-
Medicine Jun 2024Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been considered a prognostic biomarker of mortality and other major cardiac events. This study investigates NLR's efficacy in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as a prognostic marker for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been considered a prognostic biomarker of mortality and other major cardiac events. This study investigates NLR's efficacy in predicting in-hospital and long-term outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
METHODS
Electronic databases (PUBMED, Cochrane CENTRAL, ERIC, Embase, Ovid, and Google Scholar) were searched till June 2022 to identify studies having STEMI patients who underwent PCI. Risk ratios and mean differences (MDs), along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (Cis) and standard deviations (SDs), were pooled using a random-effect model. This meta-analysis has been registered on Prospero (ID: CRD42022344072).
RESULTS
A total of 35 studies with 28,756 patients were included. Pooled estimates revealed an increased incidence of primary outcomes; in-hospital all-cause mortality (RR = 3.52; 95% CI = 2.93-4.24), long-term all-cause mortality (HR = 1.07; 95% CI = 1.00-1.14), (RR = 3.32; 95% CI = 2.57-4.30); in-hospital cardiovascular mortality (RR = 2.66; 95% CI = 2.04-3.48), long-term cardiovascular mortality (RR = 6.67; 95% CI = 4.06-10.95); in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (RR = 1.31; 95% CI = 1.17-1.46), long-term MACE (RR = 2.92; 95% CI = 2.16-3.94); length of hospital stay (WMD = 0.60 days; 95% CI = 0.40-0.79) in patients with high NLR compared to those with a low NLR.
CONCLUSION
NLR might be a valuable tool for prognostication (in-hospital) and stratification of patients with STEMI who underwent PCI.
Topics: Humans; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction; Neutrophils; Prognosis; Lymphocytes; Biomarkers; Lymphocyte Count; Hospital Mortality
PubMed: 38941418
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038692 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024Danhong injection (DHI) is widely used in the treatment of myocardial infarction (MI). We aimed to systematically review the efficacy and safety of DHI in a randomized...
OBJECTIVE
Danhong injection (DHI) is widely used in the treatment of myocardial infarction (MI). We aimed to systematically review the efficacy and safety of DHI in a randomized controlled experiment on MI.
METHODS
We searched the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of DHI for MI published before 2 April 2023 in China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBM), Wanfang database, China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrance Library, and Embase databases. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Handbook 5.3 criteria using the RevMan software, and meta-analysis was performed and a forest map was drawn.
RESULTS
A total of 38 trials included 3877 patients, including 2022 cases in the DHI treatment group and 1855 cases in the control group. Meta-analysis showed that the total effective rate (RR = 1.18%, 95% CI [1.14-1.12]) during treatment with DHI was higher than that of the control group. The prevalence of cardiac arrhythmia (RR = 0.55%, 95% CI [0.46-0.65]) was lower than that of the control group. The incidence of heart rate failure (RR = 0.45%, 95% CI [0.30-0.70]) was lower than that of the control group. The prevalence of cardiogenic shock (RR = 0.33%, 95% CI [0.11-1.04]) was > 0.05, and the difference was not statistically significant. There was no statistically significant difference in LVEF between the two groups (MD = 0.00%, 95% CI [0.00-0.00]). CK-MB (MD = -0.81%, 95% CI [-0.92∼ -0.69]) was lower than the control group. hs-CRP (MD = -1.09, 95% CI [-1.22∼ -0.97]) was lower than the control group. The incidence of adverse reactions (RR = 0.37, The 95% CI [0.17-0.82]) was lower than that in the control group.
CONCLUSION
Basing on our study, the use of DHI in the treatment of myocardial infarction patients is effective, can improve cardiac function, reduce the incidence of adverse reactions, and improve the overall quality of life.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023390973.
PubMed: 38939841
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1371959 -
Revista Espanola de Cardiologia... Jun 2024Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) is recommended in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary...
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES
Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) is recommended in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) without cardiogenic shock. The present network meta-analysis investigated the optimal timing of MV-PCI in this context.
