Effect of catheter ablation versus medical therapy on mental health and quality of life in patients with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The association between atrial fibrillation (AF) and mental health is well-documented, but the relative benefits of catheter ablation versus medical therapy on mental health and quality of life are not clearly understood. This study assesses the impact of these interventions on AF patients' mental health and quality of life. METHODS: Through a systematic review of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing catheter ablation to medical therapy for AF were analyzed. The study focused on a range of outcomes, particularly mental health and quality of life, measured by tools including the SF-36 mental component, HADS, SF-36 physical component, and AFEQT scores, among others. Analyses were stratified by AF type (paroxysmal versus persistent) and synthesized using random or fixed-effects models to calculate mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: From 24 RCTs totaling 6,353 patients (51.4% receiving catheter ablation, 71.1% male, average age 59), catheter ablation was found to significantly improve mental health (SMD 0.34; 95% CI 0.05-0.63; p = 0.02) and quality of life as indicated by PCS SF-36 (MD 2.64; 95% CI 1.06-4.26; p < 0.01) and AFEQT scores (MD 6.24; 95% CI 4.43-8.05; p < 0.01), with no significant difference in outcomes between AF subtypes. CONCLUSION: Catheter ablation offers significant improvements in mental health and quality of life over medical therapy for AF patients, demonstrating its efficacy across different types of AF.

Complete versus partial revascularization for older adults with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized and multivariable adjusted data.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from randomized studies support complete over culprit-only revascularization for patients with acute coronary artery syndrome (ACS) and multivessel coronary artery diseases (MVD). Whether these findings extend to elderly patients, however, has not been thoroughly explored. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes of elderly individuals (defined as age ≥75 years) with ACS and MVD submitted to complete vs partial-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched. We computed pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to preserve time time-to-event data. RESULTS: We included 7 studies, of which 2 were RCT and 5 were multivariable adjusted cohorts, comprising a total 10 147, of whom 43.8% underwent complete revascularization. As compared with partial-only PCI, complete revascularization was associated with a lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 0.71; 95% CI 0.60-0.85; P < 0.01), cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.79; P < 0.01), and recurrent myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.85; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups regarding the risk of revascularizations (hazard ratio 0.80; 95% CI 0.53-1.20; P = 0.28). CONCLUSION: Among elderly patients with ACS and multivessel CAD, complete revascularization is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and recurrent myocardial infarction.

Complete versus partial revascularization for older adults with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized and multivariable adjusted data

BACKGROUND Evidence from randomized studies support complete over culprit-only revascularization for patients with acute coronary artery syndrome (ACS) and multivessel coronary artery diseases (MVD). Whether these findings extend to elderly patients, however, has not been thoroughly explored. METHODS We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes of elderly individuals (defined as age ≥75 years) with ACS and MVD submitted to complete vs partial-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched. We computed pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to preserve time time-to-event data. RESULTS We included 7 studies, of which 2 were RCT and 5 were multivariable adjusted cohorts, comprising a total 10 147, of whom 43.8% underwent complete revascularization. As compared with partial-only PCI, complete revascularization was associated with a lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 0.71; 95% CI 0.60­0.85; P < 0.01), cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio 0.64; 95% CI 0.52­0.79; P < 0.01), and recurrent myocardial infarction (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% CI 0.50­0.85; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between groups regarding the risk of revascularizations (hazard ratio 0.80; 95% CI 0.53­1.20; P = 0.28). CONCLUSION Among elderly patients with ACS and multivessel CAD, complete revascularization is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and recurrent myocardial infarction.

