Search

Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) may promote neuroinflammation prompting tinnitus. This retrospective cohort study evaluated whether anti-TNFα therapy influences incident tinnitus risk among adults with autoimmune disorders and no baseline tinnitus selected from a US electronic health records database (Eversana; 1 January 2010-27 January 2022). Patients with anti-TNFα had ≥90-day history pre-index (first autoimmune disorder diagnosis) and ≥180-day follow-up post-index. Random samples ( n = 25,000) of autoimmune patients without anti-TNFα were selected for comparisons. Tinnitus incidence was compared among patients with or without anti-TNFα therapy, overall and among at-risk age groups or by anti-TNFα category. High-dimensionality propensity score (hdPS) matching was used to adjust for baseline confounders. Compared with patients with no anti-TNFα, anti-TNFα was not associated with tinnitus risk overall (hdPS-matched HR [95% CI]: 1.06 [0.85, 1.33]), or between groups stratified by age (30-50 years: 1 [0.68, 1.48]; 51-70 years: 1.18 [0.89, 1.56]) or anti-TNFα category (monoclonal antibody vs. fusion protein: 0.91 [0.59, 1.41]). Anti-TNFα was not associated with tinnitus risk among those treated for ≥6 months (hdPS-matched HR [95% CI]: 0.96 [0.69, 1.32]) or ≥12 (1.03 [0.71, 1.5]), or those with RA (1.16 [0.88, 1.53]). Thus, in this US cohort study, anti-TNFα therapy was not associated with tinnitus incidence among patients with autoimmune disorders.

Pain in Sickle Cell Disease (SCD) is a major comorbidity and unique with acute pain due to recurrent and episodic vaso-occlusive crises as well as chronic pain, which can span an individual's entire life. Opioids are the mainstay treatment for pain in SCD. Due to recent health crises raised by adverse effects including deaths from opioid use, pain management in SCD is adversely affected. Cannabis and its products are most widely used for pain in multiple conditions and also by patients with SCD on their own. With the availability of "Medical Cannabis" and approval to use cannabis as medicine across majority of States in the United States as well as over-the-counter preparations, cannabis products are being used increasingly for SCD. The reliability of many of these products remains questionable, which poses a major health risk to the vulnerable individuals seeking pain relief. Therefore, this review provides up to date insights into available categories of cannabis-based treatment strategies, their mechanism of action and pre-clinical and clinical outcomes in SCD. It provides evidence for the benefits and risks of cannabis use in SCD and cautions about the unreliable and unvalidated products that may be adulterated with life-threatening non-cannabis compounds.

