Efficacy of psychological interventions on psychological outcomes in coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Background The benefits of cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) and positive psychology therapy (PPT) in patients with cardiovascular disease are still not well defined. We assessed the efficacy of CBT and PPT on psychological outcomes in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. Methods Randomized controlled trials evaluating CBT or PPT in CAD patients published until May 2018 were systematically analyzed. Primary outcomes were depression, stress, anxiety, anger, happiness, and vital satisfaction. Random effects meta-analyses using the inverse variance method were performed. Effects were expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs); risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool. Results Nineteen trials were included (n = 1956); sixteen evaluated CBT (n = 1732), and three PPT (n = 224). Compared with control groups, depressive symptoms (13 trials; SMD −0.80; 95% CI −1.33 to −0.26), and anxiety (11 trials; SMD −1.26; 95% CI −2.11 to −0.41) improved after the PI, and depression (6 trials; SMD −2.08; 95% CI −3.22 to −0.94), anxiety (5 trials; SMD −1.33; 95% CI −2.38 to −0.29), and stress (3 trials; SMD −3.72; 95% CI −5.91 to −1.52) improved at the end of follow-up. Vital satisfaction was significantly increased at follow-up (MD 1.30, 0.27, 2.33). Non-significant effects on secondary outcomes were found. Subgroup analyses were consistent with overall analyses. Conclusion CBT and PPT improve several psychological outcomes in CAD patients. Depression and anxiety improved immediately after the intervention while stress and vital satisfaction improve in the mid-term. Future research should assess the individual role of CBT and PPT in CAD populations.

Download Full-text

Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus stenting for patients with chronic kidney disease and complex coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Therapeutic Advances in Chronic Disease ◽

10.1177/2040622321990273 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

pp. 204062232199027

Author(s):

Kongyong Cui ◽

Hong Liu ◽

Fei Yuan ◽

Feng Xu ◽

Min Zhang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Myocardial Infarction ◽

Coronary Artery Disease ◽

Chronic Kidney Disease ◽

Coronary Artery ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Artery Bypass ◽

Repeat Revascularization ◽

Artery Disease

Background: The relative role of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and complex coronary artery disease (CAD) remains debatable due to the lack of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We therefore performed this meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of the two strategies in CKD patients with multivessel and/or left main disease. Methods: Electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched to identify the eligible subgroup analysis of RCTs and propensity-matched registries. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality during the longest follow-up. Results: Five subgroup analyses of RCTs and six propensity-matched registries involving 26,441 patients were analyzed. Overall, the strategy of CABG was associated with lower risks of long-term mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74–0.93], myocardial infarction (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.27–0.62), and repeat revascularization (OR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.16–0.39) compared with PCI in CKD patients with complex CAD. However, CABG was slightly associated with higher risk of stroke than PCI (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.00–1.77). Nonetheless, the higher stroke risk in the CABG group no longer existed during long-term follow-up (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.37–2.25) (>3 years). Conclusion: This meta-analysis supports the current guideline advising CABG for patients with CKD and complex CAD. At the expense of slightly increased risk of stroke, CABG reduces the incidences of long-term all-cause death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization compared with PCI.

Download Full-text