Balbaa, Elsayed

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure management following successful reperfusion with endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion remains debated. This meta-analysis aimed to determine whether intensive systolic blood pressure (SBP) management improves clinical outcomes compared with a standard approach after endovascular thrombectomy. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science through October 2025 for relevant randomized controlled trials comparing intensive (SBP target <140 mm Hg) versus standard (SBP target <180 mm Hg) management. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score, 0–2) and any intracranial hemorrhage, respectively. We performed frequentist and Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses, supplemented by trial sequential analysis. RESULTS: Six randomized controlled trials comprising 1972 patients were included. In frequentist analysis, intensive SBP management was associated with a significantly reduced likelihood of achieving functional independence (risk ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.73–0.93]). Bayesian analysis confirmed this harmful effect (posterior median risk ratio, 0.83 [95% credible interval, 0.7–1.02]), with a posterior probability of benefit of only 3.2%. Furthermore, ordinal shift analysis indicated that intensive SBP management was associated with a significant shift toward worse functional outcomes across the full modified Rankin Scale score distribution (common odds ratio, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.10–1.44]), a finding supported by a low posterior probability of benefit of 2.1%. No significant differences were observed in the risk of any intracranial hemorrhage (risk ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.96–1.16]). The corresponding Bayesian analysis yielded a posterior risk ratio estimate of 1.05 (95% credible interval, 0.90–1.21) for any intracranial hemorrhage, with a posterior probability of benefit of 23%. Trial sequential analysis indicated that the cumulative evidence reached the boundary for harm and futility for the primary efficacy and safety outcomes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute ischemic stroke following successful endovascular thrombectomy, intensive SBP management was associated with worse functional outcomes and provided no clear safety benefit. These findings support a standard, guideline-based SBP management strategy over an intensive approach.

Introduction: Preeclampsia is a multisystem progressive disease of pregnancy, characterized by a new onset of hypertension (≥ 140/90 mm Hg) with proteinuria after the 20th week of gestation. There is a conflict between United States guidelines that recommend Low-dose aspirin (LDA) and United Kingdom guidelines that recommend High-dose aspirin (HDA) for the prevention of preeclampsia in high-risk pregnant women. After the latest study that recommends HDA and the absence of pairwise meta-analyses comparing two doses, we aimed to conduct a comprehensive pairwise meta-analysis to assess whether HDA is better than LDA in the prevention of preeclampsia. Methods: We conducted a systematic search on PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central, and Web of Science (WOS) from inception until June 2025. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LDA and HDA in high-risk pregnant women were included. Our primary outcome was the incidence of preeclampsia (PE), while secondary outcomes were Placental abruption, Pre-term delivery, and Intrauterine Growth Restriction (IUGR). Using random-effects models, we calculated risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of 8 RCTs with 1,290 patients from the United States, Canada, England, and different Asian countries were included, among whom 642 (49.8%) patients were randomized to HDA. All studies compared HDA (≥ 150 mg) and LDA (75 mg to 81 mg). Patients with LDA had a higher risk of Preeclampsia (RR: 1.71, 95% CI: 1.19 to 2.44, p<0.001) compared to HDA. There was no significant difference between the LDA and HDA regarding Placental abruption, Pre-term delivery, and IUGR. With a pooled RR with a 95% CI (1.8, [0.91 to 3.54], P = 0.09), (1.25, [0.79 to 1.97], P = 0.34), (1.5, [0.93 to 2.42], P = 0.1), respectively. Conclusion: Among high-risk pregnant women, LDA was associated with a 71% higher incidence of preeclampsia than HDA. These results support the use of HDA as a preventive medication for preeclampsia in high-risk pregnant women.

Managing persistent atrial fibrillation (AF) remains challenging due to its complex arrhythmic substrate, and pulmonary vein isolation through catheter ablation remains the primary treatment. This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety outcomes of cryoballoon ablation (CBA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in patients with persistent AF to provide evidence-based insights for clinical decision-making. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CBA and RFA in persistent AF were included. Data on efficacy, safety, and procedural outcomes were pooled in the form of odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the random effects model in the Review Manager (RevMan) software. Four RCTs comprising 899 patients were included in our analysis. There were no significant differences between CBA and RFA in terms of AF recurrence, atrial tachycardia/flutter recurrence, or any arrhythmia recurrence during a mean follow-up period of 18 months after ablation. Procedure time was significantly shorter with CBA (MD: −44.85 minutes, 95% CI: −56.46 to −32.24, P < 0.01), while fluoroscopy time was comparable between the 2 groups (MD: 4.31 minutes, 95% CI: −1.79 to 10.40, P = 0.17). Safety outcomes, including overall complications, phrenic nerve palsy, access-site complications, and pericardial effusion, showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. CBA and RFA show similar rates of atrial arrhythmia recurrence and periprocedural complications in the treatment of persistent AF, while CBA offers the advantage of a shorter procedure time.