Aims Transthyretin amyloidosis cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM) is an increasingly recognized cause of heart failure. We sought to characterize the structural and functional echocardiographic phenotype across the spectrum of wild-type (wtATTR-CM) and hereditary (hATTR-CM) transthyretin cardiomyopathy and the echocardiographic features predicting prognosis. Methods and results We studied 1240 patients with ATTR-CM who underwent prospective protocolized evaluations comprising full echocardiographic assessment and survival between 2000 and 2019, comprising 766 with wtATTR-CM and 474 with hATTR-CM, of whom 314 had the V122I variant and 127 the T60A variant. At diagnosis, patients with V122I-hATTR-CM had the most severe degree of systolic and diastolic dysfunction across all echocardiographic parameters and patients with T60AhATTR-CM the least; patients with wtATTR-CM had intermediate features. Stroke volume index, right atrial area index, longitudinal strain, and E/e’ were all independently associated with mortality (P < 0.05 for all). Severe aortic stenosis (AS) was also independently associated with prognosis, conferring a significantly shorter survival (median survival 22 vs. 53 months, P = 0.001). Conclusion The three distinct genotypes present with varying degrees of severity. Echocardiography indicates a complex pathophysiology in which both systolic and diastolic function are independently associated with mortality. The presence of severe AS was independently associated with significantly reduced patient survival.
Aims Despite recent advances in catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF), pulmonary vein reconnection (PVR), and AF recurrence remain significantly high. Ablation index (AI) is a new method incorporating contact force, time, and power that should optimize procedural outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AI-guided catheter ablation compared to a non-AI-guided approach. Methods and results A systematic search was performed on MEDLINE (via PubMED), EMBASE, COCHRANE, and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) databases (from inception to 1 July 2019). We included only studies that compared AI-guided with non-AI-guided catheter ablation of AF. Eleven studies reporting on 2306 patients were identified. Median follow-up period was 12 months. Ablation index-guided ablation had a significant shorter procedural time (141.0 vs. 152.8 min, P = 0.01; I2 = 90%), ablation time (21.8 vs. 32.0 min, P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%), achieved first-pass isolation more frequently [odds ratio (OR) = 0.09, 95%CI 0.04–0.21; 93.4% vs. 62.9%, P < 0.001; I2 = 58%] and was less frequently associated with acute PVR (OR = 0.37, 95%CI 0.18–0.75; 18.0% vs 35.0%; P = 0.006; I2 = 0%). Importantly, atrial arrhythmia relapse post-blanking was significantly lower in AI compared to non-AI catheter ablation (OR = 0.41, 95%CI 0.25–0.66; 11.8% vs. 24.9%, P = 0.0003; I2 = 35%). Finally, there was no difference in complication rate between AI and non-AI ablation, with the number of cardiac tamponade events in the AI group less being numerically lower (OR = 0.69, 95%CI 0.30–1.60, 1.6% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.39; I2 = 0%). Conclusions These data suggest that AI-guided catheter ablation is associated with increased efficacy of AF ablation, while preserving a comparable safety profile to non-AI catheter ablation.
Currently available evidence supports the anti-inflammatory and cardio-protective roles of EVOO. However, there is limited amount of available randomized controlled trials especially lacking those investigating the use of EVOO as secondary prevention, heterogeneity of study design, limited generalization to wide population groups, and inability to determine the minimum intake of EVOO required to clinically achieve the anti-inflammatory and cardioprotective effects. Therefore, more highquality randomized controlled trials still need to be carried out to overcome these challenges to further assess the health benefits of EVOO consumption and potentially translate it into clinical practice as primary or secondary prevention of atherosclerosis-related conditions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.