Search

Background: Previous literature suggests that both SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 mRNA vaccine are associated with myocarditis, in which the incidence is higher in the infection group. COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-related myocarditis is noted to have a more benign course. Despite these findings, there is a need for a larger population systematic review that compares the outcomes to pre-pandemic acute myocarditis to better understand the extent of the current post-COVID state., Methods: We performed a literature search with PubMed and EMBASE and identified studies investigating COVID-19 and its vaccinated population, and the population prior to the pandemic (control group) who had myocarditis. We performed a one-group meta-analysis of the incidence, baseline demographics, and outcomes of myocarditis for each group., Results: The incidence in the SARS-CoV-2 infection group was 2.76 per thousand (95% CI, 0.85-8.92), 19.7 per million (95% CI, 12.3-31.6) in the vaccine group, and 0.861 per million (95% CI, 0.04-16.7) in the control group. The majority of patients were male, with the highest proportion in the vaccine group. The mean age was the youngest in the vaccine group (24.8, 95% CI, 19.1-30.6). The vaccine group had the lowest mortality (2.0%, 95% CI, 1.3-2.7) followed by the control and the SARS-CoV-2 infection group. The vaccine group had the lowest proportion of immunoglobulin and glucocorticoid use, mechanical circulatory support, and cardiogenic shock., Conclusion: Our study showed favorable outcomes of myocarditis in patients with COVID-19 mRNA vaccination, despite a higher incidence than pre-COVID controls. Further studies with standardized myocarditis diagnostic criteria assessing long-term outcomes are necessary., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Various durations and de-escalation strategies of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) have been tested in randomized controlled trials (RCT)s. However, evidence by specific ACS subtype is unknown., Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched in February 2023. RCTs on DAPT strategies included STEMI or NSTE-ACS patients with standard DAPT (12 months) with clopidogrel or potent P2Y 12 inhibitors, short-term DAPT (≤6 months) followed by potent P2Y 12 inhibitors or aspirin, unguided de-escalation from potent P2Y 12 inhibitors to low-dose potent P2Y 12 inhibitors or clopidogrel at one month, and guided selection with genotype or platelet function tests were identified. The primary outcome was the net adverse clinical events (NACE) defined as a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and clinically relevant bleeding events., Results: Twenty RCTs with a combined total population of 24,745 STEMI and 37,891 NSTE-ACS patients were included. In STEMI patients, unguided de-escalation strategy was associated with a lower rate of NACE compared with standard DAPT using potent P2Y 12 inhibitors (HR:0.57; 95% CI:0.34-0.96) without increased risk of MACE. In NSTE-ACS patients, unguided de-escalation strategy was associated with a lower rate of NACE compared with the guided selection strategy (HR:0.65; 95% CI:0.47-0.90), standard DAPT using potent P2Y 12 inhibitors (HR:0.62; 95% CI:0.50-0.78) and standard DAPT using clopidogrel (HR:0.73; 95% CI:0.55-0.98) without increased risk of MACE., Conclusion: Unguided de-escalation strategy was associated with a reduced risk of NACE and may be the most effective DAPT strategy for STEMI and NSTE-ACS., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Slipczuk has received consulting honoraria from Amgen, Regeneron and Phillips and a research grant from Amgen. The remaining authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Outcomes of redo aortic valve intervention (AVI) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have not been well described. We thought to investigate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of redo AVI after TAVR., Methods: The Nationwide Readmission Database (from 2012 to 2017) was queried to identify admissions for TAVR. Redo AVI was defined as readmissions that required either TAVR or balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). A multivariable regression model was used to identify independent predictors of redo AVI. In-hospital outcomes of redo TAVR or BAV and redo SAVR were compared in the unadjusted model., Results: A total of weighted 148,200 (unweighted redo AVI 297, no redo AVI 73,804) index TAVRs were identified. A weighted 593 (435 TAVR or BAV and 158 SAVR) redo AVI was included with an incidence of 1.0 per 100 person-year during a median of 105 (interquartile range 41-195) days follow-up. Predictors of redo AVI were female, heart failure, obesity, atrial fibrillation, transapical approach, oral anticoagulant use, and acute kidney injury. In-hospital mortality of redo AVI was 7.6% (5.3% for redo TAVR or BAV vs. 13.8% for redo SAVR, unadjusted p = 0.10). Stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding requiring transfusion, new pacemaker, and acute kidney injury rates were 4.7%, 2.6%, 9.3%, 10.0%, and 31.2%, respectively in redo AVI. Length of stay and hospital cost was 4.8 days and 55,826 U.S. dollars, respectively., Conclusions: The incidence of redo AVI was low following TAVR but was associated with high mortality and morbidities., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Whether readmission to non-index hospitals (where the initial procedure was not performed) could result in adverse outcomes and increased utilization of healthcare resources compared with readmission to index hospitals after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear., Methods: From January 2012 to September 2015, a nationwide readmission database was queried to identify those who were older than 50 years and had endovascular TAVR, using the International Classification of Disease, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification code 35.05. Elective readmissions were excluded. In-hospital outcomes were compared between the index and non-index hospital readmissions. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of non-index hospital readmissions., Results: A total of 6808 readmissions were identified of which 2564 (37.7%) were readmitted to non-index hospitals. Residents at smaller counties, metropolitan non-teaching hospitals, or hospitals at large metropolitan areas were predictors of non-index readmissions. In-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.27, p = 0.20), acute myocardial infarction (aOR 0.83, p = 0.53), pacemaker placement (aOR 0.97, p = 0.90), acute kidney injury (aOR 0.98, p = 0.84), and stroke (aOR 1.03, p = 0.90) were similar between index and non-index readmissions but bleeding events requiring transfusions were more frequently observed in readmissions at non-index hospitals (aOR 1.32, p = 0.025). Hospital cost (15,410 dollars vs. 16,390 dollars, p = 0.25) and length of stay (5.70 days vs. 5.65 days, p = 0.85) were comparable between groups., Conclusions: Non-index readmissions post-TAVR was relatively common but did not result in increased hospital mortality or healthcare utilization. Our results are reassuring for TAVR recipients with limited access to index hospitals., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine which procedure, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), for severe aortic stenosis (AS) improves follow-up left ventricular (LV) function or hypertrophy more effectively, we performed the first meta-analysis of comparative studies reporting LV ejection fraction (LVEF) or mass (LVM) after TAVI versus SAVR., Methods: Studies considered for inclusion met the following criteria: the article was written in English; the design was a comparative study; the study population was patients with severe AS; patients were assigned to TAVI versus SAVR; and outcomes included follow-up (6-12-month) LVEF or LVM. For each study, data regarding fractional changes in LVEF or LVM in both the TAVI and SAVR groups were used to generate mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: Our search identified 8 eligible studies. Two studies with baseline LVEF<40% demonstrated significantly greater fractional changes in LVEF after TAVI than after SAVR. A pooled analysis of 6 studies demonstrated no statistically significant difference in fractional changes in LVEF between TAVI and SAVR (MD, 3.25%; 95% CI, -1.30% to 7.80%; p=0.16). Another pooled analysis of 5 studies demonstrated significantly greater fractional changes (i.e. less fractional "reductions") in LVM after TAVI than after SAVR (MD, 4.75%; 95% CI, 2.18% to 7.32%; p=0.0003)., Conclusions: For patients with severe AS, SAVR may be associated with greater improvement in LVM, probably not in LVEF, at 6-12 months. For limited patients with reduced LVEF, TAVI might be associated with greater improvement in LVEF., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine whether follow-up survival is better after elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) than open surgical repair (OSR) for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), we combined 5-year survival curves themselves of EVAR and OSR in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies., Methods: Eligible studies were RCTs or PSM studies of elective EVAR versus OSR enrolling patients with intact AAA and reporting 5-year (at least) survival curves. Data regarding detailed inclusion criteria, duration of follow-up, and survival curves were abstracted from each individual study. In case of crossing of the combined survival curves, a pooled late-phase (between the crossing time and 5years) hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality was calculated., Results: Our search identified 7 eligible studies (including 2 RCTs and 5 PSM studies) enrolling a total of 92,333 patients with AAA assigned to EVAR or OSR. Pooled survival rates after EVAR and OSR were 98.1% and 96.1 at 1month, 94.2% and 93.1% at 1year, 85.1% and 86.8% at 3years, and 75.8% and 78.8% at 5years, respectively. The survival curves crossed at 1.8years with the survival rate of 90.5%. A pooled late-phase (between 1.8years and 5years) HR for calculated from data of the combined survival curves significantly favored OSR (1.29, 95% confidence interval, 1.24 to 1.35; p<0.00001)., Conclusions: For intact AAA, although survival was better immediately after elective EVAR than OSR, the survival curves crossed at 1.8years. Thereafter until 5years, survival was worse after EVAR than OSR., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We summarized comparative studies of MitraClip versus surgical repair for mitral regurgitation (MR) with a systematic literature search and meta-analytic estimates., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through June 2016. Eligible studies were randomized controlled or observational comparative studies of MitraClip versus surgical repair enrolling patients with MR and reporting early (30-day or in-hospital) or late (≥6-month including early) all-cause mortality. For each study, data regarding all-cause mortality and incidence of recurrent >2+ MR in both groups were used to generate odds ratios (ORs). Alternatively, ORs or hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality and recurrent MR themselves were directly abstracted from each study., Results: Eight reports of 7 studies comparing MitraClip with surgical repair enrolling a total of 1015 patients with MR were