-
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 -
Journal of Pharmacy & Bioallied Sciences Apr 2024May-Thurner syndrome (MTS) is an anatomical condition of external luminal compression of common iliac vein due to a partial obstruction of the common iliac vein between... (Review)
Review
May-Thurner syndrome (MTS) is an anatomical condition of external luminal compression of common iliac vein due to a partial obstruction of the common iliac vein between common iliac artery and lumbar vertebra causes deep-vein thrombosis, venous hypertension, and chronic venous insufficiencies. In this article, we review present evidence of the clinical diagnosis and management of MTS. Here, we conducted a literature review of studies on MTS. We also reviewed different clinical features, presentation, diagnostic methods, and therapeutic procedure for this condition. Most studies mentioned the diagnosis of this condition is performed by color Doppler, computed tomographic angiography, venography, and problem-solving cases by intravascular ultrasound technique. Nonsurgical methods of management are first line, and vascular surgery is reserved for refractory cases. Multiple modalities are required to reach the diagnosis of MTS, and noninvasive intervention radiology methods are the first line of management. This review highlights the presentations of MTS and outlines diagnostic procedure and management.
PubMed: 38882842
DOI: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_1135_23 -
CJC Open May 2024Ongoing debate remains regarding optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ongoing debate remains regarding optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the following: (i) dual-pathway therapy (DPT; oral anticoagulant [OAC] plus antiplatelet) vs triple therapy (OAC and dual-antiplatelet therapy) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and (iii) OAC monotherapy vs DPT at least 1 year after PCI or ACS. Following a 2-stage process, we identified systematic reviews published between 2019 and 2022 on these 2 clinical questions, and we updated the most comprehensive search for additional RCTs published up to October 2022. Outcomes of interest were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), death, stent thrombosis, and major bleeding. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Based on 6 RCTs (n = 10,435), DPT reduced major bleeding (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52-0.73) and increased stent thrombosis (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.02-2.36), vs triple therapy after PCI or medically-managed ACS, with no significant differences in MACE and death. In 2 RCTs (n = 2905), OAC monotherapy reduced major bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49-0.91) vs DPT in AF patients with remote PCI or ACS, with no significant differences in MACE or death.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with AF and coronary artery disease, using less-aggressive antithrombotic treatment (DPT after PCI or ACS, and OAC alone after remote PCI or ACS) reduced major bleeding, with an increase in stent thrombosis with recent PCI. These results support a minimalist yet personalized antithrombotic strategy for these patients.
PubMed: 38846448
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjco.2024.01.001 -
World Journal of Cardiology May 2024In severe cases of coronary artery disease, percutaneous coronary intervention provide promising results. The stent used could be a drug-eluting stent (DES) or a...
BACKGROUND
In severe cases of coronary artery disease, percutaneous coronary intervention provide promising results. The stent used could be a drug-eluting stent (DES) or a titanium-nitride-oxide coated stent (TiNOS).
AIM
To compare the 5-year effectiveness and safety of the two stent types.
METHODS
The following systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines, and PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception till August 2023. Primary outcomes were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death or MI, and ischemia-driven total lesion revascularization (ID-TLR).
RESULTS
Four randomized controlled trials (RCT), which analyzed a sum total of 3045 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after a median follow-up time of 5 years were included. Though statistically insignificant, an increase in the ID-TLR was observed in patients receiving TiNOSs DESs. In addition, MI, cardiac death and MI, and definite stent thrombosis (DST) were significantly decreased in the TiNOS arm. Baseline analysis revealed no significant results with meta-regression presenting non-ST elevated MI (NSTEMI) as a statistically significant covariate in the outcome of MACE.
CONCLUSION
TiNOS was found to be superior to DES in terms of MI, cardiac death or MI, and DST outcomes, however, the effect of the two stent types on ID-TLR and MACE was not significant. A greater number of studies are required to establish an accurate comparison of patient outcomes in TiNOS and DES.
PubMed: 38817643
DOI: 10.4330/wjc.v16.i5.293 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders May 2024Optical coherence tomography (OCT) guidance in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to improve procedural outcomes. However, evidence supporting its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Optical coherence tomography (OCT) guidance in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to improve procedural outcomes. However, evidence supporting its superiority over angiography-guided PCI in terms of clinical outcomes is still emerging and limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of OCT-guided PCI versus angiography-guided PCI in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).
METHODS
A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical outcomes of OCT-guided and angiography-guided PCI in patients with CAD. Clinical endpoints including all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were assessed.
