Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 10 de 10
Filtrar
1.
Pacing Clin Electrophysiol ; 46(12): 1609-1634, 2023 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37971718

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The optimal power and duration settings for radiofrequency (RF) atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation to improve efficacy and safety is unclear. We compared low-power long-duration (LPLD), high-power short-duration (HPSD), and very HPSD (vHPSD) RF settings for AF ablation. METHODS: This network meta-analysis (NMA) was structured according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Observational and randomized studies were included. Eligible studies compared outcomes in AF patients who underwent first-time RF ablation with the following settings: vHPSD (70-90 W, 3-10 s), HPSD (45-60 W, 5-10 s), or LPLD (20-40 W, 20-60 s). RESULTS: Thirty-six studies comprising 10,375 patients were included (33% female). Frequentist NMA showed LPLD tended toward a lower odds of freedom from arrhythmia (FFA) versus HPSD (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.00). There was no difference in FFA between vHPSD versus HPSD. Splitwise interval estimates showed a lower odds of FFA in LPLD versus vHPSD on direct (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-0.93) and network estimates (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.98). Frequentist NMA showed less total procedural (TP) time with HPSD versus LPLD (generic variance 1.06, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.29) and no difference between HPSD versus vHPSD. CONCLUSION: This NMA shows improved procedural times in HPSD and vHPSD versus LPLD. Although HPSD tended toward improved odds of FFA compared to LPLD, the overall result was not statistically significant. The odds of FFA in LPLD was lower versus vHPSD on direct and network estimates on splitwise interval analysis. Large prospective head-to-head randomized trials are needed to validate HPSD and vHPSD settings.


Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Ablação por Cateter , Veias Pulmonares , Ablação por Radiofrequência , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Fibrilação Atrial/cirurgia , Metanálise em Rede , Estudos Prospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento
2.
Europace ; 24(10): 1585-1598, 2022 10 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35696286

RESUMO

AIMS: The value of additional ablation beyond pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation is unclear, especially for persistent AF. The optimal target for substrate modification to improve outcomes is uncertain. We investigate the utility of low-voltage area (LVA) substrate modification in patients undergoing catheter ablation for AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: This meta-analysis was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Only randomized studies were included. AF patients who underwent catheter ablation with voltage-guided substrate modification targeting LVA (LVA group) vs. conventional ablation approaches not targeting LVA (non-LVA group) were compared. Four studies comprising 539 patients were included (36% female). Freedom from arrhythmia (FFA) in patients with persistent AF was greater in the LVA group [risk ratio (RR) 1.30; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03-1.64]. There was no difference in FFA in patients with paroxysmal AF between groups (RR 1.30; 95% CI 0.89-1.91). There was no difference in total procedural time (mean difference -17.54 min; 95% CI -64.37 to 29.28 min) or total ablation time (mean difference -36.17 min; 95% CI -93.69 to 21.35 min) in all included patients regardless of AF type between groups. There was no difference in periprocedural complications between groups in all included patients regardless of AF type (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.22-3.82). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis demonstrates improved FFA in persistent AF patients who underwent voltage-guided substrate modification targeting LVA.


Assuntos
Fibrilação Atrial , Ablação por Cateter , Veias Pulmonares , Fibrilação Atrial/diagnóstico , Fibrilação Atrial/cirurgia , Ablação por Cateter/efeitos adversos , Ablação por Cateter/métodos , Técnicas Eletrofisiológicas Cardíacas/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Veias Pulmonares/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento
3.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc ; 45: 101191, 2023 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36923949

RESUMO

Background: Colchicine has anti-inflammatory properties, but its utility in improving cardiovascular outcomes has been disputed. Here, we study the impact of colchicine on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with gout with and without coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Primary outcomes included myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Secondary outcomes included stroke and all-cause mortality. Results: We included 4 observational studies comprising 10,026 patients with gout on treatment with colchicine. There was no significant difference in the risk of myocardial infarction (risk ratio [RR] 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-1.39), need for PCI, or need for CABG, between patients on colchicine and those not receiving colchicine. Colchicine was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.43-0.79). Conclusion: Non-randomized studies suggest that risk of MI, stroke and revascularization is not higher in gout patients treated with colchicine compared to gout patients without colchicine treatment.

4.
Am J Cardiol ; 198: 101-107, 2023 07 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37183091

RESUMO

Aortic stenosis (AS) and cardiac amyloidosis (CA) occur concomitantly in a significant number of patients and portend a higher risk of all-cause mortality. Previous studies have investigated outcomes in patients with concomitant CA/AS who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) versus medical therapy alone, but no evidence-based consensus regarding the ideal management of these patients has been established. Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Methodologic bias was assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies. A total of 4 observational studies comprising 83 patients were included. Of these, 45 patients (54%) underwent TAVI, whereas 38 (46%) were managed conservatively. Of the 3 studies that included baseline characteristics by treatment group, 30% were women. The risk of all-cause mortality was found to be significantly lower in patients who underwent TAVI than those treated with conservative medical therapy alone (odds ratio 0.24, 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 0.73). In conclusion, this meta-analysis suggests a lower risk of all-cause mortality in patients with CA with AS who underwent TAVI than those managed with medical therapy alone.


Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/complicações , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Implante de Prótese de Valva Cardíaca/efeitos adversos , Razão de Chances , Fatores de Risco , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento
5.
J Am Heart Assoc ; 11(4): e023548, 2022 02 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35132876

RESUMO

Background Coronary artery disease (CAD) is highly prevalent in patients with chronic kidney disease and is a common cause of mortality in end-stage renal disease. Thus, patients with end-stage renal disease are routinely screened for CAD before renal transplantation. The usefulness of revascularization before transplantation remains unclear. We hypothesize that there is no difference in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in waitlisted renal transplant candidates with CAD who underwent revascularization versus those treated with optimal medical therapy before transplantation. Methods and Results This meta-analysis was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines. MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane risk of bias tool. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality. Eight studies comprising 945 patients were included (36% women, mean age 56 years). There was no difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 1.16 [95% CI, 0.63-2.12), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.29-1.89]), or major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.30-2.07]) when comparing renal transplant candidates with CAD who underwent revascularization versus those who were on optimal medical therapy before renal transplant. Conclusions This meta-analysis demonstrates that revascularization is not superior to optimal medical therapy in reducing all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or major adverse cardiovascular events in waitlisted kidney transplant candidates with CAD who eventually underwent kidney transplantation.


Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Falência Renal Crônica , Transplante de Rim , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/complicações , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Feminino , Humanos , Falência Renal Crônica/cirurgia , Transplante de Rim/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade
6.
J Arrhythm ; 38(6): 981-990, 2022 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36524044

RESUMO

Background: Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is a proven alternative to pharmacologic rhythm control in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether outcomes differ in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is of interest. Methods: Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. Primary efficacy outcomes of interest include atrial arrythmia recurrence and repeat ablation. Harm outcomes of interest include all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations, cardiovascular hospitalizations, stroke/transient ischemic attack, and cardiac tamponade. Results: We included 7 observational studies comprising 2554 patients with HFpEF who underwent catheter ablation for AF. When comparing patients with HFpEF versus without HF, there was no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence (risk ratio [RR] 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-2.13), stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) (RR 0.47; 95% CI 0.03-6.54), or cardiac tamponade (RR 1.20; 95% CI 0.12-12.20). When comparing patients with HFpEF versus HFrEF, there was no significant difference in atrial arrhythmia recurrence (RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.92-1.37), repeat ablation (RR 1.19; 95% CI 0.74-1.93), all-cause mortality (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.67-1.13), all-cause hospitalizations (RR 1.10; 95% CI 0.94-1.30), cardiovascular hospitalizations (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.69-1.01), stroke or TIA (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.29-2.25), or cardiac tamponade (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.19-5.16). Conclusions: Non-randomized studies suggest that catheter ablation for AF in patients with HFpEF is associated with similar arrythmia-free survival and safety profile when compared to patients with HFrEF or without heart failure.

7.
Eur Heart J Digit Health ; 3(2): 323-337, 2022 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36713001

RESUMO

Aims: High blood pressure (BP) is the commonest modifiable cardiovascular risk factor, yet its monitoring remains problematic. Wearable cuffless BP devices offer potential solutions; however, little is known about their validity and utility. We aimed to systematically review the validity, features and clinical use of wearable cuffless BP devices. Methods and results: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, IEEE Xplore and the Cochrane Database till December 2019 for studies that reported validating cuffless BP devices. We extracted information about study characteristics, device features, validation processes, and clinical applications. Devices were classified according to their functions and features. We defined devices with a mean systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) biases of <5 mmHg as valid as a consensus. Our definition of validity did not include assessment of device measurement precision, which is assessed by standard deviation of the mean difference-a critical component of ISO protocol validation criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed to summarise the mean biases for SBP and DBP across studies. Of the 430 studies identified, 16 studies (15 devices, 974 participants) were selected. The majority of devices (81.3%) used photoplethysmography to estimate BP against a reference device; other technologies included tonometry, auscultation and electrocardiogram. In addition to BP and heart rate, some devices also measured night-time BP (n = 5), sleep monitoring (n = 3), oxygen saturation (n = 3), temperature (n = 2) and electrocardiogram (n = 3). Eight devices showed mean biases of <5 mmHg for SBP and DBP compared with a reference device and three devices were commercially available. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences between the wearable and reference devices for SBP (pooled mean difference = 3.42 mmHg, 95% CI: -2.17, 9.01, I2 95.4%) and DBP (pooled mean = 1.16 mmHg, 95% CI: -1.26, 3.58, I2 87.1%). Conclusion: Several cuffless BP devices are currently available using different technologies, offering the potential for continuous BP monitoring. The variation in standards and validation protocols limited the comparability of findings across studies and the identification of the most accurate device. Challenges such as validation using standard protocols and in real-life settings must be overcome before they can be recommended for uptake into clinical practice.

