Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) vs Direct Oral Anticoagulation (DOAC) in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Prevention of stroke by anticoagulation is essential in patients with Atrial fibrillation (AF); with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) being preferred over warfarin in most patients. The Long-term efficacy and safety of DOACs vs. Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) remain unknown. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus) were searched from inception to February 10th, 2021. The primary endpoint was cardiovascular mortality. Secondary outcomes included incidence of ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) and systemicembolism. The safety endpoint was clinically relevant bleeding (a composite of major or minor clinically relevant bleeding). Results: A total of three studies with 3039 participants (LAAO = 1465; DOACs = 1574) were included. Mean age was 74.2 and 75.3 years in the LAAO and DOAC group respectively. Average follow-up period was 2 years. There was no difference in terms of cardiac mortality (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.40-2.03; p = 0.81), ischemic stroke/TIA (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.80-1.65; p = 0.46; I 2 = 0) and clinically significant bleeding (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.50-1.17; p = 0.22; I 2 = 69) between the groups. Conclusions: Among patients with AF, LAAO was comparable to DOACs with similar efficacy and safety profiles.

Norovirus outbreak amid COVID-19 in the United Kingdom; priorities for achieving control.

Norovirus, an enteric virus primarily responsible for gastroenteritis outbreaks worldwide, is currently causing outbreaks around the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic. With an already exhausted health care system, the significant burden norovirus can have on the National Health Service, including economic and social burdens, is immense and cannot be tolerated. Primary challenges and priorities to be focused on due to the increase in norovirus outbreaks include a further depletion of health care services, increase cases in schools, nurseries, and care facilities, underreporting of the cases, and no effective vaccine being available. Therefore, it is essential to increase awareness about norovirus and its transmission in public, take necessary precautions, and increase reporting of cases. This article discusses the impact norovirus has during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the challenges, and recommendations to achieve control before it reaches epidemic levels.

Current Evidence and Future Perspectives of the Best Supplements for Cardioprotection: Have We Reached the Final Chapter for Vitamins?

Cardiovascular disease (CVD), a broad-spectrum term comprising coronary artery disease, stroke, hypertension, and heart failure, presents as one of the most significant strains on global healthcare systems. Coronary artery disease, caused by atherosclerosis, has various modifiable risk factors such as dietary changes and exercise. Since these risk factors are found to be linked to oxidative stress and inflammations, the dietary supplementation with vitamins' role in treating and preventing the diseases has been of much debate. With various vitamins having anti-inflammatory and antioxidative properties, studies have explored their correlation with cardiovascular health. Therefore, this narrative review explores and evaluates the benefits and risks of all vitamin supplementations in patients with CVD and provides future recommendations.

Efficacy and Safety of Catheter Ablation vs Antiarrhythmic Drugs as Initial Therapy for Management of Symptomatic Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Catheter ablation is an effective treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF), primarily performed in patients who fail antiarrhythmic drugs. Whether early catheter ablation, as first-line therapy, is associated with improved clinical outcomes remains unclear. METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Embase) were searched until March 28th, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) compared catheter ablation vs antiarrhythmic drug therapy as first-line therapy were included. The primary outcome of interest was the first documented recurrence of any atrial tachyarrhythmia (symptomatic or asymptomatic; AF, atrial flutter, and atrial tachycardia). Secondary outcomes included symptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmia (AF, atrial flutter, and atrial tachycardia) and serious adverse events. Unadjusted risk ratios (RR) were calculated from dichotomous data using Mantel Haenszel (M-H) random-effects with statistical significance considered if the confidence interval (CI) excludes one and p < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of six RCTs with 1212 patients (Ablation n = 609; Antiarrhythmic n = 603) were included. Follow- up period ranged from 1-2 years. Patients who underwent ablation were less likely to experience any recurrent atrial tachyarrhythmia when compared to patients receiving antiarrhythmic drugs (RR 0.63; 95% CI 0.55-0.73; p < 0.00001). Symptomatic atrial tachyarrhythmia was also lower in the ablation arm (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.32-0.87; p = 0.01). No statistically significant differences were noted for overall any type of adverse events (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.68-1.27; p = 0.64) and cardiovascular adverse events (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.56-1.44; p = 0.65) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Catheter ablation, as first-line therapy, was associated with a significantly lower rate of tachyarrhythmia recurrence compared to conventional antiarrhythmic drugs, with a similar adverse effect risk profile. These findings support a catheter ablation strategy as first-line therapy among patients with symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on provision of cardiology services: a scoping review.

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic has forced hospitals to prioritize COVID-19 patients, restrict resources, and cancel all non-urgent elective cardiac procedures. Clinical visits have only been facilitated for emergency purposes. Fewer patients have been admitted to the hospital for both ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMI) and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarctions (NSTEMI) and a profound decrease in heart failure services has been reported. A similar reduction in the patient presentation is seen for ischemic heart disease, decompensated heart failure, and endocarditis. Cardiovascular services, including catheterization, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), cardiac investigations such as electrocardiograms (ECGs), exercise tolerance test (ETT), dobutamine stress test, computed tomography (CT) angiography, transesophageal echocardiography (TOE) have been reported to have declined and performed on a priority basis. The long-term implications of this decline have been discussed with major concerns of severe cardiac complications and vulnerabilities in cardiac patients. The pandemic has also had psychological impacts on patients causing them to avoid seeking medical help. This review discusses the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the provision of various cardiology services and aims to provide strategies to restore cardiovascular services including structural changes in the hospital to make up for the reduced staff personnel, the use of personal protective equipment in healthcare workers, and provides alternatives for high-risk cardiac imaging, cardiac interventions, and procedures. Implementation of the triage system, risk assessment scores, and telemedicine services in patients and their adaptation to the cardiovascular department have been discussed.

Artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and detection of heart failure: the past, present, and future.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) performs human intelligence-dependant tasks using tools such as Machine Learning, and its subtype Deep Learning. AI has incorporated itself in the field of cardiovascular medicine, and increasingly employed to revolutionize diagnosis, treatment, risk prediction, clinical care, and drug discovery. Heart failure has a high prevalence, and mortality rate following hospitalization being 10.4% at 30-days, 22% at 1-year, and 42.3% at 5-years. Early detection of heart failure is of vital importance in shaping the medical, and surgical interventions specific to HF patients. This has been accomplished with the advent of Neural Network (NN) model, the accuracy of which has proven to be 85%. AI can be of tremendous help in analyzing raw image data from cardiac imaging techniques (such as echocardiography, computed tomography, cardiac MRI amongst others) and electrocardiogram recordings through incorporation of an algorithm. The use of decision trees by Rough Sets (RS), and logistic regression (LR) methods utilized to construct decision-making model to diagnose congestive heart failure, and role of AI in early detection of future mortality and destabilization episodes has played a vital role in optimizing cardiovascular disease outcomes. The review highlights the major achievements of AI in recent years that has radically changed nearly all areas of HF prevention, diagnosis, and management.

Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac surgical services: A scoping review.

Cardiac surgery was severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Reallocation of resources, conversion of surgical intensive care units and wards to COVID-19 facilities, increased risk of nosocomial transmission to cardiac surgery patients, lead to reduced accessibility, quality, and affordability of health care facilities to cardiac surgery patients. Increasing the mortality and morbidity rate among such patients. Cardiac patients are at an increased risk to develop a severe illness if infected by COVID-19 and are associated with a high mortality rate. Therefore, measures had to be taken to reduce the spread of the virus. Various approaches such as the hubs and the spokes centers, or parallel system were enforced. Elective surgeries were postponed while urgent surgeries were prioritized. Use of personal protective equipments and surgeries performed by only senior surgeons became necessary. Surgical trainees were also affected as limited training opportunities deprived them of the experience required to complete their fellowship. Some of the trainees were reallocated to COVID-19 wards, while others invested their time in research opportunities. Online platforms were used for teaching, meetings, and workshops across the globe. Although some efforts have been made to reduce the impact of the pandemic, more research and innovation is required.

Comparison of revascularization strategies in patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whether revascularization should be performed as multivessel intervention at the time of index procedure (MV-index), staged procedure (MV-staged), or culprit only intervention (COI) in patients with multivessel disease (MVD) presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is unclear. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the optimal revascularization strategy in this patient population. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were systematically searched to identify all relevant studies. The outcomes assessed were major cardiac adverse events (MACE), all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and revascularization. A Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis was used to calculate odds ratio (OR) with credible interval (CrI). RESULTS: Thirteen studies with 8,066 patients were included in the analysis. There was a decreased risk of MACE (MV-index vs. COI: OR, 0.35; 95% CrI, 0.23-0.55; MV-staged vs COI: OR, 0.52; 95% CrI, 0.31-0.81) and revascularization (MV-index vs. COI: OR, 0.27; 95% CrI, 0.15-0.49; MV-staged vs. COI: OR, 0.38; 95% CrI, 0.19-0.70) with MV-index intervention and MV-staged intervention compared with COI. However, MV-index intervention and not MV-staged intervention was associated with a decreased risk of MI (MV-index vs. COI: OR, 0.35; 95% CrI, 0.12-0.93; MV-staged vs. COI: OR, 0.65; 95% CrI, 0.24-1.59) compared with COI. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that multivessel intervention either at index procedure or as staged intervention may be more efficacious compared to COI in patients with MVD presenting with ACS.

A rare case of gangrenous foot in juvenile systemic lupus erythematosus.

This report describes a rare case of Juvenile Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (JSLE). A young 13-year-old girl presented to the Civil Hospital Karachi on February 15, 2019 with gangrene as the only manifestation of this autoimmune disease. JSLE has several clinical manifestations such as butterfly rash, fever, joint pain, cardiac problems like pericardial infusion and neuropsychiatric disorders. However, in this case gangrene was the only presenting symptom; only laboratory investigations - anti-SSA and anti-ribosomal P protein - were suggestive of JSLE, while anti dsDNA, considered to be the most sensitive and reliable diagnostic tool for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), was negative. Raynaud's phenomenon and gangrene have been described as rare symptoms, with gangrene occurring in only a small percentage of SLE patients. Moreover, the patient had received a blood transfusion a few months ago in Hyderabad which was suspected to be the cause of the transmission of infection which lead to polyclonal activation of lymphocytes.

Efficacy of Intravascular Imaging-Guided Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Intravascular imaging (IVI) namely intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT), presents as a promising imaging modality for drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation compared to the gold-standard conventional two-dimensional angiography. IVI provides detailed information on vessel lumen, lesion length, and degree of calcification. For this purpose, we conducted a meta-analysis by pooling recently conducted randomized control trials (RCTs) to compare IVI with angiography for DES implantation. Scopus and MEDLINE were searched till May 2023 for RCTs comparing IVI with traditional angiography-guided stent implantation in coronary artery disease patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary outcome of interest was target-lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary outcomes included target vessel revascularization (TVR), all-cause mortality, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). A random-effects meta-analysis with metaregression was performed to derive risk ratios with corresponding 95% CIs from dichotomous data. Fourteen RCTs with a total of 8946 CAD patients (IVI 4751 vs angiography 4195; mean age 61.7 years) and a median follow-up of 15 months (12-24.3) were included. IVI was associated with significantly reduced TLR (RR 0.63 [0.49, 0.79]) vs conventional angiography. Similarly, TVR incidence (RR 0.66 [0.53, 0.83]), and MACE (RR 0.69 [0.58, 0.78]) were also significantly decreased with IVI vs conventional angiography for PCI. However, no significant difference was observed in all-cause mortality between the 2 imaging modalities (RR 0.85 [0.63, 1.15]). Metaregression analysis showed no significant impact of follow-up duration, baseline comorbidities such as hypertension, smoking status, previous MI, and stent length on TLR incidence. IVI was associated with improved clinical outcomes in terms of reduced TLR, TVR, and MACE incidence when compared with traditional angiography in CAD patients for stent implantation.

Safety and efficacy of percutaneous Watchman 2.5 device versus Amplatzer Amulet for left atrial appendage closure in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: A systematic review and study-level meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), mechanical occlusion of the left atrial appendage (LAA) using a permanently implanted device may be an effective alternative to oral anti-coagulants (OAC). To facilitate left atrial appendage closure (LAAC), multiple percutaneous devices have been proposed. Watchman Generation 2.5 and Amplatzer Amulet are the two most popular used devices for preventing stroke in patients with NVAF. We sought to compare safety and efficacy outcomes between Watchman 2.5 and Amplatzer Amulet in patients undergoing LAAC procedure. METHODS: We carried out a comprehensive and systematic search of the databases PubMed and Scopus, for all studies that compared the safety and efficacy of Watchman 2.5 and Amplatzer Amulet devices, from inception, till June 2023. We performed the statistical analysis using Review Manager (V.5.4.1 Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom). The safety outcomes of interest included device success, device-related thrombus, device embolization perioperatively and at follow-up, perioperative pericardial perfusion events, and perioperative cardiac tamponade events. Efficacy outcomes were all-cause mortality perioperatively and at follow-up, cardiovascular (CV) mortality at follow-up, stroke, major and minor bleeding events at follow-up, transient ischemic attack (TIA) in follow-up period, thromboembolic events in follow-up period, and peri-device leakage in perioperative period. All data was analysed using a random-effects model, and presented as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). RESULTS: Regarding safety outcomes, device success was non-significantly reduced in Watchman group when compared with Amulet (RR 0.99, p = 0.57; I2 = 34%). In contrast, device-related thrombus was non-significantly increased in Watchman 2.5 group in comparison to Amulet (RR 1.44, p = 0.11; I2 = 0%). There was no significant difference between the devices in terms of device embolization in the perioperative (RR 0.36, p = 0.38; I2 = 22%) and follow-up (RR 2.24, p = 0.13; I2 = 0%) periods. Likewise, there was no significant difference in the risks of pericardial effusion (RR 0.98, p = 0.98; I2 = 0%), and cardiac tamponade (RR 0.65, p = 0.76; I2 = 62%) perioperatively. Regarding efficacy outcomes, no significant difference was observed in all-cause mortality between devices perioperatively (RR 0.51, p = 0.32; I2 = 0%) and at follow-up (RR 1.08, p = 0.56; I2 = 0%). CV-mortality was non-significantly reduced in Watchman group when compared with Amulet (RR 0.57, p = 0.20; I2 = 0%). The Amulet device was not superior to the Watchman device in terms of stroke at follow-up (RR 1.13, p = 0.63; I2 = 0%). Sub-group analysis showed comparable ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke events between two devices. Furthermore, at follow-up, there was no significant difference in major (RR 1.06, p = 0.63; I2 = 0%) and minor bleeding events (RR 1.81, p = 0.17; I2 = 0%) between the two devices. No difference was observed for trans-ischemic attack (RR 1.89, p = 0.24; I2 = 0%) and thromboembolic events (RR 0.96, p = 0.96; I2 = 0%) at follow-up. No significant difference was observed between devices for peri-device leakage in perioperative period (RR 2.16, p = 0.05; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: The data suggested that LAAC is safe and efficacious procedure irrespective of device used, with generally low complication rates. Watchman generation 2.5 remains non-superior to Amplatzer Amulet in terms of safety and efficacy outcomes.