Non-Ergot Dopamine Agonists and the Risk of Heart Failure and Other Adverse Cardiovascular Reactions in Parkinson's Disease.

Reports suggest possible risks of adverse cardiovascular reactions, including heart failure, associated with non-ergot dopamine agonist (DA) use in Parkinson's disease (PD). The objectives of our review were to evaluate the risk of heart failure and other adverse cardiovascular reactions in PD patients who received a non-ergot DA compared with other anti-PD pharmacological interventions, placebo, or no intervention. Studies were identified via searches of six bibliographic databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRS) were eligible for study inclusion. Random-effect meta-analyses were performed to estimate adverse cardiovascular reaction risks. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. In total, forty-four studies (thirty-six RCTs and eight NRS) satisfied our inclusion criteria. A single RCT found no significant difference in the risk of heart failure with ropinirole compared with bromocriptine (odds ratio (OR) 0.39, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 2.04; low certainty). Conversely, three case-control studies reported a risk of heart failure with non-ergot DA treatment. The quality of evidence for the risk of heart failure was judged as low or very low. Findings suggest that non-ergot DA use may be associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including heart failure. Studies are needed to better understand cardiovascular risks associated with PD treatment.

Obesity and the challenges of noninvasive imaging for the detection of coronary artery disease.

Obesity is a significant health problem that could potentially lead to increased cardiovascular risk. Noninvasive imaging plays an important role in the evaluation of cardiovascular symptoms and risk of these patients. Selection of the appropriate test in the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease in this unique population is important. In this article, we focus on the strengths, limitations, and recommendations of the various noninvasive cardiac imaging modalities available in the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease. We have suggested an algorithm to help direct investigation. Ultimately, patient management should be individualized based on clinical judgement, test availability, and local expertise.

Myocardial viability: it is still alive.

Heart failure presents a significant problem in industrialized countries, with a high prevalence, morbidity, and mortality, where it is most frequently caused by coronary artery disease. Revascularization in patients with symptomatic heart failure has been associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes. Predictors of outcome benefit from revascularization include the presence and extent of hibernating myocardium, ischemia, scar, left ventricular ejection fraction, and renal function. Viability is useful in directing the management of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. It is especially useful in those with the highest risk where revascularization decisions are the most difficult. In the absence of definitive prospective randomized data on the benefit of routine viability testing in the management of ischemic cardiomyopathy, physicians will likely continue to use viability testing to assist them with their decision-making process. This review article focuses on the value of viability imaging and the modalities of its measurement, which include PET, SPECT, cardiac MRI, and dobutamine echocardiography. These imaging modalities should be seen as complementary rather than competing methods. In any given clinical setting, the indications, comorbidities, availability, local expertise, sensitivity, specificity, and limitations of each modality need to be considered. When advanced imaging (PET and cardiac MRI) are available, they are generally considered the preferred choice because of their overall higher accuracy. Finally, we explore the role of ischemia in patients with viability and the potential role of neurohormonal and viability imaging in deciding the need for implantable cardiac defibrillator as a primary prevention in patients with severe ischemic cardiomyopathy.