Mohyeldin, Eman

Background: The growing epidemiologic burden of heart failure (HF) poses a significant public health challenge. The development of conduction abnormalities influences HF outcomes, with left bundle branch block (LBBB) established as an independent mortality predictor. However, the impact of right bundle branch block (RBBB) on HF mortality is still controversial. The aim of this study is to compare survival in HF patients with and without RBBB. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to 12 October 2024. Raw data coordinates were extracted from Kaplan–Meier curves and merged into one dataset to reconstruct individual patient data. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using the Cox regression model. Dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using a random-effects model. Results: 13 studies incorporating 25714 HF patients were included in our analysis. Patients with RBBB had a significantly lower median survival of 41.0 months (95% CI: 39.0 – 44.8) compared to 51.2 months (95% CI: 49.2 – 52.8) in patients without RBBB. Survival at 1,3, and 5 years in RBBB patients was 74.2%, 54.0%, and 39.4%, respectively, compared to 77.2%, 58.1%, and 45.4% in patients without RBBB. The HR for mortality was 0.87 (95% CI: 0.83 – 0.91, p < 0.001), indicating a 13% lower risk of death in patients without RBBB compared to those with RBBB. There was no significant difference in cardiovascular mortality between groups (RR: 1.34; 95% CI: 0.88 – 2.05; p = 0.17). Conclusion: RBBB was associated with an increased risk of mortality in HF patients. These findings support the use of RBBB as a potential marker for risk stratification in HF. Further research with stricter inclusion criteria is warranted to better understand how the observed association is influenced by preserved versus reduced ejection fraction.

ABSTRACT Background Pulmonary vein isolation is a standard therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF). Pulsed field ablation (PFA) has emerged as a novel approach aiming to improve efficacy and safety over conventional thermal ablation (CTA) (radiofrequency and cryoballoon). This meta‐analysis evaluated outcomes of PFA versus thermal ablation in paroxysmal AF. Methods Electronic databases were searched through May 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared the efficacy and safety of PFA versus CTA. The primary outcome was AF recurrence. Summary estimates were conducted using random effects. Results A total of six studies, involving 1928 patients, were included. The incidence of AF recurrence was significantly lower among patients treated with PFA (risk ratio [RR] 0.67; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53–0.85). PFA was associated with a lower incidence of any atrial arrhythmia recurrence (RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.61–0.99). The total procedure duration was significantly shorter with PFA (mean difference −21.46 min (95% CI: −26.04 to −16.88)), but there was no difference in fluoroscopy time. The rates of esophageal injury and phrenic nerve palsy were lower with PFA. However, the data were limited for these two outcomes, and a meta‐analysis was not conducted for them. There was no difference between the two groups in the incidence of stroke or pericardial tamponade. Conclusion Among patients with paroxysmal AF undergoing catheter ablation, PFA is associated with favorable outcomes, including lower recurrence and shorter procedure time compared to conventional ablation modalities.

Advanced heart failure (HF) significantly diminishes quality of life (QoL) due to severe symptom burden and psychological distress. This meta-analysis investigates the impact of palliative care interventions on QoL, psychological well-being, symptom burden, and mortality in adults with advanced HF. A systematic search of major databases through August 2024 identified 13 randomized controlled trials involving 1541 participants from the USA, China, Iran, and Sweden. Palliative care significantly improved QoL scores compared with usual care [mean difference (MD) = 1.36; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.89–1.83; P < 0.00001], with notable improvements using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Palliative care significantly reduced anxiety scores (MD = −0.39; 95% CI, −0.66 to −0.11), P = 0.006), especially when assessed with the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale. While no significant differences were observed for dyspnea or depression ( P =0.56, P = 0.23, respectively). Mortality rates did not differ significantly between groups ( P = 0.61). These findings highlight the potential of palliative care, particularly interventions incorporating symptom management and psychological support, to enhance QoL and reduce anxiety in advanced HF patients. However, further research is required to standardize these interventions and evaluate their long-term outcomes.