scholarly journals Association Between Atrial Fibrillation and Cognitive Impairment in Individuals With Prior Stroke

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (6) ◽  
pp. 1662-1666 ◽  
Author(s):  
Damianos G. Kokkinidis ◽  
Nikos Zareifopoulos ◽  
Christina A. Theochari ◽  
Angelos Arfaras-Melainis ◽  
Christos A. Papanastasiou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Adjusted Analysis ◽  
End Point ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Prior Stroke ◽  
Unadjusted Analysis

Background and Purpose— Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common chronic arrhythmia. Dementia and cognitive impairment (CI) are major burdens to public health. The prevalence of all 3 entities is projected to increase due to population aging. Previous reports have linked AF with a higher risk of CI and dementia in patients without prior stroke. Stroke is known to increase the risk for dementia and CI. It is unclear if AF in patients with history of stroke can further increase the risk for dementia or CI. Our purpose was to evaluate the impact of AF on risk for dementia or CI among patients with history of stroke. Methods— Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Pubmed, Scopus, and Cochrane central were searched. The outcomes of interest were dementia, CI, and the composite end point of dementia or CI. A random-effect model meta-analysis was performed. Meta-regression analysis was also performed. Publication bias was assessed with the Egger test and with funnel plots. Results— Fourteen studies and 14 360 patients (1363 with AF) were included in the meta-analysis. In the meta-analysis of adjusted odds ratio, AF was associated with increased risk of CI (odds ratio, 1.60 [95% CI, 1.20–2.14]), dementia (odds ratio, 3.11 [95% CI, 2.05–4.73]), and the composite end point of CI or dementia (odds ratio, 2.26 [95% CI, 1.61–3.19]). The heterogeneity for the composite end point of dementia or CI was moderate (adjusted analysis). The heterogeneity for the analysis of the end point of CI only was substantial in the unadjusted analysis and moderate in the adjusted analysis. The heterogeneity for the end point of dementia only was moderate in the unadjusted analysis and zero in the adjusted analysis. Conclusions— Our results indicate that an association between AF and CI or dementia is patients with prior strokes is possible given the persistent positive associations we noticed in the unadjusted and adjusted analyses. The heterogeneity levels limit the certainty of our findings.

scholarly journals The impact of atrial fibrillation type on the risks of thromboembolic recurrence, mortality and major haemorrhage in patients with previous stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-168
Author(s):  
Antonia Mentel ◽  
Terence J Quinn ◽  
Alan C Cameron ◽  
Kennedy R Lees ◽  
Azmil H Abdul-Rahim
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Major Haemorrhage ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Previous Stroke ◽  
The Impact

Introduction There is conflicting evidence on the impact of atrial fibrillation (AF) type, i.e. non-paroxysmal AF or paroxysmal AF, on thromboembolic recurrence. The consensus of risk equivalence is greatly based on historical evidence, focussing on initial stroke risks. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the impact of AF type on the risk of thromboembolic recurrence, mortality and major haemorrhage in patients with previous stroke. Methods We systematically searched four multidisciplinary databases from inception to December 2018. We selected observational studies investigating clinical outcomes in patients with ischaemic stroke and AF, stratified by AF type. We assessed all included studies for risk of bias using the ‘Risk of Bias In Non-randomised Studies – of Exposures’ tool. The Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software was used to calculate odds ratios from crude event rates. Results After reviewing 14,127 citations, we selected 108 studies for full-text screening. We extracted data from a total of 26 studies, reporting outcomes on 23,054 patients. Overall, risk of bias was moderate. The annual incidence rates of thromboembolism in patients with non-paroxysmal AF and paroxysmal AF were 7.1% (95% confidence interval: 4.2–11.7) and 5.2% (95% confidence interval: 3.2–8.2), respectively. The odds ratio for thromboembolism in patients with non-paroxysmal AF versus paroxysmal AF was 1.47 (95% confidence interval: 1.08–1.99, p = 0.013). The annual mortality rates in patients with non-paroxysmal AF and paroxysmal AF were 20.0% (95% confidence interval: 13.2–28.0) and 10.1% (95% confidence interval: 5.4–17.3), respectively, and odds ratio was 1.90 (95% confidence interval: 1.43–2.52, p < 0.001). There was no difference in rates of major haemorrhage, odds ratio  = 1.01 (95% confidence interval: 0.61–1.69, p = 0.966). Conclusion In patients with prior stroke, non-paroxysmal AF is associated with significantly higher risk of thromboembolic recurrence and mortality than paroxysmal AF. Although current guidelines make no distinction between non-paroxysmal AF and paroxysmal AF for secondary stroke prevention, future guidance and risk stratification tools may need to consider this differential risk (PROSPERO ID: CRD42019118531).