Cardiovascular Benefits of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Patients Living with Obesity or Overweight: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have emerged as an effective therapeutic class for weight loss. However, the efficacy of these agents in reducing cardiovascular endpoints among patients living with obesity or overweight is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing GLP-1 RAs versus placebo in patients with obesity or overweight. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs were included, with 30,512 patients. Compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs reduced systolic blood pressure (MD - 4.76 mmHg; 95% CI - 6.03, - 3.50; p < 0.001; I2 = 100%) and diastolic blood pressure (MD - 1.41 mmHg; 95% CI - 2.64, - 0.17; p = 0.03; I2 = 100%). GLP-1 RA significantly reduced the occurrence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.61, 0.85; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%). There were no significant differences between groups in unstable angina (UA; RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.65, 1.07; p = 0.16; I2 = 0%), stroke (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.74, 1.12; p = 0.38; I2 = 0%), atrial fibrillation (AF; RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.17, 1.43; p = 0.19; I2 = 22%), and deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.06, 1.40; p = 0.13; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients living with obesity or overweight, GLP-1 RA reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure and the occurrence of myocardial infarction, with a neutral effect on the occurrence of UA, stroke, AF, and deep vein thrombosis. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO identifier number CRD42023475226.

Cardiovascular benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists in patients living with obesity or overweight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have emerged as an effective therapeutic class for weight loss. However, the efficacy of these agents in reducing cardiovascular endpoints among patients living with obesity or overweight is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing GLP-1 RAs versus placebo in patients with obesity or overweight. We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 13 RCTs were included, with 30,512 patients. Compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs reduced systolic blood pressure (MD - 4.76 mmHg; 95% CI - 6.03, - 3.50; p < 0.001; I2 = 100%) and diastolic blood pressure (MD - 1.41 mmHg; 95% CI - 2.64, - 0.17; p = 0.03; I2 = 100%). GLP-1 RA significantly reduced the occurrence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.61, 0.85; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%). There were no significant differences between groups in unstable angina (UA; RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.65, 1.07; p = 0.16; I2 = 0%), stroke (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.74, 1.12; p = 0.38; I2 = 0%), atrial fibrillation (AF; RR 0.49; 95% CI 0.17, 1.43; p = 0.19; I2 = 22%), and deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.30; 95% CI 0.06, 1.40; p = 0.13; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients living with obesity or overweight, GLP-1 RA reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure and the occurrence of myocardial infarction, with a neutral effect on the occurrence of UA, stroke, AF, and deep vein thrombosis.

Catheter ablation versus medical therapy for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare catheter ablation and medical therapy (antiarrhythmics for rhythm or rate control) in patients with AF and HFpEF. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Outcomes were the composite end points of death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization, all-cause death, cardiovascular death, all-cause rehospitalization, and HF hospitalization. Statistical analysis was performed using R statistical software, version 4.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. RESULTS: We included 20,257 patients from 8 studies. Of those, 3 were derived from RCTs, either through post hoc analysis or subgroup analysis, and 5 were observational studies. The median follow-up ranged from 24.6 to 61.2 months. Compared with medical therapy, catheter ablation was associated with a statistically significant lower risk of death or HF hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.83; P = .001; I2 = 66%), all-cause death (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46-0.99; P = .047; I2 = 61%), cardiovascular death (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.21-0.84; P = .014; I2 = 22%), and HF hospitalization (HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23-0.82; P = .011; I2 = 87%). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, catheter ablation was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization, and all-cause rehospitalization in comparison to medical therapy in patients with AF and HFpEF.

Intracardiac echography-guided fluoroless ablation versus conventional fluoroscopy-guided ablation for cardiac arrhythmias: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) has improved catheter ablation procedures, reducing reliance on fluoroscopy. Yet, the efficacy and safety of zero-fluoroscopy (ZF) procedures remain uncertain. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing ZF ablation procedures guided by ICE vs. conventional techniques regarding efficacy and safety outcomes. PubMed, Cochrane, and embase were searched. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs), odds ratios (OR) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: We includedfourteen studies with 1,919 patients of whom 1,023 (58.72%) performed ZF ablation using ICE. We found a significant reduced ablation time (SMD -0.18; 95% CI -0.31;-0.04; p=0.009), procedure time (MD -7.54; 95% CI -14.68;-0.41; p=0.04), fluoroscopic time (MD -2.52; 95% CI -3.20;-1.84; p<0.001) in patients treated with ZF approach compared with NZF approach. However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in acute success rate (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.99-1.01; p=0.85), long-term success rate (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93-1.05; p=0.77) and complications (RR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.48-1.46; p = 0.54). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that among patients undergoing arrhythmia ablation, fluoroscopy-free ICE-guided technique reduces procedure time and radiation exposure with comparable short and long-term success rates and complications.

