Back to Authors

Thakkar, Samarthkumar

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9562-3443

Mayo Clinic

Houston Methodist

Citations 14

Echocardiography, lung ultrasound, and cardiac magnetic resonance findings in COVID‐19: A systematic review
Barssoum, Kirolos , Victor, Varun , Kumar, Ashish , Mubasher, Mahmood , Hassib, Mohab, Magdi, Mohamed, Renjithlal, Sarathlal, Abdelazeem, Mohamed , Shariff, Mariam , Idemudia, Osarenren , Ibrahim, Mounir , Mohamed, Amr , Patel, Harsh , Diab, Mohamed , Szeles, Andras , Ibrahim, Fadi , Jha, Roshan Kumar , Akula, Navya, Nanda, Navin C. , Kumar, Ashish , Kumar, Ashish , Shariff, Mariam , Chowdhury, Medhat , Salem, Ahmad, Thakkar, Samarthkumar , Kalra, Ankur

Echocardiography | July 8, 2021 | Volume: No volume available | Issue: No issue available | Pages: No page available

10.1111/echo.15152 Get It

A Systematic Review of the Cardiovascular Manifestations and Outcomes in the Setting of Coronavirus-19 Disease
Thakkar, Samarthkumar , Arora, Shilpkumar , Jaswaney, Rahul , Faisaluddin, Mohammed, Shariff, Mariam , Barssoum, Kirolos , Patel, Harsh , Arora, Nirav , Jani, Chinmay , Patel, Kripa , Savani, Sejal, Mulpuru, Siva K. , Deshmukh, Abhishek , Kumar, Ashish , Mulpuru, Siva, Shariff, Mariam , Kumar, Ashish , Din, Mohammad Ammad Ud , DeSimone, Christopher V.

Clinical Medicine Insights: Cardiology | December 1, 2020 | Volume: 14 | Issue: No issue available | Pages: 117954682097719

10.1177/1179546820977196 Get It

The impact of coronavirus disease, 2019 (COVID-19), has been profound. Though COVID-19 primarily affects the respiratory system, it has also been associated with a wide range of cardiovascular (CV) manifestations portending extremely poor prognosis. The principal hypothesis for CV involvement is through direct myocardial infection and systemic inflammation. We conducted a systematic review of the current literature to provide a foundation for understanding the CV manifestations and outcomes of COVID-19. PubMed and EMBASE databases were electronically searched from the inception of the databases through 27 April 2020. A second literature review was conducted to include major trials and guidelines that were published after the initial search but before submission. The inclusion criteria for studies to be eligible were case reports, case series, and observation studies reporting CV outcomes among patients with COVID-19 infection. This review of the current COVID-19 disease and CV outcomes literature revealed a myriad of CV manifestations with potential avenues for treatment and prevention. Future studies are required to understand on a more mechanistic level the effect of COVID-19 on the myocardium and thus provide avenues to improve mortality and morbidity.
Impact of catheter ablation for atrial flutter on mortality and hospital readmission rates in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction
Arora, Shilpkumar , Patel, Harsh , Gonzalez, J, Deshmukh, A, D'Hoit, B, Jani, Chinmay , Thakkar, Samarthkumar , Deshmukh, A D, Patel, R

European Heart Journal | November 26, 2020 | Volume: 41 | Issue: Supplement_2 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0441 Get It

Abstract Background The effectiveness of catheter ablation as a management modality amongst patients with coexisting atrial flutter (AFL) and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is scarcely studied. Methods Appropriate ICD 10 codes were applied to the 2016 and 2017 National Readmission Database (NRD) to isolate patients having coexistent AFL and HFrEF including who had undergone an ablation. All-cause mortality at the end of 1 year was used as a primary outcome. Readmission due to AFL, heart failure (HF) and other causes were secondary outcomes. The hazard ratios were generated using Cox regression analysis while the time to event analysis was demonstrated with the Kaplan Meier curves. Results Out of a total of 9966 patients with AFL and HFrEF, 1980 (24.79%) patients underwent catheter ablation. The primary outcome, all-cause mortality (2.8% vs. 4.6%, HR: 0.610, 95% CI: 0.460–0.808, p=0.001) at the end of 1 year was significantly lower. Significant difference was also noted amongst two groups when it came to secondary outcomes such as readmissions due to AFL (1.6% vs. 6.3%, HR: 0.247, 95% CI: 0.173–0.354, p<0.001), HF (8.2% vs. 11.4%, HR: 0.693, 95% CI: 0.587–0.819, p<0.001) and other causes (29.4% vs. 37.1%, HR: 0.735, 95% CI: 0.673–0.804, p<0.001) Conclusion Ablative intervention amongst AFL patients with concomitant HFrEF showed a significant reduction in all-cause mortality. It also leads to significant reductions in readmissions due to AFL, HF and other causes at the end of one year. Outcomes of AFL and HFrEF Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None
Impact of catheter ablation for atrial flutter on mortality and hospital readmission rates in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction
Patel, Harsh , Gonzalez, J. , Deshmukh, Awani, RAO, M , Thakkar, Samarthkumar , Jani, Chinmay , Arora, S, Patel, R, Kumar, Ashish , Rao, M

European Heart Journal | November 26, 2020 | Volume: 41 | Issue: Supplement_2 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.0440 Get It

Abstract Background The availability of real-world data regarding the impact of the catheter ablation in patients with concomitant atrial flutter (AFL) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is limited. Methods 2016 and 2017 National Readmission Database (NRD) was subjected to appropriate ICD-10 codes to identify and extract patients having coexistent atrial flutter and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction including who had undergone ablation. At 1 year, all-cause mortality was utilized as the primary outcome while readmissions due to AFL, heart failure (HF) and any other causes were designated as secondary outcomes. Kaplan Meier curves were used for a time to event analysis. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to generate hazard ratios. Results Out of a total 6099 patients with AFL and HFpEF, 906 (14.85%) underwent catheter ablation. At 1 year all cause mortality (3%, vs. 4.4%, HR: 0.661, 95% CI: 0.444–0.985, p=0.042) and readmissions due to AFL (2.3% vs. 5.3%, HR: 0.424, 95% CI: 0.272–0.661, p<0.001) were significantly less among ablation group. Readmission due to HF (9.3% vs. 9.7%, HR: 0.938, 95% CI: 0.745–1.182, p=0.587) and other causes (37% vs.40.3%, HR: 0.926, 95% CI: 0.825–1.040, p=0.193) did not show any significant difference in outcomes at the end of 1 year. Conclusion The utilization of catheter ablation amongst AFL patients with concomitant HFpEF showed a significant reduction in all-cause mortality and readmission due to AFL. However, it did not show any significant changes in readmissions due to HF or other causes at the end of one year. Outcomes of AFL and HFpEF Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None