RESULTS
Eleven RCTs, comprising 2,699 patients in the OCT-guided group and 2,968 patients in the angiography-guided group met inclusion criteria. OCT-guided PCI was associated with significantly lower rates of cardiovascular death(RR 0.56; 95%CI: 0.32-0.98; p = 0.04; I = 0%), stent thrombosis(RR 0.56; 95%CI: 0.33-0.95; p = 0.03; I = 0%), and MACE (RR 0.79; 95%CI: 0.66-0.95; p = 0.01; I = 5%). The incidence of all-cause death (RR 0.71; 95%CI: 0.49-1.02; p = 0.06; I = 0%), myocardial infarction (RR 0.86; 95%CI: 0.67-1.10; p = 0.22; I = 0%) and TLR (RR 0.98; 95%CI: 0.73-1.33; p = 0.91; I = 0%) was non-significantly lower in the OCT-guided group.
CONCLUSIONS
Among patients undergoing PCI, OCT-guided PCI was associated with lower incidences of cardiovascular death, stent thrombosis and MACE compared to angiography-guided PCI.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023484342.
Topics: Humans; Tomography, Optical Coherence; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Coronary Angiography; Coronary Artery Disease; Treatment Outcome; Risk Factors; Predictive Value of Tests; Male; Female; Middle Aged; Aged; Coronary Vessels; Coronary Thrombosis
PubMed: 38769510
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-024-03930-y -
Current Problems in Cardiology Aug 2024Debates persist regarding the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in coronary artery disease (CAD).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Debates persist regarding the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in coronary artery disease (CAD). Recent trials have introduced a novel approach involving P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with ticagrelor or clopidogrel, after a short DAPT. However, the effectiveness and safety of this strategy remains to be established. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing monotherapy with P2Y12 inhibitors versus standard DAPT in patients undergoing PCI at 12 months.
METHODS
Multiple databases were searched. Six RCTs with a total of 24877 patients were included. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 12 months of follow-up. The secondary endpoints were cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, probable or definite stent thrombosis, stroke events, and major bleeding. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024499529).
RESULTS
Monotherapy with P2Y12 inhibitor ticagrelor significantly reduced both allcause mortality (HR 0.71, 95 CI [0.55-0.91], P = 0.007) and cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.66, 95% CI [0.49-0.89], P = 0.006) compared to standard DAPT. In contrast, clopidogrel monotherapy did not demonstrate a similar reduction. The decrease in mortality associated with ticagrelor was primarily due to a lower risk of major bleeding (HR 0.56, 95% CI [0.43-0.72], P < 0.001), while the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) remained unchanged (HR 0.90, 95% CI [0.73-1.11], P = 0.32). The risk of stroke was found to be similar across treatments.
CONCLUSIONS
In comparison to standard DAPT, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with ticagrelor may lead to a reduced mortality. The clinical benefits are driven by a reduction of bleeding risk without ischemic risk trade-off.
Topics: Humans; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists; Coronary Artery Disease; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Treatment Outcome; Dual Anti-Platelet Therapy; Ticagrelor
PubMed: 38750991
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102635 -
Current Problems in Cardiology Aug 2024Despite recent advancements, challenges persist in determining the optimal stenting strategy for LM bifurcation disease. Hence, this systematic review aims to compare... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Despite recent advancements, challenges persist in determining the optimal stenting strategy for LM bifurcation disease. Hence, this systematic review aims to compare single provisional and systematic dual stenting for managing LM bifurcation disease. A systematic search was performed until January 14, 2024. For the effect measure, risk ratios (RRs) was calculated. This study included 22 studies with 10776 participants. The all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality revealed comparable outcomes between provisional and dual-systematic stenting (RR 1.13, CI95 %: 0.87-1.47, p 0.36, I 59 %; RR 1.16, CI95 %: 0.73-1.84, p 0.63, I 80 %). In addition, MACE, MI, TLR, TVR, and in stent thrombosis also showed similar findings. Subgroup analysis revealed that cohort studies was the source of heterogeneity in all-cause mortality, stent thrombosis, and TLR. This meta-analysis suggests comparable outcomes between provisional and dual-systematic stenting in managing LM bifurcation disease. Further study is needed to validate the outcomes of novel techniques.
Topics: Humans; Coronary Artery Disease; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention; Stents; Drug-Eluting Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38744356
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2024.102633 -
BMC Infectious Diseases May 2024Thromboembolic (TE) complications [myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE)] are common causes of mortality in...