Background: Leadless pacemakers offer a safe and effective alternative pacing strategy. However, limited data are available for patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD), a population of significant relevance. Methods: Using the Nationwide Readmission Database, we extracted data from all adult patients with ESRD who underwent traditional transvenous or leadless pacemaker implantation between 2016 and 2021. We compared in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission rates, complication rates, and healthcare resource utilization between the two cohorts. Results: A total of 6384 (81.2%) patients were included in the transvenous pacemaker cohort, and 1481(18.8%) patients were included in the leadless pacemaker cohort. In patients with ESRD, leadless pacemaker implantation was linked to higher in-hospital complications when compared to transvenous pacemakers. These included the need for blood transfusion (aOR 1.85, 95% CI 1.32–2.60, p < 0.01), vascular complications (aOR 3.6, CI 1.40–9.26, p = 0.01), and cardiac complications (aOR 4.12, CI 1.70–9.98, p < 0.01). However, there were no differences between the two groups in terms of in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmission rates. The median length of stay was longer for leadless pacemaker implantation than transvenous pacemaker implantation (5 days vs. 4 days, p < 0.01). The total hospitalization charges were also higher ($139,826 vs. $93,919, p < 0.01). Conclusions: Although previous studies have demonstrated lower long-term complication rates with leadless pacemakers than transvenous pacemakers, our analysis shows a higher risk of short-term in-hospital complications in ESRD patients, though no differences in in-hospital mortality and 30-day readmissions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The implantation of cardiac electronic devices (CIEDs), including pacemakers and defibrillators, has become increasingly prevalent in recent years and has been accompanied by a significant rise in cardiac device infections (CDIs), which pose a substantial clinical and economic burden. CDIs are associated with hospitalizations and prolonged antibiotic therapy and often necessitate device removal, leading to increased morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs worldwide. Approximately 1–2% of CIED implants are associated with infections, making this a critical issue to address. In this contemporary review, we discuss the burden of CDIs with their risk factors, healthcare costs, prevention strategies, and clinical management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are frequently interconnected and their association leads to an exponential increase in the risk of both fatal and non-fatal events. In addition, the burden of arrhythmias in CKD patients is increased. On the other hand, the presence of CKD is an important factor that influences the decision to pursue cardiac device therapy. Data on CKD patients with device therapy are scarce and mostly derives from observational studies and case reports. Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is associated with decreased mortality, reduced heart failure symptoms, and improved renal function in early stages of CKD. Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) are associated with a significant reduction in the mortality of CKD patients only for the secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death. Cardiac resynchronization therapy with defibrillator (CRT-D) is preferred in patients who meet the established criteria. The need for cardiac pacing is increased three-fold in dialysis patients. CKD is an independent risk factor for infections associated with cardiac devices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The history of cardiac pacing dates back to the 1930s with externalized pacing and has evolved to incorporate transvenous, multi-lead, or even leadless devices. Annual implantation rates of cardiac implantable electronic devices have increased since the introduction of the implantable system, likely related to expanding indications, and increasing global life expectancy and aging demographics. Here, we summarize the relevant literature on cardiac pacing to demonstrate the enormous impact it has had within the field of cardiology. Further, we look forward to the future of cardiac pacing, including conduction system pacing and leadless pacing strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Leadless pacemakers with an atrioventricular synchrony algorithm represent a novel technology for patients qualified for VDD pacing. The current evidence of their performance is limited to several small-scale observational studies. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this new technology. We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases from their inception to 12 September 2022. The primary efficacy outcome was atrioventricular synchrony after implantation, whereas the secondary efficacy outcome was the change in cardiac output represented by the left ventricular outflow tract velocity time integral (LVOT-VTI). The primary safety outcome was major complications related to the procedures and the algorithm. Means or mean differences with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were combined using a random-effects model or a fixed-effects model. Finally, 8 published studies with 464 participants were included in the qualitative analysis. The pooled atrioventricular synchrony proportion was 78.9% (95% CI 71.9–86.0%), and a further meta-regression did not screen factors that contributed significantly to the heterogeneity. Additionally, a significant increase in atrioventricular synchrony of 11.3% (95% CI 7.0–15.7%, p < 0.01) was achieved in patients experiencing programming optimization. LVOT-VTI was significantly increased by 1.9 cm (95% CI 1.2–2.6, p < 0.01), compared with the VVI pacing mode. The overall incidence of complications was approximately 6.3%, with major complications related to the algorithm being extremely low. Overall, leadless pacemakers with atrioventricular synchronous pacing demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy. Future data on their long-term performance are required to facilitate their widespread adoption in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Leadless pacemakers (LPMs) have emerged as an alternative to conventional transvenous pacemakers to eliminate the complications associated with leads and subcutaneous pockets. However, LPMs still present with complications, such as cardiac perforation, dislodgment, vascular complications, infection, and tricuspid valve regurgitation. Furthermore, the efficacy of the leadless VDD LPMs is influenced by the unachievable 100% atrioventricular synchrony. In this article, we review the available data on the strategy selection, including appropriate patient selection, procedure techniques, device design, and post-implant programming, to minimize the complication rate and maximize the efficacy, and we summarize the clinical settings in which a choice must be made between VVI LPMs, VDD LPMs, or conventional transvenous pacemakers. In addition, we provide an outlook for the technology for the realization of true dual-chamber leadless and battery-less pacemakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: Leadless (LL) stimulation is perceived to lower surgical, vascular, and lead-related complications compared to transvenous (TV) pacemakers, yet controlled studies are lacking and real-life experience is non-conclusive. (2) Aim: To prospectively analyse survival and complication rates in leadless versus transvenous VVIR pacemakers. (3) Methods: Prospective analysis of mortality and complications in 344 consecutive VVIR TV and LL pacemaker recipients between June 2015 and May 2021. Indications for VVIR pacing were "slow" AF, atrio-ventricular block in AF or in sinus rhythm in bedridden cognitively impaired patients. LL indication was based on individualised clinical judgement. (4) Results: 72 patients received LL and 272 TV VVIR pacemakers. LL pacemaker indications included ongoing/expected chronic haemodialysis, superior venous access issues, active lifestyle with low pacing percentage expected, frailty causing high bleeding/infectious risk, previous valvular endocarditis, or device infection requiring extraction. No significant difference in the overall acute and long-term complication rate was observed between LL and TV cohorts, with greater mortality occurring in TV due to selection of older patients. (5) Conclusions: Given the low complication rate and life expectancy in this contemporary VVIR cohort, extending LL indications to all VVIR candidates is unlikely to provide clear-cut benefits. Considering the higher costs of LL technology, careful patient selection is mandatory for LL PMs to become advantageous, i.e., in the presence of vascular access issues, high bleeding/infectious risk, and long life expectancy, rendering lead-related issues and repeated surgery relevant in the long-term perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Finally, a specific left ventricular endocardial leadless pacemaker system [[8]] overcomes limitations posed by unfavourable peripheral venous access or coronary sinus anatomy for the positioning of conventional coronary sinus leads in selected patients with heart failure and CRT indication. As far as cardiac resynchronization therapy is concerned, changing trends in the implantation of CRT devices must be considered in the wider context of overall heart failure patient management improvements and specific developments in the field of device therapy. In recent years, the rate of pacemaker implantations has continued to rise throughout Europe [[1]]. Leadless pacemakers are among the possible options available for the treatment of elderly, clinically fragile patients who require a pacemaker. [Extracted from the article]

