Faculty Opinions recommendation of Survival and Cardiovascular Outcomes of Patients With Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Author(s):  
Wilbert Aronow
2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. S74
Author(s):  
H. Alkofide ◽  
R. Almesned ◽  
L. Alnoghaimshi ◽  
Z. Alkherb ◽  
G. Alhindi ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 100997
Author(s):  
Safi U. Khan ◽  
Ahmad N. Lone ◽  
Muhammad Shahzeb Khan ◽  
Salim S. Virani ◽  
Roger S. Blumenthal ◽  
...  

Heart ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 104 (4) ◽  
pp. 306-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauro Chiarito ◽  
Matteo Pagnesi ◽  
Enrico Antonio Martino ◽  
Michele Pighi ◽  
Andrea Scotti ◽  
...  

ObjectivesDifferences in terms of safety and efficacy of percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral repair between patients with functional and degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR) are not well established. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify these differences.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Google scholar database and international meeting abstracts were searched for all studies about MitraClip. Studies with <25 patients or where 1-year results were not delineated between MR aetiology were excluded. This study is registered with PROSPERO.ResultsA total of nine studies investigating the mid-term outcome of percutaneous edge-to-edge repair in patients with functional versus degenerative MR were included in the meta-analysis (n=2615). At 1 year, there were not significant differences among groups in terms of patients with MR grade≤2 (719/1304 vs 295/504; 58% vs 54%; risk ratio (RR) 1.12; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.47; p=0.40), while there was a significantly lower rate of mitral valve re-intervention in patients with functional MR compared with those with degenerative MR (77/1770 vs 80/818; 4% vs 10%; RR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.97; p=0.04). One-year mortality rate was 16% (408/2498) and similar among groups (RR 1.26; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.77; p=0.18). Functional MR group showed significantly higher percentage of patients in New York Heart Association class III/IV (234/1480 vs 49/583; 16% vs 8%; p<0.01) and re-hospitalisation for heart failure (137/605 vs 31/220; 23% vs 14%; p=0.03). No differences were found in terms of single leaflet device attachment (25/969 vs 20/464; 3% vs 4%; p=0.81) and device embolisation (no events reported in both groups) at 1 year.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis suggests that percutaneous edge-to-edge repair is likely to be an efficacious and safe option in patients with both functional and degenerative MR. Large, randomised studies are ongoing and awaited to fully assess the clinical impact of the procedure in these two different MR aetiologies.


Author(s):  
Farzane Saeidifard ◽  
Jose R Medina Inojosa ◽  
Colin P West ◽  
Thomas P Olson ◽  
Virend K Somers ◽  
...  

Background: This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of resistance training (RT) on survival and other cardiovascular outcomes including ischemic heart disease events and stroke. Methods: An experienced librarian searched databases up to September 25 th , 2017, for randomized trials and cohort studies that evaluated the effect of RT on survival and cardiovascular events in the general population. The databases included Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Two investigators conducted the screening process independently and in duplicate. Cochrane tools were used to assess the risk of bias in clinical trials and observational studies. We calculated hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals using RevMan and fixed and random effect models and had a subgroup analysis based on doses of RT and for the combination of RT and aerobic exercise (AE) vs no exercise. Results: The search identified 1429 studies from which 10 (one randomized trial) met the inclusion criteria, including 338,254 participants with a mean follow up of 8.14 years. The meta-analysis showed that RT, in comparison with no exercises, is associated with 24% lower all-cause mortality and 48% lower mortality when combined with AE. Based on subgroup analysis, performing 1-2 sessions of RT/week is associated with lower all-cause mortality by 28% (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66-0.78) whereas > 5 sessions of RT/week has no association with all-cause mortality (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76-1.31). Further, RT alone or combined with AE is associated with lower CV mortality compared to no exercise (Figures). Finally, RT alone also showed a borderline association with lower all-cancer mortality. Heterogeneity was present for several comparisons, and subsequent analysis will explore sources of this variability. Using study design-specific Cochrane risk of bias tools, no major sources of bias were identified in the included studies. One cohort study looked at the effect of RT on coronary heart disease events and found 23% risk reduction in men, while no study specifically assessed the effect of RT on cerebrovascular outcomes. Conclusion: RT is associated with lower all-cause, CV and all-cancer mortality. RT appears to have an additive effect when combined with AE.


2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (10) ◽  
pp. 1130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Sannino ◽  
Robert L. Smith ◽  
Gabriele G. Schiattarella ◽  
Bruno Trimarco ◽  
Giovanni Esposito ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillaume Grenet ◽  
Samia Mekhaldi ◽  
Sabine MAINBOURG ◽  
Marine AUFFRET ◽  
Catherine Cornu ◽  
...  

Background Association between DPP4 inhibitors and respiratory infection remains unclear. CardioVascular Outcomes Trials (CVOTs) conducted before the COVID-19 pandemic are available. We aimed to estimate the effect of DPP4 inhibitors on the risk of respiratory infections. Methods We updated a previous systematic review and meta-analysis, searching for CVOTs assessing a DPP4 inhibitor in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We focused on placebo-controlled CVOTs. Our primary outcome was 'any respiratory infection'. We added a sensitivity analysis integrating non-CVOTs and active-controlled CVOTs. Findings We included 47 714 patients in five placebo-controlled CVOTs. Median follow-up ranged from 1.5 years to 3 years. 4 369 events of overall respiratory infection were reported (rate of 9.2%). DPP4 inhibitors were not associated with a different risk compared to placebo (RR = 0.99 [95%CI: 0.93; 1.04]). The sensitivity analysis integrating the non-CVOTs studies and the active-controlled CVOT reached 11 349 events among 82 644 participants (rate of 13.7%). DPP4 inhibitors were not associated with a different risk of overall respiratory infection (RR = 1.00 [95% CI: 0.97; 1.03]). Interpretation Our up-dated meta-analysis provides the most powerful and least biased estimation of the association of DPP4 inhibitors and the risk of overall (non COVID-19) respiratory infection. We did not find any effect of the DPP4 inhibitors on the risk of respiratory infection. Our results support the recently published practical recommendations for the management of diabetes in patients with COVID-19, suggesting that DPP4 inhibitors should not be discontinued regarding the COVID-19 pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document