Use of different anticholinergic scales and their correlation with anticholinergic symptom burden in a cohort of people living with HIV.

OBJECTIVES: How to detect the clinical impact of anticholinergic (AC) burden in people with HIV (PWH) remains poorly investigated. We cross-sectionally described the prevalence and type of AC signs/symptoms and the screening accuracy of three AC scales in detecting their presence in a modern cohort of PWH. METHODS: We calculated AC Burden Scale (ABS), AC Risk Score (ARS) and AC Drug Score (ADS) in 721 adult PWH and recorded the presence of AC signs/symptoms over the previous 3 months. High AC risk was defined by ABS score ≥2, and ARS or ADS score ≥3. Comparisons among the scale were based on Cohen's inter-rater agreement, and their screening accuracy was assessed by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and performance measures. RESULTS: We enrolled 721 PWH, of whom 72.0% of participants were male; the median age was 53 years, and 164 participants (22.7%) were on at least one AC drug. Among these, 28.6% experienced at least one AC sign/symptom. Agreement in AC risk classification was substantial only between ARS and ADS (k = 0.6). Lower and higher risk of AC signs/symptoms was associated with dual regimens [adjusted OR (aOR) = 0.12 versus three-drug regimens, P = 0.002] and increasing number of AC drugs (aOR = 12.91, P < 0.001). Depression and COPD were also associated with higher risk of AC signs/symptoms in analysis unadjusted for number of AC drugs. ABS and ADS showed the best area under the ROC curve (AUROC) of 0.85 (0.78-0.92) and 0.84 (0.75-0.92; P < 0.001 for both). However, at the cut-off used for the general population, the sensitivity of all three scales was very low (34.0%, 46.8% and 46.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Up to one-fourth of participants in our cohort were exposed to at least one AC drug, and among them AC signs/symptoms affected more than one-fourth. Both polypharmacy (as number of antiretrovirals and of co-medications with AC properties) and to a lesser extent specific comorbidities shaped the risk of developing AC signs/symptoms. Sensitive screenings for AC risk in PWH should prefer ABS or ADS based on lower cut-offs than those suggested for the general population.

Long-Term Atrioventricular Block Following Valve Surgery: Electrocardiographic and Surgical Predictors.

BACKGROUND: Bradyarrhythmia requiring pacemaker implantation among patients undergoing valve surgery may occur even after several years, with unclear predictors. Our aim was to investigate the incidence of pacemaker implantation at different follow-up times and identify associated predictors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study evaluating 1046 consecutive patients who underwent valve surgery at the Cardiac Surgery Division of Bologna University Hospital from 2005 to 2010. RESULTS: During 10 ± 4 years of follow-up, 11.4% of these patients required pacemaker implantation. Interventions on both atrioventricular valves independently predicted long-term pacemaker implantation (SHR 2.1, 95% CI 1.2-3.8, p = 0.014). Preoperative atrioventricular conduction disease strongly predicted long-term atrioventricular block, with right bundle branch block as the major predictor (SHR 7.0, 95% CI 3.9-12.4, p < 0.001), followed by left bundle branch block (SHR 4.9, 95% CI 2.4-10.1, p < 0.001), and left anterior fascicular block (SHR 3.9, 95% CI 1.8-8.3, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing valvular surgery have a continuing risk of atrioventricular block late after surgery until the 12-month follow-up, which was clearly superior to the rate of atrioventricular block observed at long-term. Pre-operative atrioventricular conduction disease and combined surgery on both atrioventricular valves are strong predictors of atrioventricular block requiring pacemaker implantation.

Combined use of intra-aortic balloon pump and impella in cardiogenic shock: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Use of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) in combination with Impella has been described as an alternative strategy for mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). We provide a systematic review aimed to explore the effectiveness of this paired MCS approach. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive systematic search in MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases to identify all studies that investigated dual MCS with IABP and Impella. RESULTS: Our search strategy identified 12 articles, including 1 randomized controlled trial, 1 retrospective study, 1 case series, 7 case report and 2 animal studies. Rationale for this combined MCS strategy stems from an observed reduction in myocardial oxygen demand/supply ratio compared to the use of each device alone, without determining significant variations in left ventricular work. Nonetheless, this combined approach also leads to a 30-40 % decline in Impella flow, increasing the risk of bleeding, Impella displacement, as well as triggering positioning and pressure alarms. Additionally, hemolytic risk data yielded inconclusive results. Importantly, there were no notable disparities in mortality rates when comparing the combined strategy to the use of each device individually. CONCLUSION: At the current state-of-the-art, there are no conclusive data demonstrating net clinical benefits of combining Impella with IABP. Considering the substantial risks of morbidity associated, we recommend against its use in clinical practice.