8.
J Diabetes Metab Disord ; 20(1): 417-425, 2021 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34222069

RESUMO

PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the estimated 10-year predicted risk of developing cardiovascular diseases (CVD) among participants with and without diabetes in Bangladesh. METHODS: We performed posthoc analysis from a matched case-control study conducted among 1262 participants. A total of 631 participants with diabetes (case) were recruited from a tertiary hospital, and 631 age, sex and residence matched participants (control) were recruited from the community in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Socioeconomic anthropometric, clinical and CVD risk factor data were collected from the participants. The 10-year estimated CVD risk was calculated using the Framingham Risk Score, which has reasonable validity in South Asians. RESULTS: The mean (SD) age of the participants were 51 (10) years. Total 52.3% of cases and 17.2% of controls were at high risk for CVD. The 10-year risk of CVD increased by age and was higher among males in both groups. Among the control group, high CVD risk was more prevalent among higher education and income groups. More than 85% of the tobacco smokers and 70% of chewing tobacco users in the case group were at high risk of CVD. Prevalence of high CVD risk among non-smokers cases was 8.6%. About 35% of hypertensive participants in the control group were at high risk of CVD. CONCLUSION: Bangladeshi patients with diabetes showed a significant burden of CVD risk at a relatively younger age. Strategies for reducing tobacco use and improving BP control in people with diabetes is needed for lowering future CVD risks.

9.
Cureus ; 12(1): e6814, 2020 Jan 29.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32140370

RESUMO

Background Management of elderly patients with Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) continues to be a source of controversy due to underrepresentation in large-scale clinical trials and the increased risk of adverse outcomes after both invasive (Percutaneous coronary intervention and Coronary artery bypass grafting) and non-invasive therapies. Recent randomized clinical trials have shown improved short term and intermediate term outcomes among high risk NSTEMI patients receiving early invasive management versus conservative medical management. However, how this is reflected in U.S. clinical practice for elderly patients has not been reported. Objective To identify the trend of invasive management in patients with NSTEMI, particularly among elderly population. Methods We used data from National Hospital Discharge Survey to identify all adult patients with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) code for NSTEMI from the years 2005 to 2009. The goal was to investigate the trends in time of invasive therapy for patients diagnosed with NSTEMI. We then stratified the patients according to age >65 and ≤65, and compared the temporal trends between two age groups. Results Among 21,306 patients diagnosed with NSTEMI between 2005 and 2009, the median age was 73 years (IQR: 61-82 years), 54% were males and 57% were White. The proportions of patients age>65 years receiving invasive management (21%, N=13978) was significantly lower than those age≤65 (41%, N=7328) (p<0.001). Moreover, in both age groups, the proportion of patients receiving early invasive management decreased substantially over time (p<0.001). Conclusion Despite numerous studies promoting the use of early invasive management for NSTEMI patients, the proportion of patients receiving invasive intervention gradually decreased from 2005-2009, more so in elderly population. The decrease seen in overall proportion of patients receiving invasive therapy could be associated with older median age of NSTEMI patients; 73 years (IQR: 61-82). Our future analyses will investigate if this trend maintains after adjusting for other factors (sex, co-morbid conditions, insurance status, year of procedure, hospital region, and hospital bed-size) thought to be associated with the management of NSTEMI in elderly patients.

10.
Cardiol Res Pract ; 2019: 6419147, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31360545

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Atrial fibrillation leads to increased risk of systemic embolism and stroke. To decrease these adverse events, anticoagulation is routinely prescribed. Nonvitamin K anticoagulants like apixaban and rivaroxaban are becoming popular and being used more frequently nowadays. We here compare the efficacy and safety of apixaban with those of warfarin. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy and safety of apixaban compared to those of warfarin. Eligible participants were adults diagnosed with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. The intervention was apixaban, and the comparator was warfarin. The primary efficacy endpoint is the first admission with systemic embolism or stroke, and the primary safety outcome is the occurrence of major bleeding. Relevant studies were searched in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PubMed, and clinicaltrials.gov. After being independently reviewed by two authors, five articles were included in the systematic review. The risk of bias of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and SIGN methodology. The RevMan software was used to assess the effect size and perform meta-analysis. RESULTS: Apixaban was found to be superior to warfarin in terms of safety (RR 0.58; CI 0.52-0.66) but not superior to warfarin in terms of efficacy (RR 0.93; CI 0.70-1.24). CONCLUSION: Apixaban is superior to warfarin in terms of safety, but no difference in efficacy is noted. The choice of anticoagulation should be individualized based on the risk factor profile of the patient.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA