scholarly journals Prevalence of Atrial Fibrillation and Associated Mortality Among Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zuwei Li ◽  
Wen Shao ◽  
Jing Zhang ◽  
Jianyong Ma ◽  
Shanshan Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Epidemiological Studies ◽  
Clinical Impact ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
New Onset

Background: Epidemiological studies have shown that atrial fibrillation (AF) is a potential cardiovascular complication of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the prevalence and clinical impact of AF and new-onset AF in patients with COVID-19.Methods: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and MedRxiv up to February 27, 2021, were searched to identify studies that reported the prevalence and clinical impact of AF and new-onset AF in patients with COVID-19. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021238423).Results: Nineteen eligible studies were included with a total of 21,653 hospitalized patients. The pooled prevalence of AF was 11% in patients with COVID-19. Older (≥60 years of age) patients with COVID-19 had a nearly 2.5-fold higher prevalence of AF than younger (<60 years of age) patients with COVID-19 (13 vs. 5%). Europeans had the highest prevalence of AF (15%), followed by Americans (11%), Asians (6%), and Africans (2%). The prevalence of AF in patients with severe COVID-19 was 6-fold higher than in patients with non-severe COVID-19 (19 vs. 3%). Furthermore, AF (OR: 2.98, 95% CI: 1.91 to 4.66) and new-onset AF (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.60 to 3.37) were significantly associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality among patients with COVID-19.Conclusion: AF is quite common among hospitalized patients with COVID-19, particularly among older (≥60 years of age) patients with COVID-19 and patients with severe COVID-19. Moreover, AF and new-onset AF were independently associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality among hospitalized patients with COVID-19.

scholarly journals New-onset glucose disorders in peritoneal dialysis patients: a meta-analysis and systematic review

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (8) ◽  
pp. 1412-1419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Xue ◽  
Yan-Yan Gu ◽  
Cheng-Ji Cui ◽  
Chen-Chen Zhou ◽  
Xian-Dong Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Glucose Tolerance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Incidence Rates ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
New Onset

Abstract Background Peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients are at high risk of developing glucose metabolism disturbance (GMD). The incidence and prevalence of new-onset GMD, including diabetes mellitus (DM), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and impaired fast glucose (IFG), after initiation of PD, as well as their correlated influence factors, varies among studies in different areas and of different sample sizes. Also, the difference compared with hemodialysis (HD) remained unclear. Thus we designed this meta-analysis and systematic review to provide a full landscape of the occurrence of glucose disorders in PD patients. Methods We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases for relevant studies through September 2018. Meta-analysis was performed on outcomes using random effects models with subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis. Results We identified 1124 records and included 9 studies involving 13 879 PD patients. The pooled incidence of new-onset DM (NODM) was 8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 4–12; I2 = 98%] adjusted by sample sizes in PD patients. Pooled incidence rates of new-onset IGT and IFG were 15% (95% CI 3–31; I2 = 97%) and 32% (95% CI 27–37), respectively. There was no significant difference in NODM risk between PD and HD [risk ratio 0.99 (95% CI 0.69–1.40); P = 0.94; I2 = 92%]. PD patients with NODM were associated with an increased risk of mortality [hazard ratio 1.06 (95% CI 1.01–1.44); P < 0.001; I2 = 92.5%] compared with non-DM PD patients. Conclusions Around half of PD patients may develop a glucose disorder, which can affect the prognosis by significantly increasing mortality. The incidence did not differ among different ethnicities or between PD and HD. The risk factor analysis did not draw a definitive conclusion. The glucose tolerance test should be routinely performed in PD patients.

scholarly journals Effect of Digoxin Therapy on Mortality in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: An Updated Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoxu Wang ◽  
Yi Luo ◽  
Dan Xu ◽  
Kun Zhao
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Clinical Effects ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Risk Of Mortality ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Background: Whether digoxin is associated with increased mortality in atrial fibrillation (AF) remains controversial. We aimed to assess the risk of mortality and clinical effects of digoxin use in patients with AF.Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched to identify eligible studies comparing all-cause mortality of patients with AF taking digoxin with those not taking digoxin, and the length of follow-up was at least 6 months. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted and pooled.Results: A total of 29 studies with 621,478 patients were included. Digoxin use was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality in all patients with AF (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.13–1.22, P < 0.001), especially in patients without HF (HR 1.28, 95% CI 1.11–1.47, P < 0.001). There was no significant association between digoxin and mortality in patients with AF and HF (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.99–1.14, P = 0.110). In all patients with AF, regardless of concomitant HF, digoxin use was associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.23–1.60, P < 0.001) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08–1.50, P < 0.001), and digoxin use had no significant association with all-cause hospitalization (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.92–1.39, P = 0.230).Conclusion: We conclude that digoxin use is associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality, CV mortality, and SCD, and it does not reduce readmission for AF, regardless of concomitant HF. Digoxin may have a neutral effect on all-cause mortality in patients with AF with concomitant HF.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.ukPROSPERO.

scholarly journals New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Primary Aldosteronism Receiving Different Treatment Strategies: Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Three Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng-Hsuan Tsai ◽  
Ya-Li Chen ◽  
Chien-Ting Pan ◽  
Yen-Tin Lin ◽  
Po-Chin Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Essential Hypertension ◽  
Primary Aldosteronism ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist ◽  
Onset Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
New Onset

BackgroundPrimary aldosteronism (PA) is a common cause of secondary hypertension and associated with higher incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF). However, the effects of surgical or medical therapies on preventing NOAF in PA patents remain unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis study was to assess the risk of NOAF among PA patients receiving mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) treatment, PA patients receiving adrenalectomy, and patients with essential hypertension.MethodsWe performed the meta-analysis of the randomized or observational studies that investigated the incidence rate of NOAF in PA patients receiving MRA treatment versus PA patients receiving adrenalectomy from database inception until December 01, 2020 which were identified from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library.ResultsA total of 172 related studies were reviewed, of which three fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including a total of 2,705 PA patients. The results of meta-analysis demonstrated a higher incidence of NOAF among the PA patients receiving MRA treatment compared to the PA patients receiving adrenalectomy (pooled odds ratio [OR]: 2.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.76–4.57 in the random effects model, I2 = 0%). The pooled OR for the PA patients receiving MRA treatment compared to the patients with essential hypertension was 1.91 (95% CI: 1.11–3.28). The pooled OR for the PA patients receiving adrenalectomy compared to the patients with essential hypertension was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.28–1.79).ConclusionCompared to the essential hypertension patients and the PA patients receiving adrenalectomy, the patients with PA receiving MRA treatment had a higher risk of NOAF.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42021222022.

Abstract 12813: Atrial Fibrillation and Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohan Satish ◽  
Raviteja Guddeti ◽  
Florian Wenzl ◽  
Ryan Walters ◽  
Venkata M Alla
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ejection Fraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Excess Risk ◽  
Mortality Data ◽  
Preserved Ejection Fraction ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Introduction: Due to shared risk factors and pathophysiology, atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) frequently coexist. However, the prognostic implications of AF in HFpEF are unclear with conflicting data. Herein, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of concomitant AF on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with HFpEF. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar were comprehensively searched through May 7th, 2020 for studies comparing outcomes of HFpEF patients with and without AF. Outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality and a composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Data from selected studies were abstracted and pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals [CIs] for each of the outcomes. Results: Our final analysis included 10 studies with 27,440 HFpEF patients (43.2% with AF). AF was associated with significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality (OR 1.37 [1.17-1.61], p < 0.001, Fig. 1A), HF hospitalization or CV mortality (OR 1.66 [1.16-2.36], p = 0.005, Fig. 1B), and HF hospitalization alone (OR 1.34 [1.03-1.76], p = 0.03, Fig. 1C). However, AF was not associated with excess risk of CV mortality alone (OR 1.10 [0.79-1.52], p = 0.57, Fig. 1D). Conclusions: In patients with HFpEF, concomitant AF is associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality and HF hospitalization. Further research into the mechanisms and interventions to mitigate this excess risk is necessary.

scholarly journals Effects of Hot Balloon vs. Cryoballoon Ablation for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinyi Peng ◽  
Xiao Liu ◽  
Hongbo Tian ◽  
Yu Chen ◽  
Xuexun Li
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pulmonary Veins ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Cryoballoon Ablation ◽  
Procedure Time ◽  
Increased Risk

Background: Balloon-based catheter ablations, including hot balloon ablation (HBA) and cryoballoon ablation (CBA), have rapidly emerged as alternative modalities to conventional catheter atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation owing to their impressive procedural advantages and better clinical outcomes and safety. However, the differences in characteristics, effectiveness, safety, and efficacy between HBA and CBA remain undetermined. This study compares the characteristic and prognosis differences between HBA and CBA.Methods: Electronic search was conducted in six databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrial.gov, and medRxiv) with specific search strategies. Eligible studies were selected based on specific criteria; all records were identified up to June 1, 2021. The mean difference, odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the clinical outcomes. Heterogeneity and risk of bias were assessed using predefined criteria.Results: Seven studies were included in the final meta-analysis. Compared with CBA, more patients in the HBA group had residual conduction and required a higher incidence of touch-up ablation (TUA) [OR (95% CI) = 2.76 (2.02–3.77), P = 0.000]. The most frequent sites of TUA were the left superior pulmonary veins (PVs) in the HBA group vs. the right inferior PVs in the CBA group. During HBA surgery, the left and right superior PVs were more likely to have a higher fluid injection volume. Furthermore, the procedure time was longer in the HBA group than in the CBA group [weighted mean difference (95% CI) = 14.24 (4.39–24.09), P = 0.005]. Patients in the CBA group could have an increased risk of AF occurrence, and accepted more antiarrhythmic drug therapy; however, the result was insignificant.Conclusions: HBA and CBA are practical ablation approaches for AF treatment. Patients who received HBA had a higher incidence of TUA and longer procedure time. Clinical outcomes during the mid-term follow-up between HBA and CBA were comparable.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=259487, identifier: CRD42021259487.

scholarly journals Safety of Dabigatran as an Anticoagulant: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ya Zhou ◽  
Zhihao Yao ◽  
Linjie Zhu ◽  
Yong Tang ◽  
Jie Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Intracranial Hemorrhage ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Adverse Reactions ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Suitable Alternative ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Background: Dabigatran is a univalent low-molecular-weight direct thrombin inhibitor which was developed as an alternative to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). However, the safety of dabigatran remains controversial so far. In this study, we aimed to compare the risk of bleeding, fatal adverse events, and the all-cause mortality of dabigatran with those of the control group by a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, Wanfang database, Clinical trial, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Chinese Scientific Journal database (VIP), and Chinese Biological Medicine database (CBM), for clinical trials on conventional treatments compared with dabigatran, published between January 2014 and July 2020. The reported outcomes, including the endpoints of primary safety, were systematically investigated.Results: Seven RCTs (n = 10,743) were included in the present systematic review. Compared to the control groups, dabigatran was not associated with an increased risk of major bleeding (relative risk [RR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.61 to 1.21, p = 0.06), intracranial hemorrhage (RR 0.89, 95% CI: 0.58 to 1.36, p = 0.41), fatal adverse reactions (RR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.17, p = 0.66), all-cause mortality (RR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.11, p = 0.45, I2 = 0%), and significantly reduced risk of clinically relevant non-major bleeding (RR 0.96, 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.42, p = 0.0007). However, dabigatran is associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (RR 1.78, 95% CI: 1.02 to 3.13, p = 0.05).Conclusion: Dabigatran has a favorable safety profile in terms of major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and life-threatening events, among other safety outcomes. The present study suggested that dabigatran may be a suitable alternative to VKAs as an oral anticoagulant. However, more data are necessary to clarify the incidence of other adverse events and serious adverse reactions.