Atrial Fibrillation and Cognitive Impairment: An Associated Burden or Burden by Association?

Angiology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (6) ◽  
pp. 498-519
Author(s):  
Theodora A. Manolis ◽  
Antonis A. Manolis ◽  
Evdoxia J. Apostolopoulos ◽  
Helen Melita ◽  
Antonis S. Manolis
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Control Strategies ◽  
Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Cerebral Hypoperfusion ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Vascular Oxidative Stress ◽  
Prior Stroke

Growing evidence suggests that atrial fibrillation (AF), in addition to its thromboembolic risk, is a risk factor for cognitive impairment (CI) via several pathways and mechanisms, further contributing to morbidity/mortality. Prior stroke is a contributor to CI, but AF is also associated with CI independently from prior stroke. Silent brain infarctions, microemboli and microbleeds, brain atrophy, cerebral hypoperfusion from widely fluctuating ventricular rates, altered hemostatic function, vascular oxidative stress, and inflammation may all exacerbate CI, particularly in patients with persistent/permanent rather than paroxysmal AF and with increased duration/burden of the arrhythmia. Brain magnetic resonance imaging is an important screening tool in eliciting and monitoring vascular and nonvascular lesions contributing to CI. Evidence is also emerging about the role of genetics in CI development. Anticoagulation and rhythm/rate control strategies may protect against CI preventing or slowing its progression or conversion to dementia, particularly at the early stages when CI may still be a treatable condition. Importantly, AF and CI share many common risk factors. Thus, screening for these 2 conditions and searching for and managing modifiable risk factors and potentially reversible causes for both AF and CI remains an important step toward prevention or amelioration of the impact incurred by these 2 conditions.

scholarly journals Triple versus LAMA/LABA combination therapy for patients with COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akira Koarai ◽  
Mitsuhiro Yamada ◽  
Tomohiro Ichikawa ◽  
Naoya Fujino ◽  
Tomotaka Kawayama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Combination Therapy ◽  
Triple Therapy ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Beta Agonist ◽  
History Of ◽  
Dyspnea Score ◽  
Long Acting

Abstract Background Recently, the addition of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) to long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) and long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) combination therapy has been recommended for patients with COPD who have severe symptoms and a history of exacerbations because it reduces the exacerbations. In addition, a reducing effect on mortality has been shown by this treatment. However, the evidence is mainly based on one large randomized controlled trial IMPACT study, and it remains unclear whether the ICS add-on treatment is beneficial or not. Recently, a large new ETHOS trial has been performed to clarify the ICS add-on effects. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety including ETHOS trial. Methods We searched relevant randomized control trials (RCTs) and analyzed the exacerbations, quality of life (QOL), dyspnea symptom, lung function and adverse events including pneumonia and mortality, as the outcomes of interest. Results We identified a total of 6 RCTs in ICS add-on protocol (N = 13,579). ICS/LAMA/LABA treatment (triple therapy) significantly decreased the incidence of exacerbations (rate ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.64–0.83) and improved the QOL score and trough FEV1 compared to LAMA/LABA. In addition, triple therapy significantly improved the dyspnea score (mean difference 0.33, 95% CI 0.18–0.48) and mortality (odds ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.50–0.87). However, triple therapy showed a significantly higher incidence of pneumonia (odds ratio 1.52, 95% CI 1.16–2.00). In the ICS-withdrawal protocol including 2 RCTs, triple therapy also showed a significantly better QOL score and higher trough FEV1 than LAMA/LABA. Concerning the trough FEV1, QOL score and dyspnea score in both protocols, the differences were less than the minimal clinically important difference. Conclusion Triple therapy causes a higher incidence of pneumonia but is a more preferable treatment than LAMA/LABA due to the lower incidence of exacerbations, higher trough FEV1 and better QOL score. In addition, triple therapy is also superior to LABA/LAMA due to the lower mortality and better dyspnea score. However, these results should be only applied to patients with symptomatic moderate to severe COPD and a history of exacerbations. Clinical Trial Registration: PROSPERO; CRD42020191978.

