Oral anticoagulants or antiplatelets for cryptogenic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Chi K, Song J, Zarif T, Chiang C, Lee P, Chang Y, Nanna M, Nanna M. Oral anticoagulants or antiplatelets for cryptogenic stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Heart Journal 2024, 45: ehae666.2309. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae666.2309.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchLeft atrial diameterRelevant randomized controlled trialsPatent foramen ovaleNAVIGATE ESUS trialOral anticoagulantsOral anticoagulant useRecurrent ischemic strokeCryptogenic strokeIschemic strokeMeta-analysisSubgroup analysisESUS patientsHazard ratioSafety of oral anticoagulantsInternational Society of ThrombosisSociety of ThrombosisOptimal antithrombotic strategyAtrial cardiopathyDiagnostic work-upRE-SPECT ESUSElectronic databases of PubMedCryptogenic stroke patientsSources of cardioembolismRandom-effects meta-analysisSystematic reviewBeta-blockers for secondary prevention following myocardial infarction in patients without reduced ejection fraction or heart failure: an updated meta-analysis
Chi K, Lee P, Chowdhury I, Akman Z, Mangalesh S, Song J, Satish V, Babapour G, Kang Y, Schwartz R, Chang Y, Borkowski P, Nanna M, Damluji A, Nanna M. Beta-blockers for secondary prevention following myocardial infarction in patients without reduced ejection fraction or heart failure: an updated meta-analysis. European Journal Of Preventive Cardiology 2024, zwae298. PMID: 39298680, DOI: 10.1093/eurjpc/zwae298.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchReduced ejection fractionBeta-blockersEjection fractionHeart failureMortality benefitBB useReduced EFCV mortalityPost-MIRandom-effects meta-analysisMeta-analysisHistory of HFAll-cause mortalityTemporal trendsPrespecified subgroup analysesEvent-free periodCardiovascular (CVIncreased CV mortalityStudy inclusion periodPost-myocardial infarctionContemporary dataAssociated with detrimental effectsNon-significant trendSecondary preventionBB usersIntravascular Imaging–Guided Versus Angiography‐Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials
Sreenivasan J, Reddy R, Jamil Y, Malik A, Chamie D, Howard J, Nanna M, Mintz G, Maehara A, Ali Z, Moses J, Chen S, Chieffo A, Colombo A, Leon M, Lansky A, Ahmad Y. Intravascular Imaging–Guided Versus Angiography‐Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Trials. Journal Of The American Heart Association 2024, 13: e031111. PMID: 38214263, PMCID: PMC10926835, DOI: 10.1161/jaha.123.031111.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsAdverse cardiac eventsPercutaneous coronary interventionAngiography-guided percutaneous coronary interventionTarget vessel revascularizationTarget-lesion revascularizationCardiac eventsCardiac deathImaging-guided percutaneous coronary interventionWeighted mean follow-up durationMeta-analysisPrimary outcomeMean follow-up durationStent thrombosisMeta-analysis of randomized trialsStudy-level meta-analysisComplex lesion subsetsIntravascular imagingAll-cause deathRandom-effects meta-analysisStandard of careIntention-to-treat principleUpdates of clinical guidelinesMixed-effects meta-regressionComplex percutaneous coronary interventionIntravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention