Efficacy and safety of left atrial appendage closure procedure in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation with contraindication and/or failure for oral anticoagulants: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: With the aim of reducing the risk of Cerebrovascular Accident (CVA) in patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation (NVAF), Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) devices are emerging as an alternative to oral anticoagulants. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the efficacy and safety of the LAAO procedure in patients with NVAF and contraindications and/or failure for oral anticoagulants. METHOD: The search for evidence was carried out in the electronic databases Medline and Embase till January 2024. Additional searches were conducted on Google Scholar. The clinical trials registry database was also consulted. Two blinded investigators performed the search, study selection, and data collection, and assessed quality and risk of bias using the Cochrane tool for randomized clinical trials. Meta-analyses of eligible trials were performed using RevMan 5.4.1 software. The random effects model was used for all analyses. RESULTS: Five articles were selected, among which three were non-inferiority randomized clinical trials that analyzed the performance and safety of LAAO devices compared to the use of Vitamin K Antagonists (AVKs) or Novel Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs). No randomized clinical trials were found that analyzed populations with absolute contraindications to oral anticoagulants. Having as primary outcomes analyzed the occurrence of stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), cardiovascular or unexplained death and systemic embolism, the non-inferiority of the LAAO procedure compared to the use of oral anticoagulants was verified. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with an absolute contraindication to anticoagulation and/or failure to use oral anticoagulants, evidence for the use of LAAO devices is scarce.

Prevalence of contraindicated combinations amid behavioral and mental health medications filled in a pediatric population.

BACKGROUND: Behavioral or mental health disorders are common in children, adolescents, and young adults. Medication use is increasingly common, with few data describing drug-drug combinations in ambulatory settings. The objectives of this study were to describe the pharmaco-epidemiology of behavioral and mental health (BMH) medications among children, adolescents, and young adults in New York Medicaid and assess the prevalence of contraindicated drug pairs within this population. METHODS: This observational cross-sectional study evaluated New York State Medicaid managed care and fee-for-service enrollees under 21 years of age dispensed BMH medications in 2014. Main outcomes included number of members with prescriptions filled; number filling > 1 medication prescription concurrently for ≥ 30 days (polypharmacy), and number and nature of potentially contraindicated drug pairs. RESULTS: Of 2,430,434 children, adolescents, and young adults, 422,486 (17.4%) had a visit associated with a BMH diagnosis and 141,363 (5.8%) received one or more BMH medications. With 84 distinct medications evaluated, polypharmacy was common, experienced by 53,388 individuals (37.8% of those with a prescription filled), generating 11,115 distinct drug combinations. 392 individuals filled prescriptions for a contraindicated pair of ≥ 2 BMH medications for 30 days or longer. With ≥ 1 day overlap, 651 were exposed to contraindicated medications. The most common contraindicated pairs increased potential risk for prolonged QT interval and serotonin syndrome (n = 378 and n = 250 patients, respectively). Most combinations involved ziprasidone (3247.1 per 10,000 ziprasidone prescriptions filled). CONCLUSIONS: With nearly 6% of members dispensed a BMH medication, contraindicated drug pairs were uncommon. However, any of those combinations represent a potential risk. Clinicians should attend to the balance of potential risks and benefits before contraindicated pairs are dispensed. The methodology described could serve as a basis for monitoring such rare instances and might reduce harm.

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Anticoagulation Failure vs Anticoagulation Contraindication.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) provides mechanical cardioembolic protection for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who cannot use oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT). Patients with a thrombotic event despite OAT are at high risk for recurrence and may also benefit from LAAO. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the efficacy of LAAO in AF patients with a thrombotic event on OAT compared to: 1) LAAO in AF patients with a contraindication for OAT; and 2) historical data. METHODS: The international LAAO after stroke despite oral anticoagulation (STR-OAC LAAO) collaboration included patients who underwent LAAO because of thrombotic events on OAT. This cohort underwent propensity score matching and was compared to the EWOLUTION (Evaluating Real-Life Clinical Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Receiving the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology) registry, which represents patients who underwent LAAO because of OAT contraindications. The primary outcome was ischemic stroke. Event rates were compared between cohorts and with historical data without OAT, yielding relative risk reductions based on risk scores. RESULTS: Analysis of 438 matched pairs revealed no significant difference in the ischemic stroke rate between the STR-OAC LAAO and EWOLUTION cohorts (2.5% vs 1.9%; HR: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.72-2.61). STR-OAC LAAO patients exhibited a higher thromboembolic risk (HR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.04-2.83) but lower bleeding risk (HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18-0.88) compared to EWOLUTION patients. The mortality rate was slightly higher in EWOLUTION (4.3% vs 6.9%; log-rank P = 0.028). Relative risk reductions for ischemic stroke were 70% and 78% in STR-OAC LAAO and EWOLUTION, respectively, compared to historical data without OAT. CONCLUSIONS: LAAO in patients with a thrombotic event on OAT demonstrated comparable stroke rates to the OAT contraindicated population in EWOLUTION. The thromboembolic event rate was higher and the bleeding rate lower, reflecting the intrinsically different risk profile of both populations. Until randomized trials are available, LAAO may be considered in patients with an ischemic event on OAT.

Overcoming barriers for left atrial appendage thrombus: a systematic review of left atrial appendage closure.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 90% of intracardial thrombi originate from the left atrial appendage in non-valvular atrial fibrillation patients. Even with anticoagulant therapy, left atrial appendage thrombus (LAAT) still occurs in 8% of patients. While left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) could be a promising alternative, the current consensus considers LAAT a contraindication to LAAC. However, the feasibility and safety of LAAC in patients with LAAT have yet to be determined. METHODS: This systematic review synthesizes published data to explore the feasibility and safety of LAAC for patients with LAAT. RESULTS: This study included a total of 136 patients with LAATs who underwent successful LAAC. The Amulet Amplatzer device was the most frequently utilized device (48.5%). Among these patients, 77 (56.6%) had absolute contraindications to anticoagulation therapy. Cerebral protection devices were utilized by 47 patients (34.6%). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is the primary imaging technique used during the procedure. Warfarin and novel oral anticoagulants were the main anticoagulant medications used prior to the procedure, while dual antiplatelet therapy was primarily used post-procedure. During a mean follow-up period of 13.2 ± 11.5 months, there was 1 case of fatality, 1 case of stroke, 3 major bleeding events, 3 instances of device-related thrombus, and 8 cases of peri-device leakage. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the preliminary effectiveness and safety of the LAAC procedure in patients with persistent LAAT. Future large-scale RCTs with varied LAAT characteristics and LAAC device types are essential for evidence-based decision-making in clinical practice.

Inconsistencies of absolute drug-drug contraindication reports: Analysis of Summaries of Product Characteristics of commonly prescribed drugs.

AIMS: Prescribing information should follow a defined structure to help prescribers easily find required information. Often information appears in different sections of Summaries of Product Characteristics (SmPCs) in an inconsistent way. Still unknown is how this inconsistency affects absolute contraindications and how it can be improved. Thisstudy aimed to evaluate the structure of absolute contraindications in SmPCs based on absolute drug-drug contraindications (DDCI) in the section 'contraindications' and references to sections 'special warnings and precautions for use' (here as 'warnings') and 'interaction with other medicinal products and other forms of interaction' (here as 'interactions'). METHODS: SmPCs of 693 commonly prescribed drugs were analysed regarding absolute DDCI in 'contraindications' sections. References to sections on 'warnings' and 'interactions' were evaluated to characterize information provided about DDCI. RESULTS: Of 693 analysed SmPCs, 138 (19.9%) contained ≥1 absolute DDCI. Of 178 SmPCs that referred to sections on 'warnings' or 'interactions', 131 (73.6%) did not contain further information on absolute DDCI, whereas 47 (26.4%) did. Such additional information was found in sections on 'interactions' and 'warnings' in 41 (87.2%) and 9 (19.1%) SmPCs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Information regarding absolute DDCI was found not only in sections on 'contraindications' but also in sections on 'warnings' and 'interactions'. Information was not given with consistently straightforward phrasing and structure and so can leave uncertainty for prescribers. To improve drug safety, clear definitions and wording for absolute and relative contraindications should be provided, ideally in tables.

The antiinflammatory and electrophysiological effects of fingolimod on penicillin-induced rats.

BACKGROUND: The fact that inflammation triggers epileptic seizures brings to mind the antiepileptic properties of anti-inflammatory drugs. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the electrophysiological and anti-inflammatory effects of fingolimod on an experimental penicillin-induced acute epileptic seizure model in rats. METHODS: Thirty-two male Wistar rats were divided into four groups: control (penicillin), positive control (penicillin + diazepam [5 mg/kg]), drug (penicillin + fingolimod [0.3 mg/kg]) and synergy group (penicillin + diazepam + fingolimod). The animals were anesthetized with urethane, and epileptiform activity was induced by intracortical injection of penicillin (500,000 IU). After electrophysiological recording for 125 minutes, IL-1ß, TNF-α, and IL-6 were evaluated by ELISA in the serum of sacrificed animals. RESULTS: During the experiment, animal deaths occurred in the synergy group due to the synergistic negative chronotropic effect of diazepam and fingolimod. Although not statistically significant, fingolimod caused a slight decrease in spike-wave activity and spike amplitudes in the acute seizure model induced by penicillin (p > 0.05). Fingolimod decreased serum IL-1ß (p < 0.05); fingolimod and diazepam together reduced IL-6 (p < 0.05), but no change was observed in serum TNF-α values. CONCLUSION: Even in acute use, the spike-wave and amplitude values of fingolimod decrease with diazepam, anticonvulsant and anti-inflammatory effects of fingolimod will be more prominent in chronic applications and central tissue evaluations. In addition, concomitant use of fingolimod and diazepam is considered to be contraindicated due to the synergistic negative inotropic effect.

ANTECEDENTES: O fato de a inflamação desencadear crises epilépticas traz à mente as propriedades antiepilépticas dos anti-inflamatórios. OBJETIVO: Investigar os efeitos eletrofisiológicos e anti-inflamatórios do fingolimode em um modelo experimental de crise epiléptica aguda induzida por penicilina em ratos. MéTODOS: Trinta e dois ratos Wistar machos foram divididos em quatro grupos: controle (penicilina), controle positivo (penicilina + diazepam [5 mg/kg]), droga (penicilina + fingolimode [0,3 mg/kg]) e grupo sinergia (penicilina + diazepam + fingolimode). Os animais foram anestesiados com uretano, e a atividade epileptiforme foi induzida por injeção intracortical de penicilina (500.000 UI). Após registro eletrofisiológico por 125 minutos, IL-1ß, TNF-α e IL-6 foram avaliados por ELISA no soro dos animais sacrificados. RESULTADOS: Durante o experimento, ocorreram mortes de animais no grupo sinérgico devido ao efeito cronotrópico negativo sinérgico do diazepam e do fingolimode. Embora não seja estatisticamente significativo, o fingolimode causou uma ligeira diminuição na atividade pico-onda e nas amplitudes pico no modelo de convulsão aguda induzida pela penicilina (p > 0,05). O fingolimode diminuiu a IL-1ß sérica (p < 0,05); fingolimode e diazepam juntos reduziram a IL-6 (p < 0,05), mas não foi observada alteração nos valores séricos de TNF-α. CONCLUSãO: Pensa-se que o efeito anticonvulsivante leve de uma dose única de fingolimode será mais proeminente em aplicações crônicas e em avaliações de tecidos centrais. Além disso, o uso concomitante de fingolimode e diazepam é considerado contraindicado devido ao efeito inotrópico negativo sinérgico.

Contemporary choice of glucose lowering agents in heart failure patients with type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: There is a bi-directional link between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and heart failure (HF) and their co-existence markedly increases an individual's morbidity and mortality. Therefore, it is of major importance to diagnose early (and, even better, prevent) HF in T2DM patients, as well as adequately treat T2DM patients with HF. AREAS COVERED: The present narrative review discusses the effects of different antidiabetic drugs [metformin, pioglitazone, sulphonylureas (SUs), dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and insulin] on HF incidence, hospitalization and outcomes. Current guidelines of diabetes and cardiology societies on this issue are also commented on. EXPERT OPINION: Metformin (+lifestyle interventions) is the first-line treatment for all T2DM patients and SGLT2i are the preferred drugs (class I, level of evidence A) in patients with T2DM and HF. Pioglitazone is contraindicated in HF, whereas SUs, DPP4i, GLP-1 RAs and insulin are considered as neutral. However, SUs may cause hypoglycemia and weight gain, saxagliptin (a DPP4i) must be avoided in this setting and GLP-1 RAs seem not to affect HF risk. There is an urgent need of increasing guidelines implementation regarding SGLT2i use in clinical practice, to sufficiently tackle the HF burden in T2DM.