Abstract 223: Impact of Differences in Once- vs Twice-Daily Medications Adherence on the Risk of Bleed and Stroke in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation: Analysis of Randomized Trials and Claims Data Sources

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Colleen A McHorney ◽  
Eric D Peterson ◽  
Mike Durkin ◽  
Veronica Ashton ◽  
François Laliberté ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Stroke Risk ◽  
Claims Data ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Cardiovascular Medications ◽  
One Year ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Similar Risk

Background: In non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients, those receiving once-daily (QD) versus twice-daily (BID) non vitamin-K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) may have better medication adherence. The impact on stroke and bleed risk is not known. Objective: To estimate the impact of adherence differences between QD vs BID therapies on bleed and stroke risks in NVAF patients. Methods: The relation between adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]) for QD vs BID NOACs and one year bleed risk was modeled using claims data from Truven Health Analytics MarketScan databases (7/2012-10/2015). Next, the relation between adherence and bleeding was calibrated to match that seen in the placebo and NOAC arms of previous randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Finally, we used adherence rates for QD (PDC=0.849) and BID (PDC=0.738) cardiovascular medications from a meta-analysis (Coleman et al.). These rates were used in the calibrated model to estimate bleeds. An analogous method was applied to evaluate the impact of QD vs BID adherence on stroke risk. Results: The relation between PDC and risks of bleed and stroke was modeled using claims data (N=65,022) and calibrated using RCTs. In the calibrated model, compared with BID dosing, QD dosing was associated with 81 fewer strokes (34% reduction) and 14 more bleeds (6% more) per 10,000 patients/year (Figure). Conclusion: Among NVAF patients, better adherence to QD dosing was associated with a significantly lower stroke risk of QD but similar risk of bleed.

scholarly journals Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. k4738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna C Crocker ◽  
Ignacio Ricci-Cabello ◽  
Adwoa Parker ◽  
Jennifer A Hirst ◽  
Alan Chant ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Lived Experience ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Retention Rates ◽  
The Impact

AbstractObjectiveTo investigate the impact of patient and public involvement (PPI) on rates of enrolment and retention in clinical trials and explore how this varies with the context and nature of PPI.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesTen electronic databases, including Medline, INVOLVE Evidence Library, and clinical trial registries.Eligibility criteriaExperimental and observational studies quantitatively evaluating the impact of a PPI intervention, compared with no intervention or non-PPI intervention(s), on participant enrolment and/or retention rates in a clinical trial or trials. PPI interventions could include additional non-PPI components inseparable from the PPI (for example, other stakeholder involvement).Data extraction and analysisTwo independent reviewers extracted data on enrolment and retention rates, as well as on the context and characteristics of PPI intervention, and assessed risk of bias. Random effects meta-analyses were used to determine the average effect of PPI interventions on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: main analysis including randomised studies only, secondary analysis adding non-randomised studies, and several exploratory subgroup and sensitivity analyses.Results26 studies were included in the review; 19 were eligible for enrolment meta-analysis and five for retention meta-analysis. Various PPI interventions were identified with different degrees of involvement, different numbers and types of people involved, and input at different stages of the trial process. On average, PPI interventions modestly but significantly increased the odds of participant enrolment in the main analysis (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval and prediction interval 1.01 to 1.34). Non-PPI components of interventions may have contributed to this effect. In exploratory subgroup analyses, the involvement of people with lived experience of the condition under study was significantly associated with improved enrolment (odds ratio 3.14v1.07; P=0.02). The findings for retention were inconclusive owing to the paucity of eligible studies (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.33 to 4.14), for main analysis).ConclusionsThese findings add weight to the case for PPI in clinical trials by indicating that it is likely to improve enrolment of participants, especially if it includes people with lived experience of the health condition under study. Further research is needed to assess which types of PPI work best in particular contexts, the cost effectiveness of PPI, the impact of PPI at earlier stages of trial design, and the impact of PPI interventions specifically targeting retention.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42016043808.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document