-
Current Reviews in Clinical and... Apr 2024Pancreatic Cancer (PC) is one of the most malignant tumors and highly invasive neoplasms around the world. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pancreatic Cancer (PC) is one of the most malignant tumors and highly invasive neoplasms around the world.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to study the relationship between the use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and the incidence and mortality of PC.
METHODS
The electronic search was conducted systematically until October 10, 2023. in databases, including Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The required data were extracted from the articles and were analyzed by Stata 15 using statistical tests (Chi-square and I2), Forest plots, and publication bias tests (Begg's and Egger's tests).
RESULTS
A total of four studies (2011-2019; n=314,856) investigated the relationship between RAS antagonists and PC risk. No significant associations were found between angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) (OR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.77-1.14, p=0.513), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (OR=0.96, 95% CI: 0.84-1.09, p=0.505), or combination therapy (ARBs + ACEIs) (OR=0.97, 95% CI: 0.87-1.09, p=0.627) and PC risk. Also, nine studies (2010-2023; n=20,483) examined the association between renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors and PC mortality. Significant reductions in PC mortality were found for ARBs (OR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.66-0.98, p=0.032), ACEIs (OR=0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.99, p=0.038), and combination therapy (OR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.70-0.97, p=0.022). No evidence of publication bias was found in the study results.
CONCLUSION
In summary, while renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors did not appear to impact PC risk, their use was associated with lower PC mortality based on this meta-analysis of the current evidence. More rigorous and well-designed studies are required to validate and support these findings.
PubMed: 38629353
DOI: 10.2174/0127724328291047240409062436 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2024IgA nephropathy (IgAN), a condition posing a significant threat to public health, currently lacks a specific treatment protocol. Research has underscored the potential...
Efficacy of traditional Chinese medicine angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and their combinations in the treatment of IgA nephropathy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
IgA nephropathy (IgAN), a condition posing a significant threat to public health, currently lacks a specific treatment protocol. Research has underscored the potential benefits of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) for treating IgAN. Nevertheless, the effectiveness of various intervention strategies, such as combining TCM with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) or angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), lacks a comprehensive systematic comparison. Therefore, this study aimed to conduct a network meta-analysis to assess the clinical efficacy of ACEIs, ARBs, TCM, and their combinations in treating IgAN to offer novel insights and approaches for the clinical management of IgAN.
METHODS
A systematic review conducted until November 2023 included relevant literature from databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, CNKI, and Wanfang. Two independent researchers screened and assessed the data for quality. Network and traditional meta-analyses were performed using Stata 18.0 and RevMan 5.3 software, respectively. Outcome measures included 24-h urinary protein quantification (24 hpro), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), serum creatinine (Scr), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and adverse event incidence rates (ADRs). Forest plots, cumulative ranking probability curves (SUCRA), and funnel plots generated using Stata 18.0 facilitated a comprehensive analysis of intervention strategies' efficacy and safety.
RESULTS
This study included 72 randomized controlled trials, seven interventions, and 7,030 patients. Comparative analysis revealed that ACEI + TCM, ARB + TCM combination therapy, and TCM monotherapy significantly reduced the levels of 24 hpro, eGFR, Scr, and BUN compared to other treatment modalities ( < 0.05). TCM monotherapy demonstrated the most favorable efficacy in reducing eGFR levels (SUCRAs: 78%), whereas the combination of ARB + TCM reduced Scr, 24 hpro, and BUN levels (SUCRAs: 85.7%, 95.2%, and 87.6%, respectively), suggesting that ARB + TCM may represent the optimal intervention strategy. No statistically significant differences were observed among the various treatment strategies in terms of ADR ( > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
The combination of ACEI or ARB with TCM demonstrated superior efficacy compared to ACEI/ARB monotherapy in the treatment of IgAN without any significant ADRs. Therefore, combination therapies can be used to enhance therapeutic outcomes based on individual patient circumstances, highlighting the use of TCM as a widely applicable approach in clinical practice.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42023476674.
PubMed: 38576485
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1374377 -
Cureus Feb 2024Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and imposes a significant financial burden on healthcare systems globally. Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin... (Review)
Review
Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and imposes a significant financial burden on healthcare systems globally. Angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI), a novel neuroendocrine inhibitor, is frequently used in treating HF. However, there is still limited understanding regarding how it compares to other neuroendocrine inhibitors, such as angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). The purpose of this research is to present the most recent data regarding the efficacy and renal impact of ARNIs in the treatment of HF in comparison to ACE inhibitors and ARBs. Several large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently been conducted to evaluate the benefits of this drug in patients with different types of HF, regardless of their renal status. We searched multiple databases, including PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), and Google Scholar, to find relevant RCTs. The efficacy outcome was a composite of the rate of death from cardiovascular causes, the frequency of HF hospitalizations (HFH), and alterations in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels. The renal outcome was impairment of renal function. This systematic review analyzed large-scale RCTs involving 17,327 participants, with an average follow-up time of approximately 2.9 years. sacubitril/valsartan showed notable improvements compared to ACEis and ARBs in the following areas: reduction in NT-proBNP levels, prevention of further deterioration in renal function, and decreased hospitalizations for HF. Interestingly, there is no increased risk of mortality from cardiovascular causes with sacubitril or valsartan.
PubMed: 38516430
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54501 -
Cureus Feb 2024Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), are commonly... (Review)
Review
A Comparative Study of the Safety and Efficacy Between Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers on the Management of Hypertension: A Systematic Review.
Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), are commonly used in the management of hypertension. High blood pressure is a vital risk factor for cardiovascular disease. This study aims to establish any significant difference in using ACEIs and ARBs in managing hypertension. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to conduct this systematic review. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect for articles published in the last 20 years (2003 to 2023). Our search was last done on the 27th of June, 2023. Following the initial search, 8,313 articles were found on PubMed. After screening the articles selected from the databases, 10 articles examining 1,621,445 patients were selected for the final study. Three articles were identified that compared ACEI and ARB in their capacity to lower blood pressure. Six articles compared both medications' capacity to reduce cardiovascular events and mortality. Five articles were identified that compared both classes of drugs for adverse effects. This study was made to determine whether or not there is a difference between the use of ACEIs and ARBs in the treatment of hypertension. The study showed that both ACEIs and ARBs are similar in their efficacy in lowering blood pressure. However, ACEI was revealed to be superior to ARB in reducing cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. ARB was shown to be better tolerated by patients than ACEI.
PubMed: 38496070
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54311 -
Cancer Medicine Mar 2024Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including "aspirin," "NSAID," "statin" (including specific statin drug names), "metformin," "ACE inhibitors," and "ARBs" (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with "cancer." Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival.
RESULTS
We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Lung Neoplasms; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Aspirin; Antihypertensive Agents; Metformin
PubMed: 38491813
DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7049 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Feb 2024IgA nephropathy (IgAN) represents the most prevalent form of primary glomerulonephritis, and, on a global scale, it ranks among the leading culprits behind end-stage...
IgA nephropathy (IgAN) represents the most prevalent form of primary glomerulonephritis, and, on a global scale, it ranks among the leading culprits behind end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Presently, the primary strategy for managing IgAN revolves around optimizing blood pressure and mitigating proteinuria. This is achieved through the utilization of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, namely, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). As outlined by the KDIGO guidelines, individuals who continue to show a persistent high risk of progressive ESKD, even with comprehensive supportive care, are candidates for glucocorticoid therapy. Despite these therapies, some patients have a disease refractory to treatment, defined as individuals that present a 24 h urinary protein persistently >1 g after at least two rounds of regular steroids (methylprednisolone or prednisone) and/or immunosuppressant therapy (e.g., mycophenolate mofetil), or who do not tolerate regular steroids and/or immunosuppressant therapy. The aim of this Systematic Review is to revise the current literature, using the biomedical database PubMed, to investigate possible therapeutic strategies, including SGLT2 inhibitors, endothelin receptor blockers, targeted-release budesonide, B cell proliferation and differentiation inhibitors, fecal microbiota transplantation, as well as blockade of complement components.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Glomerulonephritis, IGA; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Nephrologists; Antihypertensive Agents; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Steroids; Immunosuppressive Agents
PubMed: 38399561
DOI: 10.3390/medicina60020274 -
Medicine Feb 2024In China, Salvia miltiorrhiza and ligustrazine (SML) injection are widely used as adjunctive therapy for patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). However, different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In China, Salvia miltiorrhiza and ligustrazine (SML) injection are widely used as adjunctive therapy for patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD). However, different studies have reported conflicting results. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis are necessary to assess the efficacy and safety of SML injection for the treatment of DKD.
METHODS
We searched 6 electronic literature databases comparing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), SML injection in combination with ACEIs/ARBs that were conducted from inception until September 5, 2023. Two reviewers extracted data and independently assessed the risk of bias. Using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Risk Assessment. Mean differences (MD) were combined with random-effects models and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported. Review Manager 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis. Stata 17.0 software was used for sensitivity analysis and Egger test.
RESULTS
The combined results show that the use of SML injection along with ACEI/ARB led to better outcomes than the use of controls in terms of enhancing recovery: renal function: Serum creatinine (MD = -14.69, 95% CI (-19.38, -10.00)), Blood urea nitrogen (MD = -1.23, 95% CI (-1.72, -0.74)), Urinary β2-microglobulin (MD = -4.58, 95% CI (-7.72, -1.44)); urinary protein: Urinary albumin excretion rate (MD = -45.74, 95% CI (-58.92, -32.56)), Urine albumin-creatinine ratio (MD = -11.93, 95% CI (-13.89, -9.96)), 24-h urine proteinuria (MD = -0.59, 95% CI (-0.86, -0.32)), Urine microalbumin (MD = -13.50, 95% CI (-20.18, -6.83)). Additionally, adjuvant therapy with SML injection enhanced results in blood glucose, blood pressure, lipids, and inflammatory responses, and no significant variations in adverse events were discovered between the 2 groups.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with DKD, combining SML injection with ACEI/ARB improves renal function, renal proteinuria, hyperglycemia, blood pressure, dyslipidemia, and inflammatory response.
Topics: Humans; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Diabetic Nephropathies; Salvia miltiorrhiza; Proteinuria; Albumins; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Diabetes Mellitus; Pyrazines
PubMed: 38394516
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000035853 -
Heart, Lung & Circulation Mar 2024Chronic kidney disease (CKD) coexists in up to 50% of heart failure (HF) patients, affecting both those with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and those with preserved... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic kidney disease (CKD) coexists in up to 50% of heart failure (HF) patients, affecting both those with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and those with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Although the efficacy of several guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) has been well established, the treatment recommendations are similar for those patients with HF with and without CKD. We aimed to investigate the efficacy of GDMT in patients with HF with versus those without CKD.
METHOD
This systematic review and meta-analysis included randomised controlled trials that compared the efficacy of GDMT (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor [ACE-I], beta blocker, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor) in patients with HF with and without CKD. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalisation. Risk ratios (RR) were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 19 trials (15 trials in HFrEF and four trials in HFpEF) enrolling 63,677 (38% had CKD) participants were included. Among HFrEF patients, GDMT reduced the primary endpoint in those with CKD (RR 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.82) and without CKD (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.74-0.84). Among HFpEF patients, the pooled summary RR for GDMT reducing the primary endpoint was 0.82 (95% CI 0.74-0.91) among those with CKD and 0.88 (95% CI 0.77-0.99) among those without CKD. There was no significant difference in the efficacy of GDMT in head-to-head comparisons between those with and without CKD in HFrEF (ratio of RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.88-1.06) and HFpEF (ratio of RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.80-1.11).
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients with HF, GDMT had a consistent effect in reducing adverse cardiovascular events in those with and without CKD. Future studies should investigate the best strategy to ensure patients with HF with CKD receive and tolerate GDMT when indicated.
Topics: Humans; Adrenergic beta-Antagonists; Angiotensin Receptor Antagonists; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Heart Failure; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Stroke Volume
PubMed: 38365495
DOI: 10.1016/j.hlc.2023.12.013 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2024Variation in blood pressure levels display circadian rhythms. Complete 24-hour blood pressure control is the primary goal of antihypertensive treatment and reducing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Variation in blood pressure levels display circadian rhythms. Complete 24-hour blood pressure control is the primary goal of antihypertensive treatment and reducing adverse cardiovascular outcomes is the ultimate aim. This is an update of the review first published in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of administration-time-related effects of once-daily evening versus conventional morning dosing antihypertensive drug therapy regimens on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, total adverse events, withdrawals from treatment due to adverse effects, and reduction of systolic and diastolic blood pressure in people with primary hypertension.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Hypertension Specialised Register via Cochrane Register of Studies (17 June 2022), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 6, 2022); MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process and MEDLINE Epub Ahead of Print (1 June 2022); Embase (1 June 2022); ClinicalTrials.gov (2 June 2022); Chinese Biomedical Literature Database (CBLD) (1978 to 2009); Chinese VIP (2009 to 7 August 2022); Chinese WANFANG DATA (2009 to 4 August 2022); China Academic Journal Network Publishing Database (CAJD) (2009 to 6 August 2022); Epistemonikos (3 September 2022) and the reference lists of relevant articles. We applied no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the administration-time-related effects of evening with morning dosing monotherapy regimens in people with primary hypertension. We excluded people with known secondary hypertension, shift workers or people with white coat hypertension.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two to four review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. We resolved disagreements by discussion or with another review author. We performed data synthesis and analyses using Review Manager Web for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, serious adverse events, overall adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events, change in 24-hour blood pressure and change in morning blood pressure. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis, fixed-effect meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 27 RCTs in this updated review, of which two RCTs were excluded from the meta-analyses for lack of data and number of groups not reported. The quantitative analysis included 25 RCTs with 3016 participants with primary hypertension. RCTs used angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (six trials), calcium channel blockers (nine trials), angiotensin II receptor blockers (seven trials), diuretics (two trials), α-blockers (one trial), and β-blockers (one trial). Fifteen trials were parallel designed, and 10 trials were cross-over designed. Most participants were white, and only two RCTs were conducted in Asia (China) and one in Africa (South Africa). All trials excluded people with risk factors of myocardial infarction and strokes. Most trials had high risk or unclear risk of bias in at least two of several key criteria, which was most prominent in allocation concealment (selection bias) and selective reporting (reporting bias). Meta-analysis showed significant heterogeneity across trials. No RCTs reported on cardiovascular mortality and cardiovascular morbidity. There may be little to no differences in all-cause mortality (after 26 weeks of active treatment: RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.42; RD 0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; very low-certainty evidence), serious adverse events (after 8 to 26 weeks of active treatment: RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.57; RD 0, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.03; very low-certainty evidence), overall adverse events (after 6 to 26 weeks of active treatment: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.20; I² = 37%; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.02; I² = 38%; very low-certainty evidence) and withdrawals due to adverse events (after 6 to 26 weeks active treatment: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23; I² = 0%; RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence was very uncertain.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Due to the very limited data and the defects of the trials' designs, this systematic review did not find adequate evidence to determine which time dosing drug therapy regimen has more beneficial effects on cardiovascular outcomes or adverse events. We have very little confidence in the evidence showing that evening dosing of antihypertensive drugs is no more or less effective than morning administration to lower 24-hour blood pressure. The conclusions should not be assumed to apply to people receiving multiple antihypertensive drug regimens.
Topics: Humans; Antihypertensive Agents; Hypertension; Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors; Calcium Channel Blockers; Essential Hypertension
PubMed: 38353289
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004184.pub3 -
ESC Heart Failure Jun 2024Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is a rare complication of vaccination. In this study, we sought to provide insight into the characteristics of reported TTS induced by...
AIMS
Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) is a rare complication of vaccination. In this study, we sought to provide insight into the characteristics of reported TTS induced by vaccination.
METHODS AND RESULTS
We did a systematic review, searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Ovid MEDLINE, Journals@Ovid, and Scopus databases up to 26 April 2023 to identify case reports or case series of vaccine-induced TTS. We then extracted and summarized the data from these reports. Eighteen reports were identified, with a total of 19 patients with TTS associated with vaccinations. Of the 19 included patients, the majority were female (n = 13, 68.4%) with a mean age of 56.6 ± 21.9 years. Seventeen patients developed TTS after coronavirus disease 2019 vaccination, 14 of whom received an mRNA vaccination. Two cases of TTS occurred after influenza vaccination. Among the 19 patients, 17 (89.5%) completed transthoracic echocardiography and 16 (84.2%) underwent angiography procedures. Seven patients (36.8%) completed cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. The median time to symptom onset was 2 (inter-quartile range, 1-4) days. The most common symptoms were chest pain (68.4%), dyspnoea (57.9%), and digestive symptoms (31.6%). A total of 57.9% of patients developed nonspecific symptoms such as fatigue, myalgia, diaphoresis, and fever. Among the 16 reported cases of TTS, 15 patients (93.8%) exhibited elevated cardiac troponin levels, while among the nine reported cases, eight patients (88.9%) had elevated natriuretic peptide levels. All patients had electrocardiographic changes: ST-segment change (47.1%), T-wave inversion (58.8%), and prolonged corrected QT interval (35.3%). The most common TTS type was apical ballooning (88.2%). Treatment during hospitalization typically included beta-blockers (44.4%), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (33.3%), and diuretics (22.2%). After treatment, 81.3% of patients were discharged with improved symptoms. Among this group, nine patients (56.3%) were reported to have recovered ventricular wall motion during follow-up. Two patients (12.5%) died following vaccination without resuscitation attempts.
CONCLUSIONS
TTS is a rare but potentially life-threatening complication of vaccination. Typical TTS symptoms such as chest pain and dyspnoea should be considered alarming symptoms, though nonspecific symptoms are common. The risks of such rare adverse events should be balanced against the risks of infection.
Topics: Humans; Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy; COVID-19 Vaccines; COVID-19; Vaccination; SARS-CoV-2; Echocardiography
PubMed: 38344896
DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.14719