Background: Multiple strategies have advocation for power titration and catheter movement during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. Comparative favoring evidence regarding the efficacy, logistics, and safety of a higher-power, shorter duration (HPSD) ablation strategy compared to a lower-power, longer duration (LPLD) ablation strategy is insubstantial. We performed a meta-analysis to compare arrhythmia-free survival, procedure times, and complication rates between the two strategies.Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from inception to September 2020. We included studies comparing patients who underwent HPSD and LPLD strategies for AF ablation and reporting either of the following outcomes:Freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) including AF and atrial flutter, procedure time, or periprocedural complications. We combined data using the random-effects model to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and weight mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).Results: Ten studies from 2006 to 2020 involving 2274 patients were included (1393 patients underwent HPSD strategy and 881 patients underwent LPLD strategy). HPSD strategy was not associated with increased freedom from AT at 12-month follow-up (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.99 to 2.40, p = .054). In the subgroup analysis of the randomized controlled trial, the HPSD strategy was associated with

Restoring sinus rhythm with ablation leads to significant improvement of renal function in patients with chronic kidney disease.

No abstract

Aims: To compare the cardiovascular, renal and safety outcomes of second-line glucose-lowering agents used in the management of people with type 2 diabetes.Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 13 July 2021 for randomised controlled trials comparing second-line glucose lowering therapies with placebo, standard care or one another. Primary outcomes included cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Secondary outcomes were non-cardiovascular adverse events. Risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding confidence intervals (CI) or credible intervals (CrI) were reported within pairwise and network meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. Number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed (NNH) to harm were calculated at 5 years using incidence rates and RRs. PROSPERO (CRD42020168322). Results:We included 38 trials from seven classes of glucose-lowering therapies. Both sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) showed moderate to high certainty in reducing risk of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events, 3P-MACE

No abstract