METHODS
We pooled the aggregated data from randomized trials investigating stable STEMI patients with multivessel cad treated with a strategy of either MV-PCI or culprit vessel-only PCI. The primary outcome was all-cause death. The main secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization. This study is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023457794).
RESULTS
Among 11 trials, a total of 10 507 patients were randomly assigned to MV-PCI (same sitting, n = 1683; staged during the index hospitalization, n = 3460; staged during a subsequent hospitalization within 45 days, n = 3275) or to culprit vessel-only PCI (n = 2089). The median follow-up was 18.6 months. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, MV-PCI staged during the index hospitalization significantly reduced all-cause death (risk ratio, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.56-0.92; P = .008) and ranked as possibly the best treatment option for this outcome compared with all other strategies. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, a MV-PCI reduced cardiovascular mortality without differences dependent on the timing of revascularization. MV-PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, significantly reduced myocardial infarction and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, with no significant difference between each other.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD without cardiogenic shock, multivessel PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, represents the safest and most efficacious approach. The different timings of multivessel PCI did not result in any significant differences in all-cause death.
PubMed: 38936467
DOI: 10.1016/j.rec.2024.06.002 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Jun 2024The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is not well established.... (Review)
Review
The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is not well established. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing PCI before versus after TAVR. A comprehensive literature search was performed including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases up to 5 April 2024 for studies that compared PCI before and after TAVR reporting at least one clinical outcome of interest (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023470417). The analyzed outcomes were mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) at follow-up. A total of 3 studies involving 1531 patients (pre-TAVR PCI = 1240; post-TAVR PCI = 291) were included in this meta-analysis following our inclusion criteria. Mortality was higher in the pre-TAVR PCI group (OR: 2.48; 95% CI: 1.19-5.20; = 0.02). No differences were found between PCI before and after TAVR for the risk of stroke (OR: 3.58; 95% CI: 0.70-18.15; = 0.12) and MI (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.30-1.42; = 0.29). This meta-analysis showed in patients with stable CAD undergoing TAVR that PCI after TAVR is associated with lower mortality compared with PCI before TAVR.
PubMed: 38930050
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13123521 -
International Journal of Molecular... Jun 2024The purpose of this review is to summarize the current understanding of the therapeutic effect of stem cell-based therapies, including hematopoietic stem cells, for the... (Review)
Review
The purpose of this review is to summarize the current understanding of the therapeutic effect of stem cell-based therapies, including hematopoietic stem cells, for the treatment of ischemic heart damage. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted electronic searches in MEDLINE, and EMBASE. We screened 592 studies, and included RCTs, observational studies, and cohort studies that examined the effect of hematopoietic stem cell therapy in adult patients with heart failure. Studies that involved pediatric patients, mesenchymal stem cell therapy, and non-heart failure (HF) studies were excluded from our review. Out of the 592 studies, 7 studies met our inclusion criteria. Overall, administration of hematopoietic stem cells (via intracoronary or myocardial infarct) led to positive cardiac outcomes such as improvements in pathological left-ventricular remodeling, perfusion following acute myocardial infarction, and NYHA symptom class. Additionally, combined death, rehospitalization for heart failure, and infarction were significantly lower in patients treated with bone marrow-derived hematopoietic stem cells. Our review demonstrates that hematopoietic stem cell administration can lead to positive cardiac outcomes for HF patients. Future studies should aim to increase female representation and non-ischemic HF patients.
Topics: Humans; Heart Failure; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Hematopoietic Stem Cells; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38928341
DOI: 10.3390/ijms25126634 -
Heart (British Cardiac Society) Jun 2024Despite restoration of epicardial blood flow in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), inadequate microcirculatory perfusion is common and portends a poor...
BACKGROUND
Despite restoration of epicardial blood flow in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), inadequate microcirculatory perfusion is common and portends a poor prognosis. Intracoronary (IC) thrombolytic therapy can reduce microvascular thrombotic burden; however, contemporary studies have produced conflicting outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjunctive IC thrombolytic therapy at the time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients with STEMI.
METHODS
Comprehensive literature search of six electronic databases identified relevant randomised controlled trials. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The pooled risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% CI were calculated.
RESULTS
12 studies with 1915 patients were included. IC thrombolysis was associated with a significantly lower incidence of MACE (RR=0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.82, I=0%, p<0.0004) and improved left ventricular ejection fraction (WMD=1.87; 95% CI 1.07 to 2.67; I=25%; p<0.0001). Subgroup analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in MACE for trials using non-fibrin (RR=0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.78, I=0%, p=0.007) and moderately fibrin-specific thrombolytic agents (RR=0.62, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.83, I=0%, p=0.001). No significant reduction was observed in studies using highly fibrin-specific thrombolytic agents (RR=1.10, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.96, I=0%, p=0.75). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in mortality (RR=0.91; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.71; I=0%; p=0.77) or bleeding events (major bleeding, RR=1.24; 95% CI 0.47 to 3.28; I=0%; p=0.67; minor bleeding, RR=1.47; 95% CI 0.90 to 2.40; I=0%; p=0.12).
CONCLUSION
Adjunctive IC thrombolysis at the time of primary PCI in patients with STEMI improves clinical and myocardial perfusion parameters without an increased rate of bleeding. Further research is needed to optimise the selection of thrombolytic agents and treatment protocols.
PubMed: 38925881
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2024-324078 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders Jun 2024With advancements in chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO) recanalization techniques and concepts, the success rate of recanalization has been steadily increasing.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
With advancements in chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO) recanalization techniques and concepts, the success rate of recanalization has been steadily increasing. However, the current data are too limited to draw any reliable conclusions about the efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Herein, we conducted a meta-analysis to confirm the efficacy of DCB in CTO PCI.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science and Embase from inception to July 25, 2023. The primary outcome was major advent cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The follow-up angiographic endpoints were late lumen enlargement (LLE), reocclusion and restenosis.
RESULTS
Five studies with a total of 511 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Across studies, patients were predominantly male (72.9-85.7%) and over fifty years old. The summary estimate rate of MACE was 13.0% (95% CI 10.1%-15.9%, I = 0%, p = 0.428). The summary estimate rates of cardiac death and MI were 2.2% (95% CI 0.7%-3.7%, I = 0%, p = 0.873) and 1.2% (95% CI -0.2-2.6%, I = 13.7%, p = 0.314), respectively. Finally, the pooled incidences of TLR and TVR were 10.1% (95% CI 5.7%-14.5%, I = 51.7%, p = 0.082) and 7.1% (95% CI 3.0%-11.2%, I = 57.6%, p = 0.070), respectively. Finally, the summary estimate rates of LLE, reocclusion and restenosis were 59.4% (95% CI 53.5-65.3%, I = 0%, p = 0.742), 3.3% (95% CI 1.1-5.4%, I = 0%, p = 0.865) and 17.5% (95% CI 12.9-22.0%, I = 0%, p = 0.623), respectively.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, DCB has the potential to be used as a treatment for CTO in suitable patients.