The experience with leadless pacing is growing and has identified patient populations who may derive particular benefit from leadless pacemakers, such as patients with difficult vascular access, prior valve interventions, and high infection risk [[17], [19]]. The history of cardiac pacing has been defined by many innovation milestones starting in the early 1960s. In the subsequent decade, cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) was introduced, which remains a cornerstone therapy in patients with symptomatic heart failure in combination with guideline-directed medical therapy. A direct comparison between leadless and conventional transvenous pacemakers is still lacking and may identify additional patient populations who could be eligible for leadless pacemaker implantation. [Extracted from the article]

Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) are a standard therapy utilized for different cardiac conditions. They are implanted in a growing number of patients, including those with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Cardiovascular diseases, including heart failure and malignant arrhythmia, remain the leading cause of mortality among CKD patients, especially in ESKD. CIED implantation procedures are considered minor surgery, typically with transvenous leads inserted via upper central veins, followed by an impulse generator introduced subcutaneously. A decision regarding optimal hemodialysis (HD) modality and the choice of permanent vascular access (VA) could be particularly challenging in CIED recipients. The potential consequences of arteriovenous access on the CIED side are related to (1) venous hypertension from lead-related central vein stenosis and (2) the risk of systemic infection. Therefore, when creating permanent vascular access, the clinical scenario may be complicated by the CIED presence on one side and the lack of suitable vessels for arteriovenous fistula on the contralateral arm. These factors suggest the need for an individualized approach according to different clinical situations: (1) CIED in a CKD patient; (2) CIED in a patient on hemodialysis CIED; and (3) VA in a patient with CIED. This complex clinical conundrum creates the necessity for close cooperation between cardiologists and nephrologists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited disorder of hemoglobin structure. The clinical effects of the sickle gene are pleiotropic in nature causing multiple phenotypic expressions associated with the various complications of the disease. The hallmark of the disease is pain that could be acute, chronic, nociceptive, or neuropathic that could occur singly or in various combinations. The acute vaso-occlusive painful crisis (VOC) is the most common cause of admissions to the Emergency Department and/or the hospital. Although progress has been made in understanding the pathophysiology of SCD as well as in developing preventive and curative therapies, effective pain management continues to lag behind and depend mostly on the use of opioids. This review describes the history of opioids from the ancient times of opium to the current use of the many controversial opioids. In addition, the major cause of death of patients with SCD is the complications of the disease itself and not the use of opioids. The use of opioids by patients with SCD has been stable over the years. Judicious use of opioids to treat sickle cell pain according to available guidelines could minimize the unnecessary suffering experienced by patients with SCD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]