identified and included. Pooled analyses demonstrated significantly higher age and logistic European System of Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation and significantly lower ejection fraction in the MitraClip than surgical repair group, no significant difference in rate of women and patients with New York Heart Association functional class of >II, no statistically significant difference in early- (OR, 0.54; p=0.08) and late-mortality (HR/OR, 1.17; p=0.46), and significantly higher incidence of recurrent MR in the MitraClip than surgical repair group (HR/OR, 4.80; p<0.00001)., Conclusions: In patients with MR, the MitraClip procedure achieves similar survival to surgical MV repair despite higher risk profiles. Recurrent MR, however, occurs more frequently (4.8-fold) after the MitraClip than surgical repair., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine which procedure, aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a sutureless or rapid-deployment prosthesis (SL-AVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), achieves better perioperative survival for severe aortic stenosis (AS), we conducted direct-comparison meta-analyses (DC-MAs) and an adjusted indirect-comparison meta-analysis (IDC-MA)., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through April 2016. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies. We performed a DC-MA-[A] of SL-AVR versus TAVI, a DC-MA-[B] of SL-AVR versus conventional AVR (C-AVR), and a DC-MA-[C] TAVI versus C-AVR. Then, we computed a IDC-MA-[A'] of TAVI versus SL-AVR from the results of the DC-MA-[B] and the DC-MA-[C]., Results: We identified 6 RCTs and 30 PSM studies enrolling a total of 15,887 patients. The 3 DC-MAs demonstrated significantly lower perioperative (30-day or in-hospital) all-cause mortality after SL-AVR than after TAVI (odds ratio [OR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.80; p=0.005) and no significant differences between SL-AVR and C-AVR (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.94; p=0.81) and between TAVI and C-AVR (1.07; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.27; p=0.45). The computed IDC-MA-[A'] indicated no significant difference in mortality between SL-AVR and TAVI (1.01; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.86). Combining the results of the DC-MA-[A] and IDC-MA [A'] showed significantly lower mortality after SL-AVR than after TAVI (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.97; p=0.03)., Conclusions: For patients with severe AS, SL-AVR may achieve better perioperative survival than TAVI., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Pacing from the right ventricular apex (RVA) is associated with cardiac dysfunction and shows electrophysiological features similar to left bundle branch block in which left ventricular (LV) mechanical dyssynchrony impairs septal coronary artery perfusion., Methods: A total of 62 non-ischemic patients with an implanted pacemaker at the RVA with a pacing rate of >95% were studied. LV septal coronary perfusion as indicated by the LV septal perfusion index was measured by electrocardiography (ECG)-gated single-photon emission computed tomography for all patients at baseline and for patients who were upgraded to CRT at 6months after CRT. Relationships among LV septal perfusion index, QRS duration, and LV ejection fraction were analyzed., Results: Among the patients with permanent RVA pacing, 28 of 62 (45%) had impaired septal perfusion (i.e., septal perfusion index <0.9). The LV septal perfusion index was significantly correlated with both QRS duration (r=-0.763, p<0.001) and LV ejection fraction (r=0.462, p=0.001). Eleven patients were upgraded to CRT. CRT significantly improved the LV septal perfusion index from 0.63 (SD=0.13) to 0.89 (SD=0.19) (p<0.001)and cardiac function: LV end-systolic volume from 102.3mL (SD=70.0) to 179.7mL (SD=118.4) (p=0.002) and LV ejection fraction from 22.5 (SD=8.9%) to 38.4% (SD=13.9%) (p=0.001)., Conclusions: Nearly half of the non-ischemic patients with permanent RVA pacing presenting with prolonged QRS duration and LV dysfunction developed LV septal hypoperfusion. Both septal perfusion and LV function improved in patients who were upgraded to CRT., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine whether ≥moderate paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) independently impairs overall survival and how much the impact on survival is, we performed an updated meta-analysis pooling not unadjusted but adjusted hazard ratios (HRs)., Methods: Databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through January 2016 using PubMed and OVID. Search terms included paravalvular or perivalvular; regurgitation, leak, or leakage; percutaneous, transcatheter, transluminal, transarterial, transapical, transaortic, transcarotid, transaxillary, transsubclavian, transiliac, transfemoral, or transiliofemoral; and aortic valve. Studies considered for inclusion met the following criteria: the design was an observational comparative study; the study population was patients undergoing TAVI; patients were divided into ≥moderate and ≤mild post-TAVI PAR; outcomes included ≥1-year all-cause mortality; and the adjustment method was a multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis. An adjusted HR with its 95% confidence interval (CI) for ≥moderate post-TAVI PAR was abstracted from each individual study., Results: Our search identified 17 eligible studies including a total of 15,131 patients. A pooled analysis of all the 17 studies demonstrated a statistically significant 2.12-fold increase in mortality with ≥moderate PAR (HR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.79 to 2.51; p<0.00001). Exclusion of any single study from the meta-analysis did not substantively alter the overall result disfavoring ≥moderate PAR. Although the statistical tests suggested funnel plot asymmetry, the corrected effect estimate from the trim-and-fill method demonstrated still a statistically significant 1.83-fold risk of mortality with ≥moderate PAR., Conclusions: ≥Moderate post-TAVI PAR is associated with a 2.12-fold increase in overall (≥1-year) all-cause mortality., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The S3 prosthetic valve was introduced to overcome several issues with its predecessor, the SXT, in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), however, the clinical outcomes of this new model are not clearly defined. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the outcomes in Sapien 3 (S3) and Sapien XT (SXT) recipients., Methods: A literature search through PUBMED and EMBASE was conducted. Articles that included at least one of the clinical outcomes of interest were included in the meta-analysis: moderate to severe paravalvular regurgitation (PVR), permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), major vascular complications (MVC), cerebrovascular events (stroke and transient ischemic attack) (CVE), failure rate of device implantation, life-threatening, disabling or major bleeding, need for post-dilation and early all-cause-mortality., Results: A total of 9 observational cohort studies were included. S3 was implanted in 945 and SXT in 1553 patients. S3 was associated with a lower incidence of moderate to severe PVR (1.6% vs 6.9%, p<0.0001), lower MVC (5.1% vs 8.9%, p=0.01) and less serious bleeding (8.1% vs 15.2%, p=0.003) compared to the SXT. Device deployment failure rate was lower in the S3 (1.2% vs 5.9%, p=0.004) and the S3 required less post-dilation (16.9% vs 26.9%, p=0.05). Rates of CVE, perioperative mortality and PPI were similar between the two valves., Conclusions: Implantation of the S3 prosthetic valve results in lower rates of moderate to severe PVR, MVC, post-dilation and serious bleeding however it does not improve on the SXT in terms of CVE, PPI and early mortality., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To determine whether transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) improves (or impairs) follow-up overall survival compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), we performed a meta-analysis of observational studies with a propensity-score analysis and another meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs)., Methods: Databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through October 2015 using PubMed and OVID. Eligible studies were observational studies with a propensity-score analysis or RCTs of TAVI versus SAVR enrolling patients with severe aortic stenosis and reporting follow-up overall survival or all-cause mortality as an outcome. A hazard ratio (HR) with its 95% confidence interval (CI) of follow-up (including early) all-cause mortality for TAVI versus SAVR was abstracted from each individual study., Results: Our search identified 19 observational studies with a propensity-score analysis enrolling a total of 6234 patients. The arithmetic means of 1-year and 3-year survival rates were 82.7% and 71.3% after TAVI and 84.8% and 77.9% after SAVR, respectively. A pooled analysis demonstrated a statistically significant 21% increase in the hazard of mortality with TAVI relative to SAVR (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.39; p=0.010). Another pooled analysis of 4 RCTs (enrolling a total of 1795 patients) demonstrated no statistically significant difference in mortality between TAVI and SAVR (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.37; p=0.69)., Conclusions: The arithmetic mean of 3-year survival rates was 71.3% after TAVI and 77.9% after SAVR. Compared with SAVR, TAVI appears to be associated with a significant increase in follow-up all-cause mortality., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although telmisartan is suggested to improve proteinuria/albuminuria (or prevents progression of proteinuria/albuminuria), conclusive evidence is still lacking. We perform the first meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of telmisartan therapy on proteinuria/albuminuria., Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through February 2012. Eligible studies were prospective randomized controlled trials of telmisartan therapy versus other angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI), other anti-hypertensive drug therapy, placebo, or no medication and reporting urinary protein/albumin excretion (UPE/UAE) or urinary protein/albumin to creatinine ratio (UPCR/UACR) levels as an outcome. For each study, data regarding percent changes from baseline to final UPE/UAE/UPCR/UACR levels in both the telmisartan and control groups were used to generate mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: Of 49 potentially relevant articles screened initially, 20 reports of randomized trials enrolling a total of 25,425 patients were included. Pooled analysis suggested a significant reduction in percent changes of UPE/UAE/UPCR/UACR in the 7 ARB-control (MD, -19.99%; 95% CI, -28.68% to -11.30%; p<0.00001), 7 ACEI-control (MD, -14.08%; 95% CI, -25.36% to -2.80%; p=0.01), 6 non-ARB/ACEI-control (MD, -39.82%; 95% CI, -55.96% to -23.69%; p<0.00001), and all the 20 trials (MD, -24.36%; 95% CI, -32.85% to -15.87%; p<0.00001)., Conclusion: We found that, based on a meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials including >25,000 patients, telmisartan therapy is likely effective in the improvement of proteinuria/albuminuria or in the prevention of progression in proteinuria/albuminuria., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)