Intrapericardial Fibrinolytic Therapy in Purulent Pericarditis: A Review of Two Cases.

Purulent pericarditis is the infection of the pericardial space with pus formation. High mortality and morbidity can be explained by cardiac tamponade and septic shock in the acute phase, while chronically, it can lead to recurrent purulent pericarditis and constrictive pericarditis. We present two cases of purulent pericarditis treated with intrapericardial recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (r-tPA) for three consecutive days in addition to surgical pericardial drainage. In both instances, loculated effusions and re-accumulation of pericardial fluid persisted despite adequate antibiotic coverage and surgical drainage. Intrapericardial fibrinolysis was considered a less invasive alternative to extensive surgery to prevent constrictive pericarditis and improve clinical outcomes. Both patients had complete clinical recovery and there was no evidence of constrictive pericarditis during follow-up. There is scant literature regarding r-tPA therapy for purulent pericarditis, most of which is limited to case reports or case series. The most commonly used regimen is three doses of tPA administered into the pericardial space over three days. It is a safe and potentially effective therapy in preventing constrictive pericarditis and need of pericardiectomy.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing radiofrequency catheter ablation with medical therapy for ventricular tachycardia in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies.

BACKGROUND: In patients with cardiomyopathy, radiofrequency catheter ablation (CA) for ventricular tachycardia (VT) is an adjunctive and alternative treatment option to long-term anti-arrhythmic drug therapy. We sought to compare CA with medical therapy for the management of VT in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathies. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were evaluated for relevant studies. RESULTS: Eleven studies with 2126 adult patients were included (711 in CA, 1415 in medical therapy). In the randomized controlled trial (RCT) analysis, CA reduced risk of recurrent VT (risk ratio (RR) 0.79 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.93], p = 0.005), ICD shocks (RR 0.64 [95% CI 0.45 to 0.89] p = 0.008), and cardiac hospitalizations (RR 0.76 [95% CI 0.63 to 0.92] p = 0.005). There was no difference in all-cause mortality (RR 0.94, p = 0.71). In combined RCT and observational study analysis, there was a trend for reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.75 [95% CI 0.55 to 1.02] p = 0.07). In subgroup analysis of studies with mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 35%, CA demonstrated reduction in mortality (RR 0.71, p = 0.004), ICD shocks (RR 0.63, p = 0.03), VT recurrence (RR 0.76, p = 0.004), and cardiac hospitalizations (RR 0.75, p = 0.02). The subgroup of early CA prior to ICD shocks demonstrated reduction in ICD shocks (RR 0.57, p < 0.001) and VT recurrence (RR 0.74, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: CA for VT demonstrated a lower risk of VT recurrence, ICD shocks, and hospitalization in comparison to medical therapy. The subgroups of early CA and LVEF < 35% demonstrated better outcomes.

Mortality benefit of catheter ablation versus medical therapy in atrial fibrillation: An RCT only meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) in comparison to medical therapy alone is known to improve freedom from arrhythmia and quality of life, but the benefit regarding mortality is unclear. The publication of several recent large randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing ablation with medical therapy has warranted an updated meta-analysis. METHODS: We sought to compare the effectiveness of catheter ablation versus medical therapy only in patients with AF. MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception until 04/30/2021. Relevant RCTs comparing catheter ablation versus medical therapy in patients with AF were selected. RESULTS: A total of 24 RCTs involving 5730 adult patients were included (2992 in catheter ablation and 2738 in medical therapy). There was a reduction in all-cause mortality with catheter ablation compared with medical therapy only (risk ratio (RR) 0.70 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.89]; p = .003). Catheter ablation also demonstrated a reduction in hospitalizations (RR 0.50 [95% CI 0.36-0.70]; p < .001), improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (mean difference [MD] + 5.94% [95% CI 0.40-11.48] p = .04), greater freedom from atrial arrhythmia (RR 2.23 [95% CI 1.79-2.76]; p < .001), and AF (RR 1.95 [95% CI 1.44-2.66]; p < .001). In subgroup analysis, catheter ablation demonstrated a significant reduction in mortality and hospitalizations among patients with reduced LVEF, and when ablation was compared with antiarrhythmic drug use. CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to medical therapy only, catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation reduces mortality, hospitalizations, and increases freedom from arrhythmia.

