Search

Background and Objective: Marijuana use causes catecholamine surge with consequent tachycardia and elevation of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. It is unclear if the catecholamine surge associated is sufficient to cause left ventricular wall apical ballooning (TakoTsubo Cardiomyopathy (TTC)). Given the similarity in the pathophysiology of TTC and mechanism of action of cannabis, we sought to investigate if there is any association. Methods: We obtained data from the HCUP-NIS of all patients older than 45 years hospitalized between 2012 - 2014. Our main outcome was diagnosis of TTC, and main exposure variables was cannabis use both identified using the ICD-9 codes. Using the SURVEYLOGISTICS procedure, we performed logistic regressions to estimate the odds of TTC diagnosis and in-hospital mortality among cannabis users adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and other recreational drugs. Results: Of the 7,805,400 hospitalized patients who were > 45 years, 10,160 (0.1%) had a diagnosis of TTC, 54,311 (0.7%) were nondependent cannabis user and 5,045 (0.1%) were dependent cannabis users. We observed a significant association between TTC and nondependent cannabis use (OR 1.35, 95% CI: 1.10-1.65), but the association was nonsignificant for dependent cannabis use. After adjusting for potential confounders such as age, race, gender, comorbidities, cocaine, amphetamine and alcohol, nondependent cannabis use was associated with a 2-fold increased odds of TTC (AOR 2.00, 95% CI: 1.61-2.40). However, the association remained nonsignificant for dependent cannabis users (AOR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.25-1.92). Also, among patients diagnosed with TTC, there was no significant difference in the odds of in-hospital mortality among cannabis users (dependent and nondependent) when compared to nonusers (AOR 1.04, 95% CI: 0.39 - 2.70). Conclusion: In our study population, nondependent cannabis use was associated with significantly increased odds of TTC. However, among patients with TTC, in-hospital mortality rate was the same irrespective of cannabis exposure.

Background: Cannabidiol (CBD)-a component of cannabis with no psychoactive or cognitive effect has been proven in animal models to have a vasodilatory, anti-oxidant and anti-inflammatory effect on the blood vessels. However, it is unclear if cannabis users - while being exposed to its CBD constituents - benefit from its vasodilatory and anti-inflammatory effect in the prevention of acute myocardial infarction (MI). Objective: To investigate if there is a difference in the odds of MI among cannabis users when compared to nonusers. Methods: We used data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample on patients ages 45 years and older admitted between 2012 - 2014. The main study outcome was clinical diagnosis of MI, and the main exposure variable was cannabis use identified using ICD-9 codes. Cannabis use was categorized into non-use, non-dependent, and dependent use. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate the odds of MI and In-hospital mortality in relation to cannabis use adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and use of other recreational drugs. Results: Of the 7, 995,162 hospitalized patients who were > 45 years, 532,112 (6.7%) had a diagnosis of MI, 56,836 (0.7%) were non-dependent cannabis user and 5,417 (0.1%) were dependent cannabis users. We observed a significant inverse association between cannabis use and MI (non-dependent OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.83-0.90; dependent OR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.21-0.31). After adjusting for confounding variables, the association was attenuated for non-dependent cannabis users (OR: 1.03, 95% CI: 0.99-1.06]). However, among dependent cannabis users, there was 66% decreased odds of MI when compared to nonusers. Also, cannabis use was associated with 32% decreased odds of in-hospital mortality among patients with MI when compared to nonuse. Conclusions: Using the largest national data, our study showed cannabis use was not a risk factor for MI and alternatively may point to a protective benefit in the diagnosis of MI and in-hospital mortality. Future prospective studies may aid in further exploring this association to maximize the therapeutic advantage of the cannabinoid system in MI prevention.