Perioperative atrial fibrillation and risk of stroke after cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M.K Wang ◽  
P Chen ◽  
P Meyre ◽  
M.Z Ali ◽  
R Heo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Cardiac Surgery ◽  
Stroke Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
New Onset

Abstract Background Perioperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after cardiac surgery has been associated with an increased risk of stroke. However, many previous studies have not systematically excluded patients with pre-existing AF. As such, the association between new-onset POAF and stroke risk has not been well established. Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the short and long-term risks of stroke in patients experiencing new-onset POAF after cardiac surgery. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases for studies comparing the risk of stroke in patients with versus without new-onset POAF after cardiac surgery. Studies were included in our review if they enrolled ≥100 patients and defined POAF as new-onset AF in patients with no history of preoperative AF. Data were independently extracted in duplicate. The quality of studies was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to calculate summary risk ratios. Short-term stroke risk was calculated using events occurring either in-hospital or ≤30 days after surgery, and long-term risk was calculated using events occurring &gt;30 days after surgery. Results After reviewing 11,791 citations, 46 studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies included 364,822 patients, of which 76,388 (20.9%) developed new-onset POAF. The incidence of stroke was higher among patients with POAF versus no POAF (n=44 studies; incidence 2.76% vs. 1.53%; relative risk (RR) 1.91, 95% CI 1.65–2.23; I2 = 78%). A sensitivity analysis of high-quality studies alone yielded similar results (n=9 studies; RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.31–2.30; I2 = 88%). Patients with POAF had a higher incidence of stroke both in the short-term (n=35 studies; 2.71% vs. 1.36%; RR 2.13, 95% CI 1.81–2.51; I2 = 69%) and long-term (n=20 studies; 1.6 vs. 1.0 per 100 patient-years; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.24–1.57; I2 = 27%). The risk of stroke was increased in POAF patients across all types of cardiac surgery performed, including isolated CABG (n=19 studies; RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.60–2.32; I2 = 62%), isolated transcatheter aortic valve implantation (n=7 studies; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.32–2.63; I2 = 0%), and studies including multiple procedure types (n=16 studies; RR 1.90, 95% CI 1.44–2.51; I2 = 89%). Conclusion New-onset POAF after cardiac surgery is associated with an increased risk of stroke, both in the short and long term. The absolute risk difference is small, and randomized trials are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of treatment interventions in this patient population. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals EXPRESS: Stroke risk following traumatic brain injury: systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 174749302110042
Author(s):  
Grace Mary Turner ◽  
Christel McMullan ◽  
Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi ◽  
Danai Bem ◽  
Tom Marshall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Stroke Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Vitamin K Antagonists ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Large Sample Size ◽  
Hazard Ratios ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
The Cochrane Library

Aims To investigate the association between TBI and stroke risk. Summary of review We undertook a systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library from inception to 4th December 2020. We used random-effects meta-analysis to pool hazard ratios (HR) for studies which reported stroke risk post-TBI compared to controls. Searches identified 10,501 records; 58 full texts were assessed for eligibility and 18 met the inclusion criteria. The review included a large sample size of 2,606,379 participants from four countries. Six studies included a non-TBI control group, all found TBI patients had significantly increased risk of stroke compared to controls (pooled HR 1.86; 95% CI 1.46-2.37). Findings suggest stroke risk may be highest in the first four months post-TBI, but remains significant up to five years post-TBI. TBI appears to be associated with increased stroke risk regardless of severity or subtype of TBI. There was some evidence to suggest an association between reduced stroke risk post-TBI and Vitamin K antagonists and statins, but increased stroke risk with certain classes of antidepressants. Conclusion TBI is an independent risk factor for stroke, regardless of TBI severity or type. Post-TBI review and management of risk factors for stroke may be warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document