (P < 0.001)). Symptoms were also more prevalent in those with PH (P = 0.004). Of 396 patients who underwent AVR during the study period, 57 had PH. AVR similarly improved survival in patients without and with PH (P for interaction = 0.23), and there was regression in RVSP (≥8 mm Hg drop) at discharge post-AVR in 35/57 (61%) patients with PH. Conclusions: PH was present in 14% of patients with AR and was associated with higher mortality and symptoms. The survival benefit of AVR was similar in patients without and with PH.

Infective endarteritis of coronaries following percutaneous coronary intervention (stentocarditis) leading to pseudoaneurysm - a retrospective study of eleven cases.

Background: Coronary endarteritis and stent abscess following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are rare and challenging conditions with no clear treatment guidelines available. Aims: This retrospective study aims to present the clinical features, patient and procedural factors, management strategies, and outcomes in 11 consecutive cases referred between 2018 and 2022. Methods: We retrospectively analysed 11 cases of coronary endarteritis and stent abscess post-PCI that were referred from various centres. We recorded clinical features, patient demographics, procedural factors, and management approaches, and evaluated treatment outcomes. Results: Among the 11 patients, 7 (63.6%) were male. PCIs had been performed in the right coronary artery (6, 54.5%), left anterior descending artery (3, 27.3%), and circumflex artery (2, 18.2%). The presenting symptoms included fever, pericarditis with effusion, tamponade, and postinterventional angina due to stent occlusion. Fever occurred in 10 (90.9%) patients, and the majority (70%) of patients experienced fever within one week of PCI. Staphylococcus aureus was the predominant organism (54.5%), followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Transthoracic echocardiography revealed abscess cavities in 10 patients. All patients received vancomycin and piperacillin-tazobactam. Surgery was considered in 7 cases with abscesses >2 cm; one patient refused and responded to antibiotics for 4 weeks. Possible risk factors included repeated use of local sites, reuse of hardware, multiple guidewire manipulations, prolonged catheterisation, inadequate sterility, and diabetes. Conclusions: This study provides insights into coronary endarteritis and stent abscess following PCI. The lack of clear treatment guidelines highlights the challenges in managing this condition. Identifying risk factors may aid in preventive strategies. Further research is needed to develop standardised approaches for effective management.