Siddiqui, Muhammad Umer

Introduction: The Safety and efficacy of DOACs is unknown in patients with left ventricular thrombus as these patients were excluded from DOAC trials. Hypothesis: The safety and efficacy of DOACs is comparable to vitamin K antagonists Methods: Databases including Medline, Scopus and Cochrane Central Registration of Controlled Trials were queried from inception to March 30 th 2022. Studies reporting efficacy and safety outcomes were selected for the analysis. Results: We included 11 studies comprising 1920 patients with left ventricular thrombus. The mean age in the DOAC group was 57.5 years (SD 12.8) and 58.6 years (SD 13.0) in the VKA group; 26.8% were females. Pooled results showed no difference in mortality (RR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.16-2.52]) embolic events (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.59-1.50]) or major bleeding (RR, 0.95[95% CI, 0.66-1.36]) in the DOACs compared to VKA groups. Event rate for DOAC group compared to VKA group was 12.7 vs 17.5 per 100 patient-years (mean follow up of 4.0 months) for mortality, 19.5 vs 26.5 per 100 patient-years (mean follow up of 8.9 months) for embolic events and 8.0 vs 10.0 per 100 patient-years (mean follow up of 9.5 months) for major bleeding. Conclusions: These data, from observational and randomized studies, demonstrate promising safety and efficacy of DOACs for treatment of left ventricular thrombus. Elevated embolic and mortality rates regardless of anticoagulant choice emphasize the need for further research to improve outcomes for patients with this complication.

Background: Chemotherapeutic agents have been associated with cardiotoxicity; thus, they require close monitoring. Several echocardiographic variables have been investigated as early predictors of symptomatic cardiotoxicity in patients undergoing chemotherapy. Objective: To identify if global longitudinal strain (GLS) is a better predictor of symptomatic cardiotoxicity compared to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients receiving chemotherapy. Methods: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through December 2020. Adults who developed symptomatic cardiotoxicity (New York Heart Association [NYHA] Class III–IV heart failure, cardiac arrest, or cardiac death) after undergoing chemotherapy with pre- and postchemotherapy echocardiographic measures of cardiac function were included. The primary focus was on the prediction of symptomatic cardiotoxicity. Estimates were reported as random effects hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Four studies met inclusion criteria. The most common malignancy identified in the included studies was breast cancer, and the most common chemotherapeutic agent utilized was anthracyclines. Most studies utilized the Simpson biplane method to measure echocardiographic parameters. Pooled results demonstrated no significant association between LVEF and the prediction of symptomatic cardiotoxicity (HR 1.48; 95% CI, 0.96–2.27; P = 0.07). However, 2 studies that analyzed GLS found it to be a strong predictor of symptomatic cardiotoxicity (HR 1.46; 95% CI, 1.34–1.58; P < .001). There was no significant association between symptomatic cardiotoxicity and baseline left ventricular end diastolic volume, end systolic volume, or end diastolic volume index. Conclusions: GLS may predict symptomatic cardiotoxicity and be used to monitor patients on chemotherapy for symptomatic cardiac dysfunction. While the pooled results for baseline LVEF identified that it is not a predictor of symptomatic cardiotoxicity, this differs from the findings of the only randomized trial included in this meta-analysis. The data for baseline GLS as a predictor of symptomatic cardiotoxicity is encouraging, but definite evidence that GLS may be superior to LVEF is lacking. Prospective randomized, blinded trials are required to identify if 1 echocardiographic parameter may be superior to the other.

Background: Catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation is a proven alternative to pharmacologic rhythm control in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Whether outcomes differ in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is of interest. Methods: Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. We extracted or calculated a risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from each study. Primary outcomes of interest include atrial arrythmia recurrence and repeat ablation. Harm outcomes of interest include all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations, cardiovascular hospitalizations, stroke/transient ischemic attack, and cardiac tamponade. Results: We included 7 observational studies comprising 2,525 patients with HFpEF who underwent catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. There were no significant differences in primary and harm outcomes when comparing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with HFpEF to patients with no heart failure. Similarly, there were no significant differences in outcomes when comparing catheter ablation for patients with HFpEF to HFrEF. The certainty in these estimates was low. Conclusions: Non-randomized studies suggest that catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in patients with HFpEF is associated with similar arrythmia free survival and safety profile when compared to patients with HFrEF and without heart failure. This suggests that patients with AF and HFpEF may benefit equally from catheter ablation as those with AF and HFrEF.