Search

The number of patients living with chronic kidney diseases is increasing, and so are the patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing renal replacement therapy (RRT). While there is a common understanding that these patients face higher risks of fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) have been an essential pillar in managing heart failure, their use in this subset of patients have been overshadowed due to concerns of hyperkalemia. ESRD patients under RRT have often been excluded from landmark trials. This meta-analysis was conducted based on the PRISMA guideline after registering the protocol with PROSPERO (CRD42024499835). A database search included articles until April 2024 and relevant data extracted from the included studies. Analysis was done using RevMan web (version 5.4). A total of 15 studies among 1086 studies were included in the final analysis. Our meta-analysis revealed MRA significantly reduced all-cause mortality (OR 0.35, CI 0.23- 0.54) and cardio-vascular mortality (OR 0.37, 0.21-0.65). With some possible increase in the risk of hyperkalemia (OR 1.56, CI 1.01-2.42), with no discernible difference in the occurrence of stroke (OR 0.57, CI 0.25-1.28) or MI (OR 0.63, CI 0.08-4.72). The utilization of MRA in patients with ESRD under dialysis is linked to improved mortality outcomes, albeit with slight concerns for hyperkalemia. While current evidence leans towards MRA usage, prospective randomized controlled trials involving a broader patient cohort are essential to establish robust guidance for MRA application in this subset of patients., Competing Interests: Declaration of Interest statement: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Untreated multivessel disease (MVD) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been linked to a higher risk of recurrent ischemia and death within one year . Current guidelines recommend percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for significant non-infarct artery (-ies) (non-IRA) stenosis in hemodynamically stable AMI patients with MVD, either during or after successful primary PCI, within 45-days. However, deciding the timing of revascularization for non-IRA in cases of MVD is uncertain., Methods: This meta-analysis was performed based on PRISMA guidelines after registering in PROSPERO (CRD42023472652). Databases were searched for relevant articles published before 10 November 2023. Pertinent data from the included studies were extracted and analyzed using RevMan v5.4., Results: Out of 640 studies evaluated, there were 13 RCTs with 5144 patients with AMI with MVD. The immediate non-IRA PCI is associated with a significantly lower occurrence of unplanned ischemia-driven PCI (OR 0.60; confidence interval [CI] 0.44-0.83) and target-vessel revascularization (OR 0.72; CI 0.53-0.97) . Although there is a favorable trend for major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), nonfatal AMI, cerebrovascular events, and major bleeding in the immediate non-culprit artery (-ies) PCI, those were statistically non-significant. Similarly, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stent thrombosis, and acute renal insufficiency did not show significant differences between two groups., Conclusion: Among hemodynamically stable patients with multivessel AMI, the immediate PCI strategy was superior to the multistage PCI strategy for the unplanned ischemia-driven PCI and target-vessel revascularization while odds are favorable in terms of MACCE, nonfatal AMI, cerebrovascular events, and major bleeding at longest follow-up., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Sepsis and septic shock are life-threatening conditions that are associated with high mortality and considerable health care costs. The association between prior angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) use and outcomes after sepsis is elusive. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of the prior use of ACEi or ARBs and outcomes after sepsis and septic shock. A relevant literature review was performed in 4 databases from inception until July 2022. Independent reviewers first screened the title, abstract, and full text, and then, data extraction and analysis were performed. One post hoc analysis of a trial and 6 retrospective cohort studies were included in this review. There were 22% lower odds of in-hospital/30-day mortality among patients who have used ACEi/ARBs in the past [23.83% vs. 37.20%; odds ratio (OR), 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.64-0.96], and reduced 90-day mortality (OR, 0.80, 95% CI, 0.69-0.92). ACEi/ARBs users were found to have 31% lesser odds of developing acute kidney injury as compared with nonusers (OR, 0.69, 95% CI, 0.63-0.76). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (MD 1.26, 95% CI, ‒7.89 to 10.42), need for renal replacement therapy (OR, 0.71, 95% CI, 0.13-3.92), mechanical ventilation (OR, 1.10, 95% CI, 0.88-1.37) or use of vasopressors (OR, 1.21, 95% CI, 0.91-1.61). Based on this analysis, prior use of ACEi/ARBs lowers the risk of mortality and adverse renal events in patients with sepsis and septic shock., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The use of bivalirudin-based anticoagulation over heparin-based anticoagulation for coronary percutaneous intervention has been debated for a long time. Multiple trials have shown promising benefits of bivalirudin over heparin therapy with the most recent addition being the BRIGHT-4 trial. We performed a meta-analysis to assess evidence from these trials, focusing on the coronary intervention of the STEMI population., Methods: This meta-analysis was performed based on PRISMA guidelines after registering in PROSPERO (CRD42023394701). Databases were searched for relevant articles published before January 2023. Pertinent data from the included studies were extracted and analyzed using RevMan v5.4., Results: Out of 2375 studies evaluated, 13 randomized control trials with 24 360 acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients were included for analysis. The bivalirudin-based anticoagulation reduced the net clinical events (OR 0.75, CI 0.61-0.92), major adverse cardiac or cerebral events (OR 0.85, CI 0.74-0.98), any bleeding (OR 0.61, CI 0.45-0.83), major bleeding (OR 0.54, CI 0.39-0.75), all-cause mortality (OR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.92) and cardiac mortality (OR 0.78, CI 0.65-0.93) significantly without increasing the risk of any stent thrombosis (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.52-1.61), definite stent thrombosis (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.62-2.22) and acute stent thrombosis (OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.69-6.09) significantly at 30 days., Conclusion: Based on this meta-analysis, bivalirudin plus a post-PCI high-dose infusion-based anticoagulation during STEMI PCI has significant benefits over heparin therapy for cardiovascular outcomes without a significant increase in the risk of thrombotic outcomes., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Several randomized controlled trials have studied the role of colchicine, a potent anti-inflammatory drug, to prevent adverse cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). In this meta-analysis, we aimed to determine the role of colchicine in patients with CAD in clinical outcomes and mortality. We searched PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, and Embase for randomized controlled trials/experimental studies evaluating the role of colchicine in patients with CAD. After assessing the eligibility for inclusion, risk-of-bias assessment, and data extraction from the included studies, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Of 17 studies included for the qualitative analysis, 11 studies reported that inflammatory markers such as C-reactive protein and cytokines were reduced in the colchicine group, suggesting an anti-inflammatory role of colchicine in CAD. Quantitative analysis with pooling of data from 9 studies using a fixed-effect model showed 28% lower odds of acute myocardial infarction [odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.86; n = 11,712], 52% lower occurrence of stroke (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.30-0.76), and 37% reduction in odds of coronary revascularization procedure in the colchicine group (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52-0.76; n= 11,258). However, the odds of gastrointestinal adverse events were 50% higher in the colchicine group (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.01-2.23; n = 12,214). In conclusion, colchicine is associated with a lower risk of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, and coronary revascularization. However, there is some increased risk of gastrointestinal adverse events with the use of colchicine., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Abstract: Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors showed benefit in patients with heart failure. In this updated meta-analysis, we evaluate the therapeutic efficacy and safety of SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients with heart failure. Different electronic databases were searched to find relevant articles. RevMan 5.4 was used for pooling data using a random/fixed-effects model, complemented by several sensitivity and subgroup analyses. A total of 13 randomized clinical trials including 14,618 patients with heart failure were included in analysis among 6797 studies screened. The overall mortality rate was 12.45% in the SGLT-2 group and 14.67% in the placebo group with 18% lower odds of overall mortality [odds ratio (OR), 0.82; confidence interval (CI), 0.75-0.91] in the SGLT-2 group. Odds of cardiovascular mortality was 18% lower (OR, 0.82; CI, 0.74-0.92) in the SGLT-2 group. The odds of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) was 38% lower during the study period (OR, 0.62; CI, 0.56-0.68) in the SGLT-2 group. In addition, a benefit was seen for composite outcome HHF or mortality and considering subgrouping based on diabetes status, gender, and age groups. Although genital infection was significantly higher in the SGLT-2 group, the occurrence of severe adverse events, hypoglycemia, urinary tract infection, bone fracture, volume depletion, and other renal events did not differ between the 2 groups. Thus, SGLT-2 inhibitors improved cardiovascular outcomes among patients with heart failure with no significant difference in adverse events. Clinical benefit was comparable in diabetic and nondiabetic individuals, males and females, people in younger and older age groups with underlying heart failure, and HF with reduced ejection fraction., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)