Cardiac resynchronization therapy and outcomes in patients with left ventricular assist devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The impact of cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) on clinical outcome in patients with a continuous-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is currently not well understood. We conducted a systematic literature review and meta-analysis with an intention to summarize all published clinical evidence. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through March 2018 for studies that compared the outcomes in patients with LVAD and CRT. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model, inverse variance method. The between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the Q statistic and I2. A total of seven studies that included 1157 (575 CRT; 582 non-CRT) patients were identified. Our meta-analysis did not demonstrate a significant difference in the risk of mortality (pooled OR = 1.21, 95% CI 0.90-1.63, P = 0.21), ventricular arrhythmia incidence (pooled OR = 1.36, 95% CI 0.99-1.86, P = 0.06), hospitalization (pooled OR = 1.36, 95% CI 0.59-3.14, P = 0.48), or implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapies (pooled OR = 1.08, 95% CI 0.51-2.30, P = 0.84) among the CRT group compared with the non-CRT group. There was high heterogeneity with an I2 of 75% for ICD therapies. Among LVAD patients, CRT combined did not significantly affect mortality, re-hospitalization, ventricular arrhythmia incidence, and ICD therapies.

Association between diabetes mellitus and poor patient outcomes after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) serves as an important prognostic indicator in patients with cardiac-related illness. Our objective is to compare survival and neurological outcomes among diabetic and non-diabetic patients who were admitted to the hospital after an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for relevant articles from database inception to July 2018 without any language restriction. Studies were included if they evaluated patients who presented with OHCA, included mortality and neurological outcome data separately for DM patients and Non-DM patients and reported crude data, odds ratio (OR), relative risk (RR) or hazard ratio (HR). Two investigators independently reviewed the retrieved citations and assessed eligibility. The quality of included studies was evaluated using Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies. Random-effect models using the generic variance method were used to create pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 value. Survival and neurological outcomes (using modified rankin scale and cerebral performance category scale) after OHCA in hospitalized patients with DM compared with patients without DM. Out of 57 studies identified, six cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. In an analysis of unadjusted data, patients with DM had lower odds of survival, pooled OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52-0.78, [I2 = 90%]. When adjusted ORs were pooled, the association between DM and survival after OHCA was still significantly reduced, pooled OR 0.78, 95% CI, 0.68-0.89 [I2 = 55%]. Unadjusted pooled OR revealed poor neurological outcomes in patients with DM, pooled OR 0.55, 95% CI, 0.38-0.80 [I2 = 90%]. The result demonstrates significant poor outcomes of in-hospital survival and neurological outcomes among DM patients after OHCA.