High-power short duration vs. conventional radiofrequency ablation of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: We sought to compare the effectiveness and safety of high-power short-duration (HPSD) radiofrequency ablation (RFA) with conventional RFA in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS AND RESULTS: MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched until 15 May 2020 for relevant studies comparing HPSD vs. conventional RFA in patients undergoing initial catheter ablation for AF. A total of 15 studies involving 3718 adult patients were included in our meta-analysis (2357 in HPSD RFA and 1361 in conventional RFA). Freedom from atrial arrhythmia was higher in HPSD RFA when compared with conventional RFA [odds ratio (OR) 1.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-1.90; P = 0.009]. Acute PV reconnection was lower (OR 0.56, P = 0.005) and first-pass isolation was higher (OR 3.58, P < 0.001) with HPSD RFA. There was no difference in total complications between the two groups (P = 0.19). Total procedure duration [mean difference (MD) -37.35 min, P < 0.001], fluoroscopy duration (MD -5.23 min, P = 0.001), and RF ablation time (MD -16.26 min, P < 0.001) were all significantly lower in HPSD RFA. High-power short-duration RFA also demonstrated higher freedom from atrial arrhythmia in the subgroup analysis of patients with paroxysmal AF (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.29-2.50; P < 0.001), studies with ≥50 W protocol in the HPSD RFA group (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.18; P = 0.02] and studies with contact force sensing catheter use (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.21-2.25; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: High-power short-duration RFA was associated with better procedural effectiveness when compared with conventional RFA with comparable safety and shorter procedural duration.

A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing second-generation cryoballoon and contact force radiofrequency ablation for initial ablation of paroxysmal and persistent atrial fibrillation.

INTRODUCTION: Cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) are the preferred modalities for catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF). Technological advances have improved procedural outcomes, warranting an updated comparison. We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CBA-2nd generation (CBA-2G) in comparison to RFA-contact force (RFA-CF) in patients with AF. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched until 03/01/2020 for relevant studies comparing CBA-2G versus RFA-CF in patients undergoing initial catheter ablation for AF. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies, involving 11 793 patients were included. There was no difference between the two groups in the outcomes of freedom from atrial arrhythmia (p = .67) and total procedural complications (p = .65). There was a higher incidence of phrenic nerve palsy in CBA-2G (odds ratio: 10.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.85 to 19.55; p < .001). Procedure duration was shorter (mean difference: -31.32 min; 95% CI: -40.73 to -21.92; p < .001) and fluoroscopy duration was longer (+3.21 min; 95% CI: 1.09 to 5.33; p = .003) in CBA-2G compared to RFA-CF. In the subgroup analyses of patients with persistent AF and >1 freeze lesion delivered per vein, there was no difference in freedom from atrial arrhythmia. CONCLUSIONS: In AF patients undergoing initial ablation, CBA-2G and RFA-CF were equally efficacious. The procedure duration was shorter, but with a higher incidence of phrenic nerve palsy in CBA-2G. In patients with persistent AF, there was no difference in the efficacy between CBA-2G or RFA-CF techniques.

Inspiratory Muscle Training in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Meta-Analysis.

Objectives To explore the role of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) in improving cardiorespiratory fitness of stable heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) patients. Background There is a paucity of data on the role of IMT in patients with HFpEF. HFpEF is a growing problem in the developed world, especially in the aging population. Methods We conducted a systematic literature search for English studies in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We searched databases using terms relating to or describing breathing exercise, IMT, and HFpEF. RevMan 5.4 (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020) was used for data analysis, and two independent investigators performed literature retrieval and data extraction. Results We identified three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and one prospective study on the role of IMT in HFpEF. We calculated the pooled mean difference of peak oxygen consumption (Peak VO2) and six-min walk distance (6MWD) between the IMT and standard care (SC) groups. Our meta-analysis showed that compared with SC, IMT could significantly improve peak VO2 with a mean difference (MD) of 2.82 ml/kg/min, 95% CI [1.90, 3.74] P < 0.00001 and improve 6MWD with MD of 83.97 meters, 95% CI [59.18, 108.76] P< 0.00001 to improve cardiorespiratory fitness at 12 weeks of IMT and improve peak VO2 with MD of 2.18 ml/kg/min, 95% CI [0.38, 3.99] P < 0.00001 at 24 weeks of therapy. Conclusion IMT should be further studied as a possible treatment option to improve cardiorespiratory fitness for patients with stable HFpEF.

Giant bladder stone in association with severe kidney injury.

Minimal data exist on the causes, incidence and management of giant bladder stones considering their rare occurrence. Only a handful of case reports have reported stones larger than 10 cm, and most of these cases are managed surgically. We present a case of a 56-year-old female who presented with vague, lower urinary tract symptoms who was later found to have severe post-renal acute kidney injury due to a giant bladder stone measuring 11 × 11 × 10.4 cm.