Catheter ablation versus medical therapy for treatment of ventricular tachycardia associated with structural heart disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and comparison with observational studies

Heart Rhythm ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (10) ◽  
pp. 1484-1491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert D. Anderson ◽  
Nilshan Ariyarathna ◽  
Geoffrey Lee ◽  
Sohaib Virk ◽  
Ivana Trivic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Ventricular Tachycardia ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Structural Heart Disease ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

scholarly journals SURGICAL VERSUS CATHETER ABLATION IN ATRIAL FIBRILLATION: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS

2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (11) ◽  
pp. 460
Author(s):  
Pattara Rattanawong ◽  
Jakrin Kewcharoen ◽  
Chanavuth Kanitsoraphan ◽  
Wasawat Vutthikraivit ◽  
Anusha Shanbhag ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Catheter Ablation ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Dietary saturated fat and heart disease: a narrative review

2019 ◽  
Vol 78 (6) ◽  
pp. 474-485 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffery L Heileson
Keyword(s):  
Heart Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Saturated Fat ◽  
Heart Association ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Disease Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract The American Heart Association (AHA) recently published a meta-analysis that confirmed their 60-year-old recommendation to limit saturated fat (SFA, saturated fatty acid) and replace it with polyunsaturated fat to reduce the risk of heart disease based on the strength of 4 Core Trials. To assess the evidence for this recommendation, meta-analyses on the effect of SFA consumption on heart disease outcomes were reviewed. Nineteen meta-analyses addressing this topic were identified: 9 observational studies and 10 randomized controlled trials. Meta-analyses of observational studies found no association between SFA intake and heart disease, while meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials were inconsistent but tended to show a lack of an association. The inconsistency seems to have been mediated by the differing clinical trials included. For example, the AHA meta-analysis only included 4 trials (the Core Trials), and those trials contained design and methodological flaws and did not meet all the predefined inclusion criteria. The AHA stance regarding the strength of the evidence for the recommendation to limit SFAs for heart disease prevention may be overstated and in need of reevaluation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document