Background: With increasing legalization of cannabis, there is a growing number of cannabis users in the US. Cannabidiol - a component of cannabis with no psychoactive or cognitive effect has been proven in animal models to have vasodilatory and anti-inflammatory effect on the blood vessels. However, in clinical literature, the association between cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and cannabis remains inconclusive. Objective: To examine if there is a difference in the prevalence of CVA among patients who use cannabis and non-users. Methods: We identified patients > 18 years (N=12,114,360) from the 2012 -2014 National Inpatient Sample database. Using the ICD-9 code, we categorized patients using cannabis (non-dependent and dependent users) and non-users. Our outcome of interest was prevalence of CVA in this population. Logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the association between cannabis use and CVA. Using multivariate regression model, we adjusted for known confounders of CVA; age, gender, race, insurance type, socioeconomic status, tobacco use, cocaine use, alcohol abuse, amphetamine use, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, renal failure, prior history of CVA and family history of CVA. Results: From our study sample (12,114,360 hospitalized patients), 2.1% (253,752) had a diagnosis of CVA, 1.48% (179,576) were non-dependent cannabis users and 0.21% (25,968) dependent users. Among hospitalized patient, non-dependent cannabis use was associated with an 8% increased odds of CVA (AOR 1.08 [1.03-1.13]) compared to non-users. However, dependent cannabis use was associated with a 60% decreased odds of CVA (AOR 0.40 [0.31-0.49]) compared to non-users. Also, In-group comparison shows a 60% decreased odds of CVA among dependent cannabis users (AOR 0.36[0.29-0.46]) compared to non-dependent cannabis users. Conclusions: Non-dependent cannabis use was associated with a slightly increased odd of CVA while dependent cannabis use was independently protective against CVA. Our study used the largest repository of clinical information to explore this association, however we recommend more clinical study to explore this correlation in other to maximize the pharmacological benefit of cannabidiol in cannabis for the prevention of CVA.

Background: Diabetes has been associated with complications and poor perioperative outcomes. In Radiofrequency catheter ablation - therapy of choice for drug refractory atrial fibrillation and flutter, association between diabetes and procedural complications are less documented. Objectives: To examine if there is a difference in perioperative complications in patients with chronic diabetes who underwent RFA for atrial fibrillation/flutter when compared with non-diabetics. Methods: We selected patients > 45 years from the National Inpatient Survey data 2014. We identified 8356 patients (69.6 ± 9.1yrs) who underwent catheter ablation. Logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate the difference in perioperative complications (hemorrhage, cardiac perforation, cardiac complications, respiratory complications, peripheral vascular complications, stroke and in-hospital mortality) between diabetics and non-diabetics. All models were adjusted for age, gender, race, residential income, insurance, co-morbidities, hospital bed size, hospital location/teaching status, hospital region, length of stay and median household income. Results: Among our selected 8356 patients, 5777(69.1%) were non-diabetics, 2203(26.4%) had uncomplicated diabetes and 376 (4.5%) complicated diabetes. Overall there were 634 events (240 hemorrhages, 56 perforations, 163 cardiac complications, 43 respiratory complications, 12 strokes, 40 peripheral vascular complications and 80 in-hospital death. Rates of complications were the same among diabetes and non-diabetics. In the multivariate models, the odds of complications remain statistically non-significant across all the groups. However, among all the patients who underwent RFA, there is an increased odds of hemorrhage among patients with Medicare insurance versus private insurance (OR 1.73 95%CI 1.11-2.70), peripheral vascular complications among hospitals in the south (OR 3.35 95%CI 1.30-9.62), respiratory complications among patients with CHF (4.60 95%CI 1.68-12.60), death among patients with renal failure (OR 2.22 95%CI 1.32-3.73) and hospitals in the south (2.55 95% CI 1.08-6.0) and west (OR 3.23 95%CI 1.25-8.3) compared to the northeast. Odds of stroke were less among both urban non-teaching (OR 0.02 95%CI 0.01 - 0.34) and teaching hospital (OR 0.05 95%CI 0.01-0.36) when compared to rural hospital. Conclusions: RFA has a similar procedural safety in diabetics when compared to non-diabetic patients. It remains a safe procedure in diabetics with drug-refractory atrial fibrillation and flutter. Renal failure, CHF, type of Insurance, hospital location and teaching status are predictors of complications after RFA.