Correction: The Influence of Biological Sex on Presentation and Outcomes of Acute Myocarditis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57325.].

The Influence of Biological Sex on Presentation and Outcomes of Acute Myocarditis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

There is growing evidence of sex-related differences in the epidemiology and pathophysiology of cardiovascular diseases. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis that aimed to highlight the sex-specific differences in the clinical features and outcomes of acute myocarditis. Electronic searches were performed on Scopus, Embase, and PubMed from inception up to June 2023 to identify studies comparing the clinical features and outcomes of acute myocarditis in males and females. Both qualitative and quantitative summaries were conducted. In this systematic review and meta-analysis of 11 studies involving 34,791 patients presenting with acute myocarditis. Male patients, who comprised 69.8% of the entire pooled population, presented at a markedly younger age (mean difference: -8.99 years; 95% CI: -13.60, -4.38; p=0.0001). They also had significantly lower rates of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease compared to female patients (p<0.01). Male patients were more likely to present with ST elevation (RR: 2.57 [1.38, 4.79]; p=0.003) and higher C-reactive protein levels (RR: 3.04 [2.75, 3.34]; p<0.00001) compared to female patients. This review underscores the crucial sex-specific evaluation in acute myocarditis, necessitating tailored approaches in assessment and diagnostic evaluation, and emphasizing the need for additional research in this domain.

Novel Biomarkers and the Multiple-Marker Approach in Early Detection, Prognosis, and Risk Stratification of Cardiac Diseases: A Narrative Review.

Cardiac diseases are a primary cause of mortality worldwide, underscoring the importance of early identification and risk stratification to enhance patient outcomes. Biomarkers have become important tools for the risk assessment of cardiovascular disease and monitoring disease progression. This narrative review focuses on the multiple-marker approach, which involves simultaneously evaluating several biomarkers for the early detection and risk stratification of heart diseases. The review covers the clinical applications of novel biomarkers, such as high-sensitivity troponin, galectin-3, source of tumorigenicity 2, B-type natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, growth differentiation factor 15, myeloperoxidase, fatty acid-binding protein, C-reactive protein, lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2, microRNAs, circulating endothelial cells, and ischemia-modified albumin. These biomarkers have demonstrated potential in identifying people who are at high risk for developing heart disease and in providing prognostic data. Given the complexity of cardiac illnesses, the multiple-marker approach to risk assessment is extremely beneficial. Implementing the multiple-marker strategy can improve risk stratification, diagnostic accuracy, and patient care in heart disease patients.

Clinical Outcomes With Furosemide Versus Torsemide in Patients With Heart Failure: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Despite potential advantages of torsemide over furosemide, <10% of the patients with heart failure (HF) are on torsemide in clinical practice. Prior studies comparing furosemide to torsemide in patients with HF have shown conflicting findings, regarding hospitalizations and mortality. We aimed to pool all the studies conducted to date and provide the most updated and comprehensive evidence, regarding the effect of furosemide vs torsemide in reducing mortality and hospitalizations in patients with HF. We conducted a comprehensive literature search of the PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Library and Scopus from inception till June 2023, for randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing furosemide to torsemide in adult patients (>18 years) with acute or chronic HF. Data about all-cause mortality, HF-related hospitalizations and all-cause hospitalizations was extracted, pooled, and analyzed. Forest plots were created based on the random effects model. A total of 17 studies (n = 11,996 patients) were included in our analysis with a median follow-up time of 8 months. Our pooled analysis demonstrated no difference in all-cause mortality between furosemide and torsemide groups in HF patients (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.75-1.29, P = 0.89). However, torsemide was associated with a significantly lesser incidence of HF-related hospitalizations (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.99, P = 0.04), and all-cause hospitalizations (OR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.73-0.98, P = 0.03), as compared to furosemide. Torsemide significantly reduces HF-related and all-cause hospitalizations as compared to furosemide, with no difference in mortality. We recommend transitioning from furosemide to torsemide in HF patients who are not attaining symptomatic control.

Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Combined With Mitral Valve Repair Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Alone in Patients With Moderate Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation: A Meta-Analysis.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare clinical outcomes between those who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) alone and CABG with mitral valve repair (MVR) in patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation. The present study was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two authors performed a comprehensive search of international databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, for relevant studies published from inception to March 1, 2023. The search was performed again before the submission of the manuscript on March 20, 2023. Primary outcomes assessed in the present meta-analysis included early mortality and long-term mortality. Secondary outcomes assessed in the present meta-analysis included change in New York Heart Association (NYHA) score from baseline, change in ejection fraction (EF) from baseline (%), and major cardiovascular events (MACE). A total of 13 studies were included in the present meta-analysis. Out of 13 included studies, four were randomized control trials (RCTs) and nine were retrospective cohort studies. The pooled analysis showed that early mortality was significantly lower in patients in the CABG group compared to the CABG+MVR group (risk ratio [RR]: 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31, 0.70). Long-term mortality was also lower in patients who underwent CABG compared to patients in the CABG+MVR group. However, the difference was statistically insignificant (RR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.77, 1.02). No significant differences were reported in the EF score between patients who underwent CABG and patients who underwent CABG plus MVR (mean difference [MD]: 0.40, 95% CI: -1.90, 2.69). NYHA score was significantly lower in patients in the CABG+repair group compared to the CABG alone group (MD: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.72). In conclusion, our meta-analysis suggests that concomitant MVR during CABG may not improve clinical outcomes in patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation. Further clinical trials are needed to investigate this intervention in more detail.

Another Addition To The Covid-19 Associated Complications-Mucormycosis.

New manifestations of coronavirus disease are appearing over time. The association between coronavirus and mucormycosis must be given serious consideration. Without early diagnosis and treatment, there may be rapid progression of the disease, with high mortality from complications. We present a case of a 40-year-old male who presented with rhino-orbital-cerebral mucormycosis and COVID-19 infection. With this case, we highlight the importance of considering mycotic coinfection in COVID-19 patients with diabetes and the significance of its early diagnosis and treatment.