Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in heart failure patients across the range of body mass index: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors improve outcomes in patients with heart failure, with or without diabetes. We sought to assess whether there is an interaction of these effects with body mass index (BMI). A systematic review of the MEDLINE and Scopus databases (last search: November 15th, 2022) was performed according to the PRISMA statement. Studies eligible for this review were randomized control trials (RCTs) with patients with chronic heart failure with either preserved or reduced ejection fraction randomly assigned to SGLT2 inhibitors or placebo. Data were extracted independently by two reviewers. BMI was classified according to the WHO classification into under/normal weight (BMI: < 25 kg/m2), overweight (BMI: 25-29.9 kg/m2), obesity class I (BMI: 30-34.9 kg/m2), and obesity classes II/III (BMI: ≥ 35 kg/m2). All analyses were performed using RevMan 5.4. Among 1461 studies identified in the literature search, 3 were eligible and included in the meta-analysis. Among 14,737 patients (32.2% were women), 7,367 were randomized to an SGLT2 inhibitor (dapagliflozin or empagliflozin) and 7,370 to placebo. There were significantly fewer hospitalizations for HF (OR: 0.70, 95%CI: 0.64-0.76), cardiovascular deaths (OR:0.86, 95%CI: 0.77-0.97) and all-cause deaths (OR:0.90, 95%CI: 0.82-0.98) in the SGLT2 inhibitors group compared to the placebo group, without any interaction with BMI group (test for subgroup differences: x2 = 1.79, p = 0.62; x2 = 0.27, p = 0.97; x2 = 0.39, p = 0.94, respectively). There is no interaction between the efficacy of SGLT2 inhibitors and BMI in patients with HF with either preserved or reduced ejection fraction. SGLT2 inhibitors are associated with improved outcomes regardless of the BMI.Trial registration: PROSPERO ID: CRD42022383643.

Efficacy and safety of direct oral anticoagulants vs vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation and end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in individuals with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on chronic hemodialysis is increasing. The optimal anticoagulant choice in this population is unclear since these patients were excluded from the pivotal randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in the general AF population. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of DOACs vs. VKAs in patients with AF and ESRD on chronic hemodialysis through a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available evidence. PATIENTS/METHODS: We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE and Scopus for RCTs or observational studies of patients with AF and ESRD on chronic hemodialysis who were treated with DOACs or VKAs. The outcomes of interest included ischemic stroke, the composite of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, major bleeding, gastrointestinal bleeding, minor bleeding events and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among 397 studies identified from the literature search, six studies (three RCTs and three observational studies) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with VKA-treated patients, those treated with DOACs had similar risk of ischemic stroke (RR:0.76, 95% CI:0.41-1.41), ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (RR:0.65, 95% CI:0.38-1.10), major bleeding (RR:0.79, 95% CI:0.49-1.28) and all-cause death (RR:0.79, 95% CI:0.56-1.12). The risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was lower in DOAC- vs VKA-treated patients in three eligible observational studies (RR:0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.99, I2 = 79%) but this was not confirmed in two eligible RCTs (RR:0.69, 95% CI: 0.33-1.43, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Among AF patients with ESRD on chronic hemodialysis, the risk of ischemic stroke, ischemic stroke or systemic embolism, minor bleeding, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality is similar in patients treated with DOACs compared to VKAs. Given that the meta-analysis of RCTs on gastrointestinal bleeding did not confirm the results of the meta-analysis of the observational studies, it cannot be concluded that gastrointestinal bleeding is lower among DOAC-treated patients. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023391966.

Meta-analysis of survival after extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) versus pleurectomy/decortication (P/D) for malignant pleural mesothelioma in the context of macroscopic complete resection (MCR).

OBJECTIVE: We reviewed the available literature on patients with MPM undergoing either extrapleural pneumonectomy (EPP) or pleurectomy/decortication (P/D). METHODS: Original research studies that evaluated long-term outcomes of P/D versus EPP were identified, from January 1980 to February 2022. The 30-days and 90-day mortality, along with the 1-, 2-, 3-, 5-year survival, the median overall survival, the macroscopic complete resection (MCR) rate, and the complications were calculated according to both a fixed and a random effect model. The Q and I2 statistic were used to test for heterogeneity among the studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed including only studies that incorporated the MCR concept. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were included, incorporating a total of 4,852 patients treated with EPP and P/D. The 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the EPP group (OR: 2.79 [95% CI 1.30, 6.01]; p = 0.009). The median overall survival was higher in the P/D group (WMD:-4.55 [-6.05, -3.04]; p < 0.001). No differences were found regarding the 90-day mortality, MCR rate, and the 1-, 2-,3-, 5-year survival between the EPP and P/D groups. These findings were validated by the sensitivity analysis. The incidence of atrial fibrillation, hemorrhage, pulmonary embolism, air leak, and reoperation was significantly increased in the EPP group (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis indicates that P/D is associated with enhanced outcomes regarding 30-day mortality, median overall survival, and complications. The P/D approach should be preferred when technically feasible. However, the procedure of choice should be decided based on the goal of MCR in the safest approach for the patient.

Meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus video-assisted McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

We aim to review the available literature on patients with esophageal cancer treated with robot-assisted (RAME) or video-assisted McKeown's esophagectomy (VAME), to compare the efficacy and safety of the two approaches. Original research studies that evaluated perioperative and oncologic outcomes of RAME versus VAME were identified, from January 1990 to July 2022. The 90-day mortality, the R0 resection rate, the dissected lymph nodes, the perioperative parameters, and the complications were calculated according to a fixed and a random effect model. The Q statistics and I2 statistic were used to test for heterogeneity among the studies. Seven studies were included, incorporating a total of 1617 patients treated with RAME or VAME. The 90-day mortality was similar between the two groups. No difference was found regarding the R0 resection rate and the number of dissected lymph nodes. In addition, the perioperative parameters, along with the total complications were similar between RAME and VAME. Nonetheless, the incidence of postoperative pneumonia was higher in the VAME group (OR:0.67 [95% CI: 0.49, 0.93]; p = 0.02). Finally, our outcomes were further validated by sensitivity analysis including only studies performing propensity score-matched analysis. Our meta-analysis showed that RAME was equivalent to VAME in terms of safety, feasibility, and oncologic adequacy. These results should be interpreted with caution due to the small number of included studies. New Randomized Controlled trials, that are currently active, will provide further evidence with greater clarity to assess the effectiveness and safety of RAME for esophageal cancer.

Differences in surgical oncology practice in Greece and Cyprus between the first and second COVID-19 pandemic waves: Lessons from a paradigm shift.

The SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to the implementation of certain restrictions and rearrangements regarding the surgical oncology operations, thus affecting the surgical lists, the availability of surgical time, along with the consultations of oncologic patients. The purpose of the present study was to identify the differences in surgical oncology practices in Greece and Cyprus between the first and second pandemic waves. We designed a questionnaire for surgeons treating surgical oncology patients. A total of 104 surgeons participated in the present study by answering our questionnaire. According to our outcomes, there was a significant shift between the two waves in patients' willingness to undergo surgery and to present to consultations. Nonetheless, the availability of surgical services remained limited. The consequent mismatch in patients' needs and the availability of healthcare services, we demonstrate herein, is alarming and should be taken into consideration by the policymakers.