Search

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization with sacubitril/valsartan (S/V) compared to standard HF therapy in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) using real-world data. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. We searched PubMed and Google Scholar for the observational studies published in English exploring the clinical outcomes of S/V use in HFrEF till March 14, 2022. Two independent reviewers assessed the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. A random-effect model was used to combine data. The outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization associated with S/V use in comparison to standard HF therapy. A total of 9 observational studies comparing S/V to Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I)/Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) in HFrEF were included in the systematic review, with more than 32000 patients included in the final analysis. Overall, S/V use was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (Risk Ratio [RR] = 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.93, I

Background Combined oral contraceptive pills are associated with an established risk for venous thrombosis; however, their risk for arterial thrombosis remains uncertain, especially with the development of low dose new generations of combined oral contraceptive. Arterial thrombosis is less likely to occur with the use of oral contraceptive pills in the absence of cardiovascular risk factors. Case presentation We report a 35-year old female with no cardiovascular risk factors who presented with thrombotic anterior wall myocardial infarction 6 months after using a third generation low dose combined oral contraceptive pills (Marvelon; ethinylestradiol 30 mcg and desogestrel 150 mcg). Conclusion Third generation low dose combined oral contraceptives may lead to myocardial infarction in young women, even in the absence of other cardiovascular risk factors.

Tachycardia in cardiogenic shock (CS) might reduce the cardiac output (CO) by decreasing the ventricular filling time. Nevertheless, heart rate (HR) control with agents that possess negative inotropy might decrease the CO. Therefore, controlling the tachycardia in the setting of CS remains controversial. We herein describe four cases of patients presenting with myocardial infarction complicated with CS that required rescue venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) initiation. Tachycardia was present with HR ∼130-140 beats per minute after VA-ECMO initiation, and hence esmolol was infused continuously at a starting dose of 10-20 mcg/kg/min and titrated according to HR. With the use of esmolol to control the HR in the setting of CS supported with VA-ECMO, lactate cleared, and echocardiographic parameters improved, allowing the four cases to be successfully decannulated from ECMO. Our report indicates that short-acting beta-blocker could be safely used in the complex scenario of severe tachycardia while supported with VA-ECMO.

It is not well studied whether a secondary look by angiography (Re-Ang) after fixing the culprit lesion would be beneficial or not in cardiogenic shock (CS) supported by veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (VA-ECMO). This study was a retrospective observational one that looked at 5-year data from a single tertiary center. Patients were grouped according to the need of Re-Ang during the VA-ECMO course into 2 groups. The indications to perform Re-Ang were loss of pulse pressure, drop in ejection fraction or velocity time integral, resistant arrhythmia, or new electrocardiographic changes suggestive of ischemia. Out of 150 patients with cardiogenic shock screened, 30 patients were enrolled in our study. Re-Ang was done in 10 patients only. In 80% of them, positive findings were found in terms of new significant stenosis (3 patients), stent restenosis (1 patient), stent thrombosis (3 patients), and patent stent(s) with intervention to the remaining lesions in other vessels (1 patient). Neither successful weaning from VA-ECMO nor mortality was statistically different between both groups. Our set indications for Re-Ang were effective in finding a possible new culprit for a conceivable coronary intervention.

Background. Eptifibatide is an inhibitor of the platelet glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor that is commonly used in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Case. We describe a case of a 62-year-old female patient admitted with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated by primary coronary intervention (primary PCI) with a drug-eluting stent placement. She developed profound thrombocytopenia within 8 hours of first administration of eptifibatide and subsequent acute stent thrombosis next day. Other causes of thrombocytopenia were excluded and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) showed good stent expansion and opposition to the coronary wall. Platelet count gradually returned to normal after discontinuation of eptifibatide. Conclusion. Although Eptifibatide has been associated with the development of thrombocytopenia, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first case report in the medical literature that associates acute stent thrombosis and eptifibatide-induced thrombocytopenia.

Background Loop diuretics are recommended by clinical practice guidelines to treat volume overload in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). The effectiveness of switching furosemide to torsemide versus optimizing the furosemide dose following ADHF has not yet been evaluated. Methods This retrospective observational study aimed to assess the impact of switching furosemide to torsemide versus optimizing the furosemide dose after ADHF on HF-related hospitalization within 1 month and 6 months of discharge. The study included patients previously on furosemide admitted with ADHF to the Heart Hospital in Qatar between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017. The study included 2 groups: (1) patients discharged on torsemide; and (2) patients discharged on an optimized furosemide dose. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to determine the association between diuretic use and hospitalization. Results Of the 232 patients included, 45 received torsemide and 187 received an optimized furosemide dose upon discharge. The majority of patients included were males (54%) with a mean age of 67 ± 12 years, and presented with HF with reduced ejection fraction (57%) and had a history of coronary artery disease (68%). The 1-month and 6-month HF-related hospitalization did not differ between the torsemide and optimized furosemide groups (aHR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.23–2.3, p = 0.57; aHR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.45–1.8, p = 0.87), respectively. Conclusion Switching furosemide to torsemide after ADHF was not associated with reduced HF-related hospitalization compared to receiving an optimized furosemide dose. Larger prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm the findings of this study.