Ibrahim, Ramzi

Background: Disparities exist in the representation of genders in cardiovascular clinical trials. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality; however, understanding regarding the representation of women in AF-related clinical trials remains limited. Therefore, this systematic review sought to evaluate the representation of women in AF-related clinical trials. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of clinical trials using the PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases from 1996 to January 1st, 2024, focusing on AF-related lifestyle interventions, pharmacological treatments, catheter ablation, and device therapies for AF. Data extraction and analysis encompassed trial characteristics, participant demographics, and funding sources. The primary outcome was the prevalence of female enrollees, quantified through participation-to-prevalence ratios (PPRs). This was estimated overall and stratified by funding source, intervention type, and enrollment region. Results: Of the 103 clinical trials involving 218,322 participants (39.5% female), the PPR ranged from 0.00 to 1.73, with an average PPR of 1.03. Meanwhile, 43% of the trials exhibited female under-representation (PPR, <0.8). University-funded trials showed higher female enrollment (mean PPR, 0.951) compared to industry/government-funded trials (mean PPR, 0.800). No differences were observed in the representation of women when comparing enrollment regions or intervention types. Conclusions: Despite advancements in AF management, gender disparities persist in AF-related clinical trial representation, particularly in industry/government-funded studies compared to university-funded trials. Thus, addressing implicit biases and enforcing sex equality guidelines are critical steps toward more inclusive cardiovascular research.

ABSTRACT Background Ventricular tachycardia (VT) is a major contributor to sudden cardiac death among patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD). While catheter ablation reduces the arrhythmic burden, the impact on long‐term outcomes remains uncertain. We assess the efficacy of catheter ablation in patients with IHD. Methods We performed a meta‐analysis by systematically searching electronic databases from inception to April 2025. Pairwise, reconstructed time‐to‐event data meta‐analyses and Trial Sequential analyses were conducted. Results A total of seven studies (1192 participants) were included. Among patients with IHD with ICD, VT ablation was associated with a significant reduction in ICD shocks (RR = 0.50, 95% CI = [0.34–0.74]), a trend toward reduced VT storm (RR = 0.64, 95% CI = [0.40–1.04], p = 0.07), and lower rates of cardiovascular hospitalization (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = [0.53–1.01], p = 0.06) compared to ICD alone. However, no significant differences were observed when compared to patients receiving ICD plus antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs). VT ablation showed no significant impact on mortality or VT/VF recurrence compared to either ICD alone or ICD with AADs. Reconstructed Kaplan–Meier analysis for all‐cause mortality showed no significant difference between VT ablation and AAD + ICD. Trial Sequential Analysis provided conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence, while further data is required for other outcomes. Conclusion Among patients with IHD with ICD, VT ablation reduces ICD shocks, VT storm, and cardiovascular hospitalizations compared to ICD‐only therapy, but offers no significant advantage over ICD combined with AADs. VT ablation does not impact overall mortality or the recurrence of VT/VF. Trial sequential analysis confirmed conclusive evidence for VT/VF recurrence, while additional data is needed for other outcomes.