Topics: Humans; Coronary Occlusion; Coated Materials, Biocompatible; Treatment Outcome; Chronic Disease; Cardiac Catheters; Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary; Risk Factors; Aged; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Cardiovascular Agents; Aged, 80 and over; Risk Assessment; Time Factors; Equipment Design; Coronary Restenosis
PubMed: 38918738
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03993-x -
Cureus May 2024Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an inherited lipoprotein particle associated with increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) diseases. However, its impact on... (Review)
Review
Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is an inherited lipoprotein particle associated with increased risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) diseases. However, its impact on outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between elevated Lp(a) levels and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and other outcomes in patients undergoing PCI. We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Web of Science for studies published from 2015 to 2024 comparing CV outcomes between patients with elevated versus non-elevated Lp(a) levels after PCI. Primary outcome was MACE. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, CV mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and revascularization. Risk ratios (RRs) were pooled using a random-effect model. Fifteen studies with 45,059 patients were included. Patients with elevated Lp(a) had a significantly higher risk of MACE (RR 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-1.56). Elevated Lp(a) was also associated with increased risks of all-cause death (RR 1.26), CV death (RR 1.58), myocardial infarction (RR 1.44), revascularization (RR 1.38), and stroke (RR 1.18). Heterogeneity was considerable for some outcomes. This meta-analysis demonstrates that elevated Lp(a) levels are associated with worse CV outcomes, including higher rates of MACE, mortality, and recurrent ischemic events in patients undergoing PCI. Novel therapeutic approaches specifically targeting Lp(a) reduction may help mitigate residual CV risk in this high-risk population.
PubMed: 38915979
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.61069 -
Surgery Research and Practice 2024This systematic review examines the occurrence and implications of resistance to primary antiplatelet agents, aspirin and clopidogrel, often utilised in patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review examines the occurrence and implications of resistance to primary antiplatelet agents, aspirin and clopidogrel, often utilised in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), alongside the methodologies for assessment of such resistance.
METHODS
An extensive literature search across various databases such as PubMed, MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL until May 2024 was conducted to identify studies evaluating antiplatelet resistance in on-pump and off-pump CABG patients. Following quality assessment, only high-quality studies were incorporated into this review.
RESULTS
This review included 19 studies with 3,915 patients, four of which were randomised controlled trials and 15 were observational studies. Aspirin resistance incidence ranged from 11.0% to 51.5%, while clopidogrel resistance was 22%. Antiplatelet resistance, assessed through a wide variety of methods, was associated with a 13 times increase in the risk of vein graft occlusion and increased rates of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation in the case of clopidogrel resistance. The effect of cardiopulmonary bypass on antiplatelet resistance remains ambiguous.
CONCLUSION
The academic literature lacks a standardised definition for antiplatelet resistance. Assessment methodologies greatly vary, leading to noninterchangeable outcomes. While aspirin resistance has a conflicting overall significant impact on adverse outcomes, clopidogrel resistance correlates with poorer clinical outcomes.
PubMed: 38910604
DOI: 10.1155/2024/1807241 -
Clinical Cardiology Jun 2024Long-term follow-up results of various trials comparing Zotarolimus eluting stents (ZES) with Everolimus eluting stents (EES) have been published recently. Additionally,... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis
Temporal Trends in the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Zotarolimus Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus Eluting Stents: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
INTRODUCTION
Long-term follow-up results of various trials comparing Zotarolimus eluting stents (ZES) with Everolimus eluting stents (EES) have been published recently. Additionally, over the last decade, there have been new trials comparing the ZES with various commercially available EES. We aim to conduct an updated meta-analysis in light of new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide comprehensive evidence regarding the temporal trends in the clinical outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. RCTs comparing ZES with EES for short (<2 years), intermediate (2-3 years), and long-term follow-ups (3-5 years) were included. Relative risk was used to pool the dichotomous outcomes using the random effects model employing the inverse variance method. All statistical analysis was conducted using Revman 5.4.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies reporting data at different follow-ups for nine trials (n = 14319) were included. At short-term follow-up (<2 years), there were no significant differences between the two types of stents (all-cause death, cardiac death, Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target vessel myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis or safety outcomes (target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, target lesion failure). At intermediate follow-up (2-3 years), EES was superior to ZES for reducing target lesion revascularization (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.05-1.58, p < 0.05). At long-term follow-up (3-5 years), there were no significant differences between the two groups for any of the pooled outcomes (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
ZES and EES have similar safety and efficacy at short, intermediate, and long-term follow-ups.
Topics: Humans; Cardiovascular Agents; Coronary Artery Disease; Drug-Eluting Stents; Everolimus; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Prosthesis Design; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Sirolimus; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38888152
DOI: 10.1002/clc.24306