The latest medical research on Peripheral Vascular Disease

Cardiovascular disease remains a significant global health concern, with high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels contributing to an increased risk. Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) further complicates its management, necessitating additional lipid-lowering therapies. Evinacumab, an angiopoietin-like protein 3 monoclonal antibody, has emerged as a potential treatment, particularly for patients with FH, by effectively reducing LDL-C and triglyceride levels. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of evinacumab across diverse patient populations.

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were systematically retrieved from multiple databases until November 24, 2023. The inclusion criteria were studies comparing evinacumab (at doses of 5 and 15 mg) to placebo, with outcomes focusing on lipid levels and adverse events. Standardized protocols were employed for data extraction and quality assessment, and statistical analysis was conducted using RevMan software.

Four RCTs, involving 270 patients, were included in the analysis. The analysis revealed significant reductions in lipid markers, particularly with the 15-mg dose of evinacumab, including triacylglycerols (standard mean difference [SMD] = -6.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 14.53 to 2.36, P = 0.16), total cholesterol (SMD = - 6.20, 95% CI - 11.53 to - 0.88, P = 0.02), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (SMD = - 0.79, 95% CI - 1.27 to - 0.31, P = 0.001), LDL-C (SMD = - 4.58, 95% CI - 9.13 to - 0.03, P = 0.05), apolipoprotein (Apo) B (SMD = - 4.01, 95% CI - 7.53 to - 0.46, P = 0.03), and Apo C3 (SMD = - 7.67, 95% CI - 12.94 to - 2.41, P = 0.004). Adverse event analysis revealed no significant association, indicating good tolerability.

High-dose evinacumab (15 mg) consistently demonstrated efficacy in reducing cholesterol and other lipid markers, with favorable tolerability. Further research is warranted to comprehensively assess its safety and clinical effectiveness, emphasizing the need for additional data to support its use in managing cardiovascular disease.

The American Heart Association recommended sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) for the management of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). However, little is known about their real-world in-class comparative safety in patients with HFpEF. We aimed to assess the comparative safety of SGLT2i in the risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) or genital infection separately or as a composite outcome among patients with HFpEF.

This cohort study using MarketScan® Commercial and Medicare supplemental databases (2012-2020) included patients aged ≥ 18 years with a diagnosis of HFpEF who initiated SGLT2i therapy. Three pairwise comparison groups were established: cohort 1, dapagliflozin versus canagliflozin; cohort 2, empagliflozin versus canagliflozin; and cohort 3, dapagliflozin versus empagliflozin. After stabilized inverse probability treatment weighting, Cox proportional hazards regression was used to compare the risk of UTI or genital infection separately or as a composite outcome in each cohort.

The risk of the composite outcome did not significantly differ between canagliflozin and dapagliflozin (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-1.14) or between empagliflozin and canagliflozin (aHR 1.25; 95% CI 0.77-2.05). Similarly, there was no evidence of difference between dapagliflozin and empagliflozin in this risk (aHR 0.76; 95% CI 0.48-1.21). The results of analyses separately assessing UTI or genital infection were similar.

There was no significant difference in the risk of UTI or genital infection among patients with HFpEF who initiated canagliflozin, dapagliflozin, or empagliflozin.

Digoxin has been used in the treatment for heart failure for centuries, but the role of this drug in the modern era is controversial. A particular concern is the recent observational findings suggesting an increase in all-cause mortality with digoxin, although such observations suffer from biased results since these studies usually do not provide adequate compensation for the severity of disease. Using a nationwide registry database, we aimed to investigate whether digoxin is associated with 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure irrespective of phenotype.

A total of 1014 out of 1054 patients in the registry, of whom 110 patients were on digoxin, were included in the study. Multivariable adjustments were done and propensity scores were calculated for various prognostic indicators, including signs and symptoms of heart failure and functional capacity. Crude mortality, mortality adjusted for covariates, mortality in the propensity score-matched cohort, and Bayesian factors (BFs) were analyzed.

Crude 1-year mortality rate did not differ between patients on and