RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) remains unsettled. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of catheter ablation (CA) and medical therapy compared to medical therapy alone in patients with AF and HFrEF. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CA with guideline-directed medical therapy for AF in patients with HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤ 40%). We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for eligible trials. A random effects model was used to calculate the risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Six RCTs comprising 1055 patients were included, of whom 530 (50.2%) were randomized to CA. Compared with medical therapy, CA was associated with a significant reduction in heart failure (HF) hospitalization (RR 0.57; 95% CI 0.45-0.72; P < .01), cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.46; 95% CI 0.31-0.70; P < .01), all-cause mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36-0.78; P < .01), and AF burden (MD -29.8%; 95% CI -43.73% to -15.90%; P < .01). Also, there was a significant improvement in LVEF (MD 3.8%; 95% CI 1.6%-6.0%; P < .01) and quality of life (Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire; MD -4.92 points; 95% CI -8.61 to -1.22 points; P < .01) in the ablation group. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of RCTs of patients with AF and HFrEF, CA was associated with a reduction in HF hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality as well as a significant improvement in LVEF and quality of life.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To provide an update on the effect of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SGLT2 inhibitors versus placebo or other therapies in patients with T2D and reporting stroke endpoint. We computed the risk ratios (RRs) to binary endpoints, with 95â¯% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: A total of 71 RCTs and 105,914 patients were included, of whom 62,488 (59â¯%) were randomized to the SGLT2 inhibitors group. The follow-up ranged from 12 weeks to 4.2 years. There were no significant differences between groups in all types of stroke (RR 0.96; 95â¯% CI 0.89-1.04), ischemic stroke (RR 0.89; 95â¯% CI 0.76-1.04), and transient ischemic attack (RR 0.96; 95â¯% CI 0.79-1.16). Patients on SGLT2 inhibitors experienced lower rates of hemorrhagic stroke (RR 0.62; 95â¯% CI 0.39-0.98). In the subgroup analysis of the type of drug, sotagliflozin significantly reduced all types of stroke (RR 0.74; 95â¯% CI 0.56-0.97). CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis of 71 RCTs comprising 105,914 patients with T2D, SGLT2 inhibitors were not associated with a reduced risk of stroke and transient ischemic attack compared to placebo or other therapies; however, there was a trend toward reduced risk of hemorrhagic stroke. Among all SGLT2 inhibitors, sotagliflozin significantly reduced the risk of stroke.
RESUMO
Background: Patients with heart failure have high rehospitalisation rates and poor cardiovascular outcomes. Home-based monitoring (HBM) has emerged with promising results in different settings. However, its long-term effects on patients recently admitted for acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) remain uncertain. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing HBM with usual care (UC) that were published between database inception and June 24, 2023. We included studies with patients admitted for ADHF in the previous 6 months and with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. We excluded studies with patients hospitalised for reasons other than ADHF and studies with disproportional education interventions between arms. Statistical analyses were performed using R software version 4.3.2. We pooled risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for categorical and continuous outcomes, respectively. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in RCTs (RoB 2) was used to assess study quality. Publication bias was assessed via funnel plots and Egger's test, and heterogeneity was assessed through I2 statistics and sensitivity analysis. The protocol for this systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO, CRD42023465359). Findings: We included 16 RCTs comprising 4629 patients, of whom 2393 (51.7%) were randomised to HBM and 3150 (68%) were men. Follow-up ranged from six to fifteen months. As compared with UC, HBM significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.61, 0.91; p = 0.005), all-cause hospitalisations (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.70, 0.97; p = 0.018), cardiovascular (CV) mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36, 0.79; p = 0.002), hospitalisations for heart failure (RR 0.75; 95% CI 0.62, 0.91; p = 0.004), and CV hospitalisations (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.55, 0.95; p = 0.018). There were no significant differences in length of hospital stay (MD 0.97 days; 95% CI -0.90, 2.84; p = 0.308). Interpretation: In patients recently admitted with ADHF, HBM significantly reduces long-term all-cause mortality and hospitalisations, CV mortality and hospitalisations, and hospitalisations for heart failure, as compared with UC. This supports the implementation of HBM as a standard practice to optimise patient outcomes following admissions for ADHF. However, future studies are warranted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of implementing HBM in the real-world setting. Funding: None.
