Circulating magnesium as a potential risk stratification tool for sudden cardiac death: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is one of the main causes of cardiovascular mortality and accounts for 15-20% of deaths worldwide. The current stratification strategy using depressed left ventricular ejection fraction is insufficient to stratify the risk of SCD, especially in the general population. In recent years, there has been increasing evidence showing the antiarrhythmic properties of magnesium. In this systematic review, the authors aim to determine circulating magnesium as a potential risk stratification tool for SCD. METHODS: This systematic review was based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and was conducted in July 2021 with sources from Google Scholar, PubMed, Science Direct, EBSCO Medline, and ProQuest. RESULTS: A total of six studies were included in this review. Three studies conducted in the general population consistently showed lower risk of SCD in populations with high circulating magnesium. There was no association between circulating magnesium level and risk of SCD in intensive cardiac care unit (ICCU) patients, whilst the results were conflicting in congestive heart failure (CHF) patients. CONCLUSION: High circulating magnesium might have the potential to be utilized as a risk stratification tool for SCD, especially in the general population. However, further study is needed to support this evidence.

Outcome in early vs late intubation among COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Timing of endotracheal intubation in COVID-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) remains controversial regarding its risk and benefit in patient outcomes. Our study aims to elucidate early versus late intubation outcomes among COVID-19 patients with ARDS. A protocol of this study is registered at the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) (CRD42021230272). We report our systematic review based on PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. We searched the Cochrane Library, EBSCOhost, EMBASE, Grey Literature Report, OpenGrey, ProQuest, PubMed, and ScienceDirect from inception until 4 December 2021. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for their relevance. The risk of bias in each study was evaluated using the risk of bias in non-randomised studies-of interventions (ROBINS-I) guideline. Trial sequential analysis is done to elucidate firm evidence. We retrieved 20 observational studies that assessed an intervention (early vs. late intubation). Meta-analysis for in-hospital mortality reduction showed 119 fewer deaths per 1000 patients in early intubation. Early intubation reduces 2.81 days of ICU length of stay (LOS) and 2.12 days of ventilation duration. Benefits for mortality and ICU LOS reduction were based on studies with low to moderate risk of bias while ventilation duration was based on low disease burden setting. According to the contextualized approach, the benefit of mortality reduction showed a trivial effect, while ICU LOS and ventilation duration showed a small effect. GRADE certainty of evidence for mortality reduction in early intubation is moderate. The certainty of evidence for ICU length of stay, ventilation duration, ventilator-free days, and continuous renal replacement therapy are very low. This updated systematic review provided new evidence that early intubation might provide benefits in treating COVID-19 patients with ARDS. The benefits of early intubation appear to have an important but small effect based on contextualized approach for ICU LOS and ventilation duration. In reducing in-hospital mortality, the early intubation effect was present but only trivial based on contextualized approach. TSA showed that more studies are needed to elucidate firmer evidence.

Evaluation of subclinical ventricular systolic dysfunction assessed using global longitudinal strain in liver cirrhosis: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.

Global longitudinal strain (GLS) can identify subclinical myocardial dysfunction in patients with cirrhosis. This systematic review aims to provide evidence of a possible difference in GLS values between patients with cirrhosis and patients without cirrhosis. Studies from inception to August 11, 2021, were screened and included based on the inclusion criteria. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used to assess the quality of nonrandomized studies. Meta-analyses were conducted with subsequent sensitivity and subgroup analyses according to age, sex, cirrhosis etiology, and severity. Publication bias was evaluated using Begg's funnel plot, Egger's test, and rank correlation test with subsequent trim-and-fill analysis. The systematic database search yielded 20 eligible studies. Random effect showed a significant reduction of left ventricular (LV) GLS (MD:-1.43;95%; 95%CI,-2.79 to -0.07; p = 0.04; I2 = 95% p<0.00001) and right ventricular (RV) GLS (MD:-1.95; 95%CI,-3.86 to -0.05, p = 0.04; I2 = 90%, p<0.00001) in the group with cirrhosis. A sensitivity test on subgroup analysis based on the study design showed a -1.78% lower LV-GLS in the group with cirrhosis (I2 = 70%, p = 0.0003). Meta-regression analysis showed that the severity of cirrhosis was significantly related to GLS reduction. This research received no specific grants from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020201630). We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement guidelines.

Current evidence for the risk of PR prolongation, QRS widening, QT prolongation, from lopinavir, ritonavir, atazanavir, and saquinavir: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Lopinavir, ritonavir, atazanavir, and saquinavir had been reportedly used or suggested for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment. They may cause electrocardiography changes. We aim to evaluate risk of PR prolongation, QRS widening, and QT prolongation from lopinavir, ritonavir, atazanavir, and saquinavir. METHODS: In accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, our search was conducted in PubMed Central, PubMed, EBSCOhost, and ProQuest from inception to June 25, 2020. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for relevance. Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 and Downs and Black criteria was used to evaluate quality of studies. RESULTS: We retrieved 9 articles. Most randomized controlled trials have low risk of biases while all quasi-experimental studies have a positive rating. Four studies reporting PR prolongation however only 2 studies with PR interval >200 ms. One of which, reported its association after treatment with ritonavir-boosted saquinavir treatment while another, during treatment with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir. No study reported QRS widening >120 ms with treatment. Four studies reporting QT prolongation, with only one study reaching QT interval >450 ms after ritonavir-boosted saquinavir treatment on healthy patients. There is only one study on COVID-19 patients reporting QT prolongation in 1 out of 95 patients after ritonavir-boosted lopinavir treatment. CONCLUSION: Limited evidence suggests that lopinavir, ritonavir, atazanavir, and saquinavir could cause PR prolongation, QRS widening, and QT prolongation. Further trials with closer monitoring and assessment of electrocardiography are needed to ascertain usage safety of antivirals in COVID-19 era.