Cardiovascular benefits of GLP-1 receptor agonists in patients who are obese or overweight: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled

Backgroun|D: GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have emerged as an effective therapeutic class for weight loss. However, the efficacy of these agents in cardiovascular endpoints among patients who are obese or overweight requires additional investigation. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing GLP-1 RAs vs. placebo in patients who are obese or overweight. PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase were searched. A random-effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 12 RCTs were included, with 12,908 patients. Compared with placebo, GLP-1 RAs were associated with significant reductions in systolic blood pressure (MD -4.45 mmHg; 95% CI -5.31, -3.60; p<0.01) and diastolic blood pressure (MD -1.43 mmHg; 95% CI -2.63, -0.22; p=0.02). There were no significant differences between groups for unstable angina (UA) (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.29-2.84; p=0.86), stroke (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.28-1.49; p=0.30), atrial fibrillation (AF) (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.33-2.30; p=0.78), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.17-1.90; p=0.36), or deep vein thrombosis (RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.08-2.65; p=0.38). CONCLUSION: In patients who are overweight or obese, GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce systolic and diastolic blood pressure, with a neutral effect on the incidence of UA, stroke, AF, MI, and deep vein thrombosis.

Cardiovascular impact of cancer in patients with atrial fibrillation on warfarin: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The impact of cancer on patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) on warfarin remains a topic of ongoing debate. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the effect of cancer in patients with AF on warfarin. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for eligible trials. Random-effects model was used to calculate the risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio version 4.2.3. RESULTS: Five trials comprising 90,572 patients were included, of whom 12,239 (13.5%) had a personal history of cancer. The patient population had an average age of 72.7 years and 59.6% were male. A history of cancer was associated with a significant increase in any bleeding (RR 1.33; 95% CI 1.15- 1.53; p<0.01). There were no significant differences between groups for stroke (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.86- 1.29; p=0.61), major bleeding (RR 1.44; 95% CI 0.95-2.18; p=0.09), cardiovascular (CV) death (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.59-1.41; p=0.67), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 1.42; 95% CI 0.96-2.10; p=0.08), gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (RR 1.74; 95% CI 0.77-3.92; p=0.18), or all-cause death (RR 1.57; 95% CI 0.99-2.49; p=0.06). CONCLUSION: Among patients with AF on warfarin, a history of cancer is associated with an increased risk of any bleeding, with no significant effect on stroke, major bleeding, CV death, MI, GI bleeding, and all-cause death.

Complete versus culprit-only revascularization for older adults with acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND: Randomized studies support complete over culprit-only revascularization for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) However,whether these findings extend to elderly patients has not been thoroughly explored. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes of elderly individuals (defined as age > 75 years) with ACS and multivessel coronary artery disease submitted to complete vs. culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane were searched. We computed pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to preserve time-to-event data RESULTS: We included 7 studies, of which 2 were randomized controlled trials (RCTs), comprising 7,409 patients, of whom 3225 (43.5%) underwent complete revascularization. As compared with culprit lesion only PCI, complete revascularization was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.68-0.85; p<0.001), cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.54-0.82; p<0.001), and recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.85; p=0.002). There was no significant difference between the groups regarding the risk of recurrent revascularizations (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.54-1.16; p=0.23). CONCLUSION: Among elderly patients with ACS and multivessel CAD, complete revascularization is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and recurrent MI.