Thromboembolic (TE) complications [myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE)] are common causes of mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients. Therefore, this review was undertaken to explore the incidence of TE complications and mortality associated with TE complications in hospitalised COVID-19 patients from different studies. A literature search was performed using ScienceDirect and PubMed databases using the MeSH term search strategy of "COVID-19", "thromboembolic complication", "venous thromboembolism", "arterial thromboembolism", "deep vein thrombosis", "pulmonary embolism", "myocardial infarction", "stroke", and "mortality". There were 33 studies included in this review. Studies have revealed that COVID-19 patients tend to develop venous thromboembolism (PE:1.0-40.0% and DVT:0.4-84%) compared to arterial thromboembolism (stroke:0.5-15.2% and MI:0.8-8.7%). Lastly, the all-cause mortality of COVID-19 patients ranged from 4.8 to 63%, whereas the incidence of mortality associated with TE complications was between 5% and 48%. A wide range of incidences of TE complications and mortality associated with TE complications can be seen among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Therefore, every patient should be assessed for the risk of thromboembolic complications and provided with an appropriate thromboprophylaxis management plan tailored to their individual needs.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; Thromboembolism; Hospitalization; Pulmonary Embolism; SARS-CoV-2; Incidence; Venous Thromboembolism; Stroke; Myocardial Infarction; Venous Thrombosis
PubMed: 38730292
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-024-09374-1 -
Annals of Medicine and Surgery (2012) May 2024The optimal treatment regimen for patients with Hughes syndrome remains unclear. Therefore, the authors sought to compare the outcomes of warfarin vs. factor Xa... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The optimal treatment regimen for patients with Hughes syndrome remains unclear. Therefore, the authors sought to compare the outcomes of warfarin vs. factor Xa inhibitors in patients with Hughes syndrome.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 8 efficacy and safety of warfarin and factor Xa inhibitors in patients with Hughes syndrome. Recurrent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, stroke, adverse reactions, and bleeding were among 10 outcomes of interest. Mantel-Haenszel weighted random-effects model was used to calculate 11 relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs.
RESULTS
The analysis included 625 patients from four RCTs and one post-hoc analysis. Meta-analysis showed a statistically non-significant difference between factor Xa inhibitors and warfarin in the recurrent thrombosis risk (arterial or venous) [RR 2.77 (95%, CI 0.79, 9.65); =0.11, I=50%]. Consistent results were revealed among patients with a previous history of arterial thrombosis [RR 2.76 (95% CI 0.93, 8.16); =0.75, I=0%], venous thrombosis [RR 1.71 (95% CI 0.60, 4.84); =0.31, I=15%] and patients who were triple antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) positive [RR 4.12 (95% CI 0.46, 37.10); 21 =0.21, I=58%]. Factor Xa inhibitors were significantly associated with an increased risk of stroke [RR 8.51 (95% CI 2.35, 13.82); =0.47, I=0%].
CONCLUSION
Factor Xa inhibitors exhibited an increased risk of stroke among patients with Hughes syndrome. In addition, although not significant, the higher RRs among patients on factor Xa inhibitors may indicate a higher risk of thrombotic events associated with factor Xa inhibitors.
PubMed: 38694373
DOI: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000001999 -
Cardiovascular Diabetology Apr 2024Atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) represents a novel marker in the current era of cardiovascular diseases. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the association of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Atherogenic index of plasma (AIP) represents a novel marker in the current era of cardiovascular diseases. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the association of AIP with cardiovascular prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).
METHODS
PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched from inception through 2024. The primary outcome was major cardiovascular events (MACE). The secondary outcomes included all-causes death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, revascularization, and no-reflow phenomenon. AIP was determined by taking the logarithm of the ratio of triglyceride (TG) to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). The data analysis was represented using the risk ratio (RR) along with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
Sixteen studies with a total number of 20,833 patients met the eligible criteria. The pooled-analysis showed a significant increased risk of MACE in the highest AIP group compared with the lowest AIP group (RR = 1.63; 95% CI, 1.44-1.85; P < 0.001). A similar result was observed when AIP was regarded as a continuous variable (RR = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.30-1.83; P < 0.001). Besides, elevated AIP was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular death (RR = 1.79; 95% CI, 1.09-2.78; P = 0.02), MI (RR = 2.21; 95% CI, 1.55-3.13; P < 0.001), revascularization (RR = 1.62; 95% CI, 1.34-1.97; P < 0.001), no-reflow phenomenon (RR = 3.12 95% CI, 1.09-8.96; P = 0.034), and stent thrombosis (RR = 13.46; 95%CI, 1.39-129.02; P = 0.025). However, AIP was not significantly associated with the risk of all-causes death and stroke among patients with CAD.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study demonstrated that increased AIP is an independent prognostic factors in patients with CAD. Further research is warranted to elucidate the potential development of targeted interventions to modify AIP levels and improve patient outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Coronary Artery Disease; No-Reflow Phenomenon; Risk Factors; Atherosclerosis; Myocardial Infarction; Stroke
PubMed: 38566139
DOI: 10.1186/s12933-024-02198-y