RESUMEN
Background and Aim: Obesity affects nearly 650 million adults worldwide, and the prevalence is steadily rising. This condition has significant adverse effects on cardiovascular health, increasing the risk of hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation (AF). While anticoagulation for obese patients with AF is a well-established therapy for the prevention of thromboembolism, the safety and efficacy of different anticoagulants in this specific population are not well explored. This meta-analysis aimed to compare direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) to vitamin K antagonists in obese populations with AF. Methods: The PRISMA guidelines were followed for this meta-analysis, registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023392711). PubMed, PubMed Central, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases were searched for relevant articles from inception through January 2023. Two independent authors screened titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review in Covidence. Data were extracted in Microsoft Excel and analyzed using RevMan v5.4 using odds ratio as an effect measure. Results: Two thousand two hundred fifty-nine studies were identified from the database search, and 18 were included in the analysis. There were statistically significant reductions in the odds of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke in the DOAC group compared with the VKA group (OR 0.70, CI 0.66-0.75) and (OR 0.47, CI 0.35-0.62), respectively. In addition, the DOAC group exhibited lower odds of systemic embolism (OR 0.67, CI 0.54-0.83), major bleeding (OR 0.62, CI 0.54-0.72), and composite outcome (OR 0.72, CI 0.63-0.81). Conclusion: Based on the findings from this meta-analysis, DOACs demonstrate superior safety and efficacy in obese patients with AF compared with VKAs. These results may have significant implications for guiding anticoagulation strategies in this patient population.
RESUMEN
ABSTRACT: Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening conditions that are associated with high mortality and considerable health care costs. The association between prior angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) use and outcomes after sepsis is elusive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of the prior use of ACEi or ARBs and outcomes after sepsis and septic shock. A relevant literature review was performed in 4 databases from inception until July 2022. Independent reviewers first screened the title, abstract, and full text, and then, data extraction and analysis were performed. One post hoc analysis of a trial and 6 retrospective cohort studies were included in this review. There were 22% lower odds of in-hospital/30-day mortality among patients who have used ACEi/ARBs in the past [23.83% vs. 37.20%; odds ratio (OR), 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.96], and reduced 90-day mortality (OR, 0.80, 95% CI, 0.69-0.92). ACEi/ARBs users were found to have 31% lesser odds of developing acute kidney injury as compared with nonusers (OR, 0.69, 95% CI, 0.63-0.76). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (MD 1.26, 95% CI, â7.89 to 10.42), need for renal replacement therapy (OR, 0.71, 95% CI, 0.13-3.92), mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.10, 95% CI, 0.88-1.37) or use of vasopressors (OR, 1.21, 95% CI, 0.91-1.61). Based on this analysis, prior use of ACEi/ARBs lowers the risk of mortality and adverse renal events in patients with sepsis and septic shock.