ABSTRACT
The study aims to compare the use of hypothermia in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with control. We systematically searched four electronic databases until March 2022. The inclusion criteria were any study design that compared hypothermia in patients with MI undergoing PCI with control. The risk of bias assessment of the included randomized controlled trials was conducted through Cochrane Tool, while the quality of the included cohort studies was assessed by the NIH tool. The meta-analysis was performed on RevMan. A total of 19 studies were entered. Regarding the mortality, there were nonsignificant differences between hypothermia and control (odds ratio [OR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75 to 1.50, p = 0.73). There was also no significant difference between the control and hypothermia in recurrent MI (OR = 1.21, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.30, p = 0.56). On the other hand, the analysis showed a significant favor for hypothermia over the control infarct size (mean difference = -1.76, 95% CI -3.04 to -0.47, p = 0.007), but a significant favor for the control over hypothermia in the overall bleeding complications (OR = 1.88, 95% CI 1.11 to 3.18, p = 0.02). Compared with the control, hypothermia reduced the infarct size of the heart, but this finding was not consistent across studies. However, the control had lower rates of bleeding problems. The other outcomes, such as death and the incidence of recurrent MI, were similar between the two groups.
ABSTRACT
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are commonly encountered, with ESRD itself serving as a well-established risk factor for AF.1 The 2018 AF guidelines have recommended apixaban across all the spectrums of renal impairment, including patients on hemodialysis (HD), and the 2019 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Rhythm Society updated guidelines have suggested careful consideration of reduced dose of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients with ESRD.2,3 The current data on the safety and efficacy of warfarin versus DOACs in patients with AF with ESRD and HD is variable. This study aimed to perform a study-level meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of warfarin and DOACs in patients with AF who require dialysis.
ABSTRACT
Data on clinical outcomes of transcatheter tricuspid valve repair (TTVR) compared with surgical tricuspid valve repair (STVR) in patients with tricuspid valve regurgitation (TVR) remains limited. Data from the national inpatient sample (2016-2020) and propensity-score matched (PSM) analysis was utilized to determine adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of inpatient mortality and major clinical outcomes of TTVR compated with STVR in patients with TVR. A total of 37,115 patients with TVR were included: 1830 (4.9%) and 35,285 (95.1%) underwent TTVR and STVR, respectively. After PSM, there was no statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics and medical comorbidities between both groups. Compared with STVR, TTVR was associated with lower inpatient mortality (aOR 0.43 [0.31-0.59], P < 0.01), cardiovascular complications (aOR 0.47 [0.3-0.45], P < 0.01), hemodynamic complications (aOR 0.47 [0.4-0.55], P < 0.01), infectious complications (aOR 0.44 [0.34-0.57], P < 0.01), renal complications (aOR 0.56 [0.45-0.64], P < 0.01), and need for blood transfusion. There was no statistically significant difference in odds of major bleeding events (aOR 0.92 [0.64-1.45], P 0.84). Also, TTVR was associated with less mean length of stay (7 days vs 15 days, P < 0.01) and less cost of hospitalization ($59,921 vs $89,618) compared with STVR. There was an increase in the utility of TTVR associated with a decrease in the utility of STVR from 2016 to 2020 (P < 0.01). Our study showed that compared with STVR, TTVR was associated with lower inpatient mortality and clinical events. Nevertheless, further studies are needed to investigate the difference in outcomes between both procedures.
