Citations

ABSTRACT Ventricular arrhythmias (VA), including ventricular tachycardia and fibrillation, are critical cardiac conditions that are often managed by catheter ablation among those unresponsive to pharmacologic therapy. The choice of anesthesia and sedation regimens for VA ablations may impact arrhythmia inducibility and hemodynamic stability, which can affect procedural success and complication rates. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of sedation versus general anesthesia (GA) among patients undergoing VA ablation. The review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023441553). Database searches were conducted across five major databases from inception to March 9, 2024 to identify randomized trials or observational studies including adult patients undergoing ablations for VA. Screening and data extraction were completed in duplicate. Risk-of-bias assessments were conducted using ROBINS-I as all included studies were observational, and the quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Six observational studies (N = 16,435) were included. No significant differences were found between sedation and GA for total procedure time (MD: −14.16 minutes; 95%CI: −38.61 to 10.29 minutes), arrhythmia non-inducibility (RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.33–1.58), acute ablation success (RR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.65–1.71), or procedural complications (RR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.28–1.85). However, sedation was associated with significantly lower intraprocedural hemodynamic instability (RR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.12–0.70). These findings indicate that while sedation and GA have comparable outcomes, sedation may be associated with less hemodynamic instability during VA ablation. However, more high-quality studies are needed to confirm these results.

AbstractThis systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of fluvoxamine for the outpatient management of COVID‐19. We conducted this review in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, CINAHL, Web of Science, and CENTRAL up to 14 September 2023. Outcomes included incidence of hospitalisation, healthcare utilization (emergency room visits and/or hospitalisation), mortality, supplemental oxygen and mechanical ventilation requirements, serious adverse events (SAEs) and non‐adherence. Fluvoxamine 100 mg twice a day was associated with reductions in the risk of hospitalisation (risk ratio [RR] 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58–0.97; I 2 = 0%) and reductions in the risk of healthcare utilization (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.86; I 2 = 0%). While no increased SAEs were observed, fluvoxamine 100 mg twice a day was associated with higher treatment non‐adherence compared to placebo (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.22–2.14; I 2 = 53%). In subgroup analyses, fluvoxamine reduced healthcare utilization in outpatients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2, but not in those with lower BMIs. While fluvoxamine offers potential benefits in reducing healthcare utilization, its efficacy may be most pronounced in high‐risk patient populations. The observed non‐adherence rates highlight the need for better patient education and counselling. Future investigations should reassess trial endpoints to include outcomes relating to post‐COVID sequelaes. Registration: This review was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023463829).

Abstract The COVID‐19 pandemic and its accompanying infection control measures introduced sudden and significant disruptions to the lives of children and adolescents around the world. Given the potential for negative impacts on the mental health of youths as a result of these changes, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis to examine the prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and sleep disturbances in children and adolescents during the pandemic. We searched major literature databases for relevant cross‐sectional or longitudinal studies that included primary and secondary school students or children and adolescents ≤18 years of age. Prevalence values were extracted, logit‐transformed, and pooled. Based on 191 included studies with 1,389,447 children and adolescents, we found the pooled prevalence of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and sleep disturbances to be 31%, 31%, and 42%, respectively. Age, grade levels, education levels, gender, geographical regions, and electronics use were correlated with the prevalence of mental health symptoms. The prevalence of mental health symptoms also increased with time, although signs of recovery and stabilization were also observed. Overall, the results from this review demonstrate the need for increased mental health research, monitoring, and intervention for children and adolescents during the current and future pandemics.