Desouki, Mariam

Introduction: Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. In the quest for improved therapeutic strategies, the addition of Sodium Glucose Transporter Inhibitors (SGLTis) to the treatment regimen has garnered considerable attention. This meta-analysis endeavors to shed light on the efficacy of SGLTis in short-term cardio-renal protection post-AMI. By synthesizing evidence from diverse studies. Methods: Adhering to the PRISMA guidelines, a meticulous systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Comprehensive literature searches across PubMed, Web of Science, Scopes, and Google Scholar were performed. Inclusion criteria comprised four Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), one retrospective cohort, and one observational study, investigating the effects of SGLTis versus placebo on AMI patients, irrespective of diabetic status. Our analysis included the following outcomes: acute kidney injury, all-cause death, cardiovascular mortality, cardiac death, composite of cardiovascular death/hospitalization for heart failure, and NT-proBNP levels. Results: Our analysis encompassed six scientific articles involving 7238 patients. SGLTIs exhibited a notable favorable effect solely on acute kidney injury (P value=0.001, 95% CI [0.46-0.82]). Conversely, no significant benefit was observed in other short-term outcomes, including all-cause death, cardiovascular mortality, cardiac death, composite of cardiovascular death/hospitalization for heart failure, and NT-proBNP levels. These results align with previous studies suggesting the renal protective effects of SGLTIs but highlight the need for further research to clarify their overall cardiovascular benefits in AMI patients. Conclusion: Incorporating SGLTis into the therapeutic armamentarium of AMI patients, irrespective of diabetic status, demonstrated a discernible advantage solely concerning acute kidney injury. However, no appreciable benefit was discerned across other assessed metrics. These findings underscore the need for further exploration and tailored therapeutic strategies in the management of post-AMI patients.

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation is the most encountered arrhythmia in clinical settings, with an estimate of 6 million cases in the United States. A growing amount of evidence has been supporting the role of left atrial appendage in left sided atrial fibrillation with conflict results. We aim in this study to provide a more in-depth guide for optimal left sided atrial fibrillation ablation strategy. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and Scopus for published studies until May 2024. We included relevant studies that compared the left atrial appendage electrical isolation versus the standard ablation and reported our outcomes of interest. The main outcomes of the study were the recurrence of atrial arrhythmia and the incidence of stroke or transient ischemic attack during the follow-up period. Data were pooled as Mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with their 95% CI using a fixed-effect model. Results: Eleven studies with 3040 patients were included in the final analysis. Left atrial appendage electrical isolation was associated with a significant reduction in atrial arrhythmia recurrence compared to the standard ablation alone (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.48). However, it was also associated with a significant increase in stroke or transient ischemic attack incidence (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.12). Conclusion: Left atrial appendage electrical isolation led to a significantly lower atrial arrhythmia recurrence, but this was achieved with an increased risk of stroke and transient ischemic attack incidence during the follow-up period.

Background: Air pollution is a leading cause of cardiovascular diseases including ischemic heart disease and stroke contributing to millions of deaths, with elevated blood pressure, endothelial dysfunction, and systemic inflammation being some of the most important underlying mechanisms. Various studies showed a promising beneficial effect of indoor air purification on various health outcomes, including blood pressure. We aimed to assess the effect of indoor air purification on systolic blood pressure (SBP) and Diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and provide a rationale for home use of these filters. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane and Scopus for published literature up to May 2024. We included studies that assessed air purification, including HEPA filters or electrostatic air filters, as an intervention compared to no intervention. The primary outcome of interest was mean changes in blood pressure both systolic and diastolic. Secondary outcomes were biomarkers of inflammation and oxidative stress. Mean difference (MD) and 95% CI was used in a fixed-effect model to analyze the data. Results: A total of 21 studies were included in our meta-analysis with a total of 1955 participants. Air purification was associated with a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure (SBP) (MD: -2.42, 95% CI: -3.42, -1.41), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (MD: -1.11, 95% CI: -1.76, -0.46). However, there was no significant changes in levels of inflammatory biomarkers or oxidative stress. Conclusion: Indoor air purification was associated with significant reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels, but questions arise whether these reductions are clinically relevant or not. Further studies should assess these findings. Conclusion: Indoor air purification was associated with significant reductions in systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels, but questions arise whether these reductions are clinically relevant or not. Further studies should assess these findings.

Abstract Introduction Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have reduced restenosis and reintervention of femoropopliteal lesions compared to uncoated percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). However, limited data are available on different dosages of the DCBs. Purpose We aimed to give a comprehensive analysis in this regard and update the current evidence. Methods We searched Scopus, Cochrane, PubMed, and WOS from inception till February 2024 to include all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that addressed different dosages of DCBs in femoropopliteal lesions. The primary endpoint was all-cause death, primary patency, and amputation at six months, while the secondary outcomes were all-cause death, primary patency, and amputation at 12 months. Dichotomous data were pooled using Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% Confidence Interval (CI) in a random-effect model. Results A total of 21 studies, including 4081 patients in the analysis. Low-dose DCB was associated with high rates of primary patency compared to the standard dose at both 6 and 12 months of follow-up with the following values (OR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.48 to 4.08, and 1.93, 95% CI: 1.5 to 2.49, receptively). Also, low-dose DCB reduced the incidence of clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) compared to the standard dose at 12 months (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.65). Regarding high-dose DCB, higher primary patency rates were observed when compared to standard doses at 6 and 12 months (OR: 1.89, 95% CI: 1.19 to 2.99, and 5.47, 95% CI: 4.31 to 6.95, respectively). Moreover, high-dose DCB reduced the incidence of CD-TLR at 6 and 12 months of follow-up (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.63, and 0.63, 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.84, respectively). Conclusion Low-dose DCBs were associated with higher primary patency without significant differences in all-cause mortality or amputation. On the other hand, high-dose DCBs were associated with a higher incidence of amputation without significant differences in other studied outcomes.Low dose Paclitaxel coated balloon vs CoHigh dose Paclitaxel coated balloon vs C

Abstract Background: Newer generation ultrathin strut stents are associated with less incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the short term. However, its long-term effect on different cardiovascular outcomes remains unknown. Objectives: We aim to identify the effects of newer-generation ultrathin-strut stents vs. standard thickness second-generation drug eluting stents (DES) on long term outcomes of revascularization in coronary artery disease. Methods: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registries that compare newer-generation ultrathin-strut (<70 mm) with thicker-strut (>70 mm) DES to evaluate cardioprotective effects over a period of up to 5 years. Primary outcome was TLF, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary outcomes included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death were pooled as the standardized mean difference between the two groups from baseline to endpoint. Results: We included 19 RCTs and two prospective registries (96756 patients) in this analysis. The overall effect on the primary outcome was in favor of second-generation ultrathin struts stents in terms of TLF at ≥ one year, ≥ two years, and ≥ three years (P value= 0.01, 95% CI [0.75, 0.96]), P value=0.003, 95% CI [0.77, 0.95]), P value= 0.007, 95% CI [0.76, 0.96]), respectively. However, there was no reported benefit in terms of TLF when we compared the two groups at ≥ five years (P value= 0.21), 95% CI [0.85, 1.04]). Some of the reported components of the primary and secondary outcomes, such as TLR, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and TVMI, showed the same pattern as the TLF outcome. Conclusion: Ultrathin-strut DES showed a beneficial effect over thicker strut stents for up to three years. However, at the 5-year follow-up, the ultrathin strut did not differ in terms of TLF, TLR, TVR, and TVMI compared with standard-thickness DES, with similar risks of patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality.