Kalaiger, Abdul M.

Mediastinal radiation potentiates aortic stenosis and complicates its treatment. We compared the short and midterm-outcomes with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with prior mediastinal radiation. Electronic databases were searched from inception through December 2024. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs), and continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences (MDs) with respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Six observational studies were identified, including 2458 TAVR patients and 1873 SAVR patients. In the short-term, TAVR was associated with lower rate of mortality (RR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.34–0.88), atrial fibrillation (RR: 0.31; 95% CI: 0.15–0.65), acute kidney injury (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.59–0.95), bleeding (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.33–0.42), and shorter length of hospital stay (MD: −4.30; 95% CI: −5.45 to −3.15). One-year mortality was comparable between the 2 groups (RR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.50–2.13). This meta-analysis of observational studies of patients with prior mediastinal radiation demonstrated that TAVR was associated with better short-term outcomes compared to SAVR. While 1-year mortality appeared similar between the 2 interventions, this finding should be interpreted with caution. However, randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings.

Background: Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a major contributor to death among ischemic heart disease (IHD) patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluate the efficacy of catheter ablation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis by searching the electronic database up to April 2025. Seven studies, including 1192 patients, were identified. A random-effect model was used to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Trial sequential analysis was conducted to assess sample size adequacy. Results: Among Ischemic heart disease patients with ICDs, VT ablation was associated with a significant reduction in ICD shocks (RR = 0.50, 95% CI [0.34–0.74]), a trend toward reduced VT storm (RR = 0.64, 95% CI [0.40–1.04], p = 0.07), and lower rates of cardiovascular hospitalization (RR = 0.73, 95% CI [0.53–1.01], p = 0.06) compared to ICD alone. However, no significant differences were observed when compared to patients receiving ICD plus antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). Additionally, VT ablation showed no significant impact on mortality or VT/VF recurrence compared to either ICD alone or ICD with AADs. Trial Sequential Analysis provided conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence outcomes, while further data are required for other outcomes. Conclusion: Among ischemic heart disease patients with ICD, VT ablation reduces ICD shocks, VT storm, and cardiovascular hospitalizations compared to ICD-only, but offers no significant advantage over ICD combined with antiarrhythmic drugs. VT ablation does not impact mortality or the recurrence of VT/VF. Trial Sequential Analysis confirmed conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence, while additional data is needed for other outcomes.

ABSTRACT Background Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a major contributor to sudden cardiac death among patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD). While catheter ablation reduces the arrhythmic burden, the impact on long‐term outcomes remains uncertain. We assess the efficacy of catheter ablation in patients with IHD. Methods We performed a meta‐analysis by systematically searching electronic databases from inception to April 2025. Pairwise, reconstructed time‐to‐event data meta‐analyses and Trial Sequential analyses were conducted. Results A total of seven studies (1192 participants) were included. Among patients with IHD with ICD, VT ablation was associated with a significant reduction in ICD shocks (RR = 0.50, 95% CI = [0.34–0.74]), a trend toward reduced VT storm (RR = 0.64, 95% CI = [0.40–1.04], p = 0.07), and lower rates of cardiovascular hospitalization (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = [0.53–1.01], p = 0.06) compared to ICD alone. However, no significant differences were observed when compared to patients receiving ICD plus antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). VT ablation showed no significant impact on mortality or VT/VF recurrence compared to either ICD alone or ICD with AADs. Reconstructed Kaplan–Meier analysis for all‐cause mortality showed no significant difference between VT ablation and AAD + ICD. Trial Sequential Analysis provided conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence, while further data is required for other outcomes. Conclusion Among patients with IHD with ICD, VT ablation reduces ICD shocks, VT storm, and cardiovascular hospitalizations compared to ICD‐only therapy, but offers no significant advantage over ICD combined with AADs. VT ablation does not impact overall mortality or the recurrence of VT/VF. Trial sequential analysis confirmed conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence, while additional data is needed for other outcomes.

Abstract Polyphenon E (Poly E) is a green tea polyphenol preparation whose most active component is epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG). We studied the cancer preventive efficacy and safety of Poly E in subjects with rectal aberrant crypt foci (ACF), which represent putative precursors of colorectal cancers. Eligible subjects had prior colorectal advanced adenomas or cancers, and had ≥5 rectal ACF at a preregistration chromoendoscopy. Subjects (N = 39) were randomized to 6 months of oral Poly E (780 mg EGCG) daily or placebo. Baseline characteristics were similar by treatment arm (all P >0.41); 32 of 39 (82%) subjects completed 6 months of treatment. The primary endpoint was percent reduction in rectal ACF at chromoendoscopy comparing before and after treatment. Among 32 subjects (15 Poly E, 17 placebo), percent change in rectal ACF number (baseline vs. 6 months) did not differ significantly between study arms (3.7% difference of means; P = 0.28); total ACF burden was also similar (−2.3% difference of means; P = 0.83). Adenoma recurrence rates at 6 months were similar by arm (P > 0.35). Total drug received did not differ significantly by study arm; 31 (79%) subjects received ≥70% of prescribed Poly E. Poly E was well tolerated and adverse events (AE) did not differ significantly by arm. One subject on placebo had two grade 3 AEs; one subject had grade 2 hepatic transaminase elevations attributed to treatment. In conclusion, Poly E for 6 months did not significantly reduce rectal ACF number relative to placebo. Poly E was well tolerated and without significant toxicity at the dose studied. Prevention Relevance: We report a chemoprevention trial of polyphenon E in subjects at high risk of colorectal cancer. The results show that polyphenon E was well tolerated, but did not significantly reduce the number of rectal aberrant crypt foci, a surrogate endpoint biomarker of colorectal cancer.