Citations

Abstract Aims Left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) are a critical intervention for advanced heart failure (HF), serving as destination therapy or bridge to transplantation. Obesity and diabetes impact outcomes in patients with LVADs. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RAs) demonstrate cardiovascular benefits; however, their role in patients with LVADs remains underexplored. We evaluated the association of GLP1-RA therapy with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with LVADs. Methods This retrospective cohort study used the TriNetX database, a research network database from 98 healthcare organizations. We queried for all adult LVAD recipients (≥18 years) and were stratified into GLP1-RA users and non-users. Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1) balanced demographics, comorbidities, medication use and laboratory data. Outcomes included heart transplantation rates, heart failure hospitalizations, all-cause mortality, all-cause hospitalizations and cardiovascular events. Logistic regression models were used to estimate adjusted odds ratios (aOR). Results After PSM, we included a total of 1036 adult LVAD recipients (518 GLP1-RA users, 518 matched non-users) with a mean follow-up time of 311.6 ± 98.4 days for the GLP1-RA cohort and 304.0 ± 111.5 days for the non-GLP1-RAs cohort. Mean age was 56.7 ± 12.2 years in the GLP1-RA cohort and 58.0 ± 12.5 years in the non-GLP1-RA cohort. Females comprised 28.0% of both cohorts while White patients represented 52.1% of the GLP1-RA group and 53.1% of the non-GLP1-RA group. GLP1-RA users had higher heart transplantation rates [n = 98 (18.9%) vs. n = 44 (8.5%); aOR 2.514 (95% CI: 1.720–3.673)]. Acute HF events and all-cause hospitalizations were lower among GLP1-RA users compared with non-users [n = 288 (55.6%) vs. n = 357 (68.9%); aOR 0.565 (95% CI: 0.438–728) and n = 324 (62.5%) vs. n = 390 (75.3%); aOR 0.548 (95% CI: 0.420–0.716)]. No differences were observed when comparing the GLP1-RA cohort with the non-GLP1-RA cohort in regard to all-cause mortality [n = 32 (6.2%) vs. n = 44 (8.5%); aOR 0.709 (95% CI: 0.442–1.138)], stroke [n = 42 (8.1%) vs. n = 58 (11.2%); aOR 0.700 (95% CI: 0.461–1.062)] or cardiac arrest [n = 18 (3.5%) vs. n = 17 (3.3%); aOR 1.061 (95% CI: 0.541–2.082)]. Conclusions GLP1-RA therapy in patients with advanced HF and LVADs is potentially associated with improved heart transplantation rates while decreasing hospitalization and acute HF event rates.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare expenses. Meanwhile, effective management of AF requires a comprehensive, patient-centered approach that includes risk factor modification, rate and rhythm control strategies, and prevention of thromboembolic events. Multidisciplinary AF clinics have emerged as a model for comprehensive management to improve patient outcomes and reduce healthcare burden. This review discusses the rationale, structure, benefits, challenges, and future directions of multidisciplinary AF clinics, emphasizing their role in optimizing AF management.

Introduction: Sex-based differences in outcomes among patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) treated with sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) remain underexplored. This study aimed to evaluate sex-specific differences in cardiovascular outcomes in patients with HFrEF receiving SGLT2 inhibitors alongside guidelinedirected medical therapy (GDMT). Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the TriNetX global research network. Adults with HFrEF treated with SGLT2is and GDMT were stratified by sex. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance baseline demographics, comorbidities, medications, and laboratory data. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and acute heart failure (HF) events; secondary outcomes included hospitalizations, arrhythmias, renal outcomes, and advanced therapies. Results: After PSM, 17,408 male and 17,408 female patients were analyzed. Male patients had lower odds of acute HF events (aOR: 0.949; 95% CI: 0.909–0.991), all-cause hospitalizations (aOR: 0.933; 95% CI: 0.895–0.973), and renal failure (aOR: 0.915; 95% CI: 0.870–0.962). No significant differences were observed in all-cause mortality (aOR: 1.003; 95% CI: 0.926–1.087) or heart transplantation, although LVAD use was more frequent in males (aOR: 1.416; 95% CI: 1.053–1.905). Discussion: The findings highlighted potential sex-based disparities in outcomes for patients with HFrEF on SGLT2is. Differential prescribing patterns, comorbidity burden, or timing of therapy initiation may contribute to observed differences. Conclusion: Among HFrEF patients treated with SGLT2is, males experienced lower risks of HF events, hospitalizations, and renal failure compared to females, despite similar mortality. Further research is needed to understand and address sex-specific disparities in HFrEF management.

Chronic left bundle branch block (LBBB) has been associated with adverse cardiac remodeling and the development of cardiomyopathy. This retrospective cohort study evaluated the impact of angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) therapy on cardiovascular outcomes in adults with isolated LBBB with no known heart failure (HF), cardiomyopathy, or ischemic heart disease. Using the TriNetX global research network, patients were stratified by ARB use and followed for up to 5 years. Propensity score matching was performed to balance characteristics. Three thousand two hundred sixty-six patients were included in each group with comparable baseline characteristics. The ARB therapy was not associated with a reduction in new-onset acute HF events (4.9% vs 4.4%; hazard ratio (HR) 1.05 (95% CI 0.84–1.32)). Similarly, there were no significant differences in rates of all-cause hospitalizations, cardiac arrest, or ventricular tachycardia. However, ARB use was associated with a significantly lower, all-cause mortality rate (8.6% vs 12.1%; HR 0.67 (95% CI 0.57–0.77)). This is the first real-world study examining ARB use in a cohort with isolated LBBB, highlighting a potential mortality benefit, despite no difference in acute HF risk. While ARBs are not effective in preventing LBBB-induced cardiomyopathy based on these findings, the observed survival advantage warrants further investigation. Prospective studies are needed to elucidate mechanisms underlying this mortality benefit and to determine whether ARBs should be considered in the management of patients with isolated LBBB.

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.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common sustained cardiac arrhythmia, contributing to significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. The relationship between physical exercise and AF is complex, with studies showing both beneficial and potentially adverse effects. Moreover, evidence suggests a U-shaped association between exercise intensity and AF risk. Moderate exercise has been shown to reduce AF burden by improving cardiovascular risk factors, enhancing autonomic regulation, and mitigating atrial fibrosis. In contrast, excessively high-intensity endurance exercise may increase AF risk, particularly in young athletes, due to atrial stretching, dilation, fibrosis, autonomic imbalances, and heightened inflammation. The current guidelines emphasize exercise as a core lifestyle intervention for AF management, recommending moderate-intensity aerobic activity for optimal outcomes. This review examines the current evidence on the effects of exercise on AF, identifies knowledge gaps, and proposes potential future research directions.