Jaiswal, Vikash

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains a cornerstone of treatment for patients with advanced or complex coronary artery disease, yet long-term success is influenced by graft patency, progression of native disease, and ventricular remodeling. Optimizing the follow-up of these patients requires a structured approach in which multimodality cardiovascular imaging plays a central role. Echocardiography remains the first-line modality, providing readily available assessment of ventricular function, valvular competence, and wall motion, while advanced techniques, such as strain imaging and myocardial work, enhance sensitivity for subclinical dysfunction. Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) offers excellent diagnostic accuracy for graft patency and native coronary anatomy, with emerging applications of CT perfusion and fractional flow reserve derived from CT (FFR-CT) expanding its ability to assess lesion-specific ischemia. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) provides comprehensive tissue characterization, quantifying scar burden, viability, and inducible ischemia, and stress CMR protocols have demonstrated both safety and independent prognostic value in post-CABG cohorts. Nuclear imaging with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) remains essential for quantifying perfusion, viability, and absolute myocardial blood flow, with hybrid PET/CT approaches offering further refinement in patients with recurrent symptoms. In patients after CABG, multimodality imaging is tailored to the patient’s characteristics, symptoms, and pre-test probability of disease progression. In asymptomatic patients, imaging focuses on surveillance, risk stratification, and the early detection of subclinical abnormalities, whereas in symptomatic individuals, it focuses on establishing the diagnosis, defining prognosis, and guiding therapeutic interventions. Therefore, the aim of our review is to propose updated and comprehensive guidance on the crucial role of multimodality cardiovascular imaging in the evaluation and management of post-CABG patients and to provide a practical, evidence-based framework for optimizing outcomes.

Background: Supine hypertension, or elevated blood pressure while lying down, is often underrecognized in clinical settings. Though more common in older adults and those with autonomic dysfunction, its long-term cardiovascular impact remains unclear. Growing evidence suggests it may contribute to higher risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD), stroke, heart failure, and mortality. Methods: A meta-analysis evaluated the association between supine hypertension and primary cardiovascular outcomes were searched using standard electronic databases. MeSh term including “supine hypertension” and “cardiovascular outcomes” were used for Search. Studies reporting hazard ratios for CVD events, stroke, heart failure, cardiovascular, and all-cause mortality were included. Random-effect models were used for pooled analysis, with heterogeneity assessed using the I2 statistic and p value <0.05 considered significant. Results: A total of 13 studies were included in the analysis, comprising a combined study population of 241,765 individuals with a mean age of 59 years and follow up for 12.4 years. Cardiovascular Events: Six studies showed a significant association between supine hypertension and increased CVD events (HR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.28–1.55, p<0.05). Cardiovascular Mortality: Five studies indicated elevated supine systolic BP was linked to higher cardiovascular mortality (HR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.40–1.75, p<0.05). Heart Failure: Three studies demonstrated a strong, consistent association between supine hypertension and heart failure (HR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.72–1.95, p<0.05). Mortality: Eight studies showed a modest but significant increase in all-cause mortality (HR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.02–1.45, p<0.05). Stroke: Three studies revealed significantly increased stroke risk in individuals with supine hypertension versus standing hypotension (HR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.41–1.97, p<0.05). Conclusion: Supine hypertension was significantly associated with increased risks of CVD events, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, heart failure, and all-cause mortality. These findings highlight the need to consider supine blood pressure patterns in clinical evaluations to improve risk detection and guide preventive care strategies.

e24010 Background: Cancer increases the risk of atrial fibrillation (AF), particularly in patients over 65 or those with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Patients with active cancer are at a higher risk of arterial and venous thrombosis. Oral anticoagulation (OAC) is recommended in most patients with comorbidities, based on the CHA2DS2-VASc score. However, because OAC raises the risk of bleeding, it might not be appropriate for patients who have significant or frequent bleeding episodes, vascular malformations, or other contraindications. Anticoagulation in cancer patients is challenging due to thrombocytopenia, bleeding risks, and interactions with chemotherapy. Left atrial appendage Closure (LAAC) offers an alternative to anticoagulation for mitigating stroke risk in nonvalvular AF patients. However, this procedure has been offered less frequently as concerns regarding its prognosis among cancer patients remain unclear. This article aims to find the prognosis of cancer patients with LAAC. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases from inception until June 2024 using appropriate Mesh terms. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random effects models. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 5 studies with a population of 1,20,502 (Cancer Patients: 3803 and Non- Cancer patients: 116699) were included which met all the inclusion criteria. An increased risk of in-hospital mortality among cancer patients with LAAC (RR=1.90; 95% CI=1.05–3.45, P=0.03) with statistically significant was observed. However, other parameters were comparable including, 30 days readmission (RR=1.12; 95% CI=0.95–1.032), all-cause mortality (RR=1.33; 95% CI=0.72–1.95), any bleeding complication (RR=1.04; 95% CI=0.37–1.70), Cardiovascular complication (RR=1.44; 95% CI=0.51–4.06), thromboembolism (RR= 2.28; 95% CI=0.57–9.06), and neurological complication (RR=0.81; 95% CI=0.17–1.46). Conclusions: There were increased chances of in-hospital mortality among cancer patients than in non-cancer patients with LAAC procedures. However, other parameters like cardiovascular complications, any bleeding complications, thromboembolism, and neurological complications were not significantly associated. Further studies are warranted to validate these findings.

Background: Rivaroxaban is a novel oral anticoagulant suggested as an alternative to low molecular weight heparin (LMWH). However, its efficacy and safety compared to LMWH for treating venous thromboembolism (VTE) in cancer patients remain unclear. Hypothesis: This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban against LMWH for treating VTE in cancer patients. Methods: We conducted a literature search for relevant articles on PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase. Outcomes were pooled using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 14368 cancer patients (Rivaroxaban: 4378 and LMWH: 9990) from 13 studies were included with an average age of 62.5 and 61.9 respectively. At 3 months, rivaroxaban was associated with a decreased risk of recurrent VTE (RR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.86, p<0.05) and bleeding-related hospitalization (RR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.97, p<0.05) with statistical signifcant whereas, major bleeding (RR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.09, 1.65), non-major bleeding (RR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.60, 1.08) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.72, 1.09) were comparable. At 6 months, rivaroxaban was associated with a decreased risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.62, 0.97, p<0.05), and bleeding-related hospitalization (RR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.98, p<0.05) whereas major bleeding (RR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.52, 1.24), non-major bleeding (RR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.42, 1.29) and recurrent VTE (RR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.64, 1.01) were comparable. At 12 months, rivaroxaban was associated with a decreased risk of mortality (RR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.50, 0.92, p<0.05), however non-major bleeding (RR 1.38, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.94), cancer-associated thrombosis recurrence (RR 0.94, 95% CI: 0.73, 1.16), and bleeding (RR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.26, 1.15) were comparable. Conclusion: While rivaroxaban is associated with low adverse outcomes suggesting its use in treating VTE in cancer patients, further research is recommended.

Background: According to the American Cancer Society, there are currently over 18 million adult cancer survivors in the US, and by 2030, that figure is estimated to rise to over 22 million. While this is positive, more and more survivors are now at risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Hypothesis: This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the association between cancer survivors and cardiovascular event. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases from inception until March 2024 using appropriate Mesh terms for ‘Cancer’, and ‘cardiovascular risk’. Pooled risk ratios (RR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random effects models. A p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of nine studies with 1,209,168 people (Cancer survivor: 140697 and non-cancer: 1068471) were included in our study. The mean follow-up duration was 12.4 years. The risk of cardiovascular events was seen in all cancer survivors (RR: 1.69, 95%CI: 1.31-2.08, P <0.05). The cardiovascular risk was statistically significant in patients with leukemia (RR: 1.71, 95%CI: 1.54-1.88), lung cancer (RR: 1.99, 95%CI: 1.38-2.6) and lymphoma (RR: 1.65, 95%CI: 1.29-2.01), and comparable in breast cancer (RR: 1.22, 95%CI: 0.98-1.46), colorectal cancer (RR: 1.13, 95%CI: 0.89-1.37), prostate cancer (RR: 1.08, 95%CI: 0.99-1.17) and thyroid cancer (RR: 0.96, 95%CI: 0.57-1.35). Conclusion: Our study showed that overall cancer survivors had significant risk for cardiovascular events; mainly leukemia, lung cancer, and lymphoma patients had a significant result. Early identification, continuous monitoring, and proactive management strategies are essential to mitigate the long-term cardiovascular effects of cancer treatments.

Background: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have emerged as potential therapy to prevent atrial fibrillation (AF). However, inconsistent results of MRAs effect on perioperative AF have been reported in the literature in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. To our knowledge, this is the first metanalysis to assess the effect of MRAs on occurrence of perioperative AF in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Method: We searched different electronic databases from inception to April 30th, 2023, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated the use of MRAs in patients with heart failure and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 30-50% who were referred for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) and/or valve surgery without any AF history. Primary outcome was occurrence of perioperative AF. Three independent reviewers selected and appraised the data. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Result: We included 4 studies, 1 RCT and 3 observational cohorts, with a cumulative number of 1,128 patients with mean age 65.15 years. 412(36.5%) received an MRA (spironolactone or eplerenone). The follow up duration was 5 days to 1 month. During follow-up, 118 (28.64%) patients treated with MRAs, developed AF, compared to 224 (31.28%) patients, without MRA treatment. However, metanalysis showed that there is no significant reduction in occurrence of perioperative AF in MRA treated patients (OR: 0.88 CI: 0.58-1.33 p=0.55), I2 53%; Figure] Conclusion: Experimental data have shown that MRA blockade prevents perioperative AF in animal models but our metanalysis demonstrated that MRAs were not protective for perioperative AF in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Larger trials in humans are warranted to evaluate its efficacy, particularly in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.