Cardioneuroablation for reflex syncope: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Reflex syncope reduces quality of life and leads to fall-related injuries, with no highly effective treatment. In this context, cardioneuroablation (CNA) presents as a promising therapy for these patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central for studies that evaluated safety and efficacy outcomes related to CNA procedures. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction and assessment of bias. Generalized linear mixed models was used. We performed a single-arm meta-analysis using R version 4.2.3. RESULTS: A total of 25 studies comprising 871 patients were included. The mean follow-up ranged from 8 to 40 months. Mean age ranged from 32.9 to 53.9 years and 541 (62.1%) were female. The ablation target was biatrial in 302 patients (34%), left atrium only in 433 (49%), and right atrium only in 136 (15%). The freedom from syncope was 94% (95% confidence interval (CI) 90.13-97.00; P<0.01). Left and right atrial CNA was associated with a significant higher freedom from syncope (96.03%; 95% CI 93.13-97.73) than left atrial ablation only (94.61%; 95% CI 82.88-98.45) and right ablation only (84.53%; 95% CI 74.30-91.18). Peri-procedural adverse event occurred on 1.4% (95% CI 0.44- 4.50). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that in patients with reflex syncope, CNA is a procedure associated with a significant reduction in syncope incidence and with low complication rates. Among the procedures used, both right and left ablation were more effective.

Cardiac myosin inhibitors in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: Selective cardiac myosin inhibitors (CMI) are promising therapies for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Yet, the extent of their benefits remains unclear due to the limited population studied. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CMI vs. placebo in patients with obstructive HCM. PubMed, Cochrane, and embase were searched. We calculated risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs) and standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Four RCTs with 485 patients with obstructive HCM were included, of whom 261 (53.8%) were prescribed CMI (10.7% were aficamten and 89.3% were mavacamten). CMI significantly reduced resting left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) gradient (SMD -1.4, 95% CI -1.6,-1.2, p<0.001), but also reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (MD -5.1%, 95% CI -7.6,-2.6, p<0,001). Patients receiving CMI had a higher rate of study-defined complete hemodynamic response (RR 16.8, CI 95% 5.5, 51.4, p<0,001; Figure 1A) with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 8; and improvement of at least one point in NYHA functional class (RR 2.29, CI 95% 1.8,2.9, p<0,001; Figure 1B). Conclusion: In this meta-analysis of RCTs including patients with obstructive HCM, CMI led to a significant reduction in LVOT gradient and symptomatic improvement. The NNT to achieve one complete hemodynamic response was 8. There was a significant, albeit modest, decrease in LVEF in the CMI group.

Effects of anabolic androgenic steroids in athletes on left ventricle systolic and diastolic function: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The use of anabolic androgenic steroids (AAS) among athletes has been linked to pathological structural and functional cardiac changes. However, the studies are small, and the results are inconsistent. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of echocardiographic outcomes comparing athletes with prolonged use of AAS (at least 2 years of use) versus sex and age- matched athletes who were did not use AAS. PubMed, Cochrane, and embase were searched. A random-effects model was used to calculate mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Statistical analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.4.1. RESULTS: We included 17 studies comprising 1,023 athletes, of whom 543 (53%) were AAS users. The mean age ranged to 24.2 to 43 years. Compared with non-AAS users, athletes who used AAS exhibited a significant increase in interventricular septal wall thickness (MD 1.33 mm; 95% CI [0.8,1.89], p<0.001), a reduction in left ventricular ejection fraction (MD 2.77 %; 95% CI [-4.2,-1.34], p<0.001;Figure 1B) , and worsening of global longitudinal strain (MD 3.39%; 95% CI [2.88,3.91], p<0.001;Figure 1B). Additionally, there was a significant reduction in the E/A ratio (MD -0.21; 95% CI [-0.35,-0.07], p=0.003) and an increase in the E/e' ratio (MD 1.71; 95% CI [0.96,2.46], p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that prolonged use of AAS in athletes is associated with increased left ventricular wall thickness and worsening of systolic and diastolic parameters.

Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation versus impella for cardiogenic shock in acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is an important cause of cardiogenic shock (CS). There is lack of evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) compared with Impella in this population. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for studies comparing VA-ECMO with Impella in patients with CS related to AMI. The systematic review and meta-analysis followed Cochrane recommendations and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We used R version 4.3.1 for all statistical analyses. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled with a random-effects model. RESULTS: We included seven observational studies with 15.903 patients, of whom 12.943 (81.3%) were treated with Impella. There was no significant difference between groups regarding in-hospital mortality (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.37-1.69; p=0.54; Figure 1A), ischemic stroke (OR 0.69; 95% CI 0.14-3.35; p=0.64; Figure 1B), acute kidney injury (OR 1.22; 95% CI 0.55-2.70; p=0.62), renal replacement therapy or dialysis (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.33-3.19; p=0.97; Figure 1C), and blood transfusion (OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.16-1.72; p=0.28). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, there was no significant difference between VA-ECMO and Impella among patients with CS and AMI for the outcomes of in-hospital mortality, ischemic stroke, acute kidney injury, renal replacement therapy, or blood transfusion.

Cardiovascular benefits of statin plus ezetimibe combination therapy versus statin monotherapy in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of adding ezetimibe to statin therapy for event reduction in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) remains a topic of ongoing debate. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ezetimibe plus statin versus statin monotherapy in patients with ACS. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for eligible trials. Random-effects model was used to calculate the risk ratios (RRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio version 4.2.3. RESULTS: Six RCTs comprising 20,574 patients with ACS were included, of whom 10,259 (49.9%) were prescribed ezetimibe plus statin. The patient population had an average age of 63.8 years and 75.1% were male. Compared with statin monotherapy, ezetimibe plus statin significantly reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.90-0.97; p<0.01) and non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.81-0.95; p<0.01). There was no significant difference between groups for revascularization (RR 0.94; 95% CI 0.88-1.01; p=0.07), all-cause death (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.63-1.21; p=0.42), or unstable angina (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.86-1.27; p=0.64). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of patients with ACS, the combination of ezetimibe plus statin was associated with a reduction in MACE and non-fatal myocardial infarction, compared with statin monotherapy.

Cardiovascular impact of cancer in patients with atrial fibrillation on direct oral anticoagulants: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: The impact of cancer on patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) remains a matter of debate. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis exploring the effect of personal history of cancer in patients with AF on DOACs. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant studies. We used the random-effects model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical analyses were performed using RStudio version 4.2.3. RESULTS: A total of six studies were included, with 63,177 patients. The mean age was 74.0 years. In this population of individuals who had AF and took DOACs, a history of cancer was associated with a significant increase in major bleeding (RR 1.72; 95% CI 1.24-2.38; p<0.01), gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (RR 2.11; 95% CI 1.25-3.57; p<0.01), and any bleeding (RR 1.54; 95% CI 1.39-1.70; p<0.01). Additionally, all-cause death was significantly higher in patients with AF and a history of cancer (RR 1.93; 95% CI 1.35-2.76; p<0.01). There was no significant difference between groups in stroke (RR 1.77; 95% CI 0.66-4.73; p=0.25), cardiovascular (CV) death (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.57-1.23; p=0.36), or myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 1.21; 95% CI 0.82-1.79; p=0.34). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that major bleeding, GI bleeding, any bleeding, and all-cause mortality significantly increased in patients with AF on DOACs who have a personal history of cancer, as compared with those who do not.

Catheter ablation versus medical therapy for atrial fibrillation in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND The benefit of catheter ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare catheter ablation and medical therapy (antiarrhythmics for rhythm or rate control) in patients with AF and HFpEF. METHODS We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Central. Outcomes were the composite endpoints of death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization, all-cause-death, cardiovascular death, all-cause-rehospitalization and HF hospitalization. Statistical analysis was performed using the R program (version 4.3.2). Heterogeneity was assessed with I2 statistics. RESULTS We included 20,257 patients from 8 studies. Of those, 3 were derived from RCTs, either through post-hoc analysis or subgroup analysis, and 5 were observational studies. The median follow-up ranged from 24.6 to 61.2 months. As compared to medical therapy, catheter ablation was associated with a statistically significant lower risk of death or HF hospitalization (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.47 - 0.83; p=0.001; I2 =66%), all-cause-death (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.46 - 0.99; p=0.047; I2 =61%), cardiovascular death (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.21 - 0.84; p=0.014; I2 =22%) and HF hospitalization (HR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23 - 0.82; p=0.011; I2 =87%). CONCLUSION In this meta-analysis, catheter ablation was associated with lower risk of the all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, HF hospitalization and all-cause-rehospitalization in comparison to medical of patients with AF and HFpEF.

Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials I

BACKGROUND: Biventricular pacing (BVP) has proven efficacy in treating heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and ventricular dyssynchrony. Conduction system pacing (CSP), encompassing His bundle pacing (HBP) and left bundle area pacing (LBAP), has emerged as a promising alternative, but its benefits are still uncertain. METHODS: PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared CSP to BVP for resynchronization therapy in patients with HFrEF and reported the outcomes of (1) paced QRS interval duration; (2) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF); and (3) New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA). Heterogeneity was examined with I² statistics. A random-effects model was used for all outcomes. RESULTS: We included 7 RCTs with 408 patients, of whom 200 (49%) underwent CSP. In patients undergoing CSP, there was significantly lower paced QRS duration (MD -13.34; 95% CI -24.32 to -2.36; p=0.02; Figure 1) and NYHA functional class (SMD -0.37; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.05; p=0.02; Figure 2). There was also a significant increase in LVEF in the CSP group (MD 2.06; 95% CI 0.16 to 3.97; p=0.03; Figure 3). No statistical difference was noted for LVESV (SMD -0.51; 95% CI -1.26 to 0.24; p=0.18; I²=83%), threshold for lead capture (MD -0.08; 95% CI -0.42 to 0.27; p=0.66; I²=66%), and procedure time (MD 5.99; 95% CI -15.91 to 27.89; p=0.59; I²=79%). Hospitalizations for HF were only noted in three studies, and no difference was observed between groups (9 vs 7; RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.21 to 4.90; p=0.98; I²=46%). Differences in mortality did not reach statistical significance (3 vs 8; RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.12 to 1.62; p=0.219; I²=0%). In subgroup analysis per CSP technique, there were no significant differences between groups for QRS duration and LVEF. LBAP was the main contributor for the significant difference observed in the NYHA functional class with a trend towards subgroup difference (p interaction=0.06). Although no significant difference was noted for the overall lead threshold, the LBAP subgroup had significantly lower values compared to HBP (p interaction=0.03). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that CSP may have symptomatic, echocardiographic and electrophysiologic benefits for HFrEF patients requiring resynchronization.

Conduction system pacing versus biventricular pacing in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Conduction system pacing (CSP) has emerged as a promising alternative to biventricular pacing (BVP) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and ventricular dyssynchrony, but its benefits are uncertain. In this study, we aimed to evaluate clinical outcomes of CSP vs BVP for cardiac resynchronization in patients with HFrEF. PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing CSP to BVP for resynchronization therapy in patients with HFrEF. Heterogeneity was examined with I2 statistics. A random-effects model was used for all outcomes. We included 7 randomized controlled trials with 408 patients, of whom 200 (49%) underwent CSP. Compared to BVP, CSP resulted in a significantly greater reduction in QRS duration (MD -13.34 ms; 95% confidence interval [CI] -24.32 to -2.36, P = .02; I2 = 91%) and New York Heart Association functional class (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.37; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.05; P = .02; I2 = 41%), and a significant increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (mean difference [MD] 2.06%; 95% CI 0.16 to 3.97; P = .03; I2 = 0%). No statistical difference was noted for left ventricular end-systolic volume (SMD -0.51 mL; 95% CI -1.26 to 0.24; P = .18; I2 = 83%), lead capture threshold (MD -0.08 V; 95% CI -0.42 to 0.27; P = .66; I2 = 66%), and procedure time (MD 5.99 minutes; 95% CI -15.91 to 27.89; P = .59; I2 = 79%). These findings suggest that CSP may have electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and symptomatic benefits over BVP for patients with HFrEF requiring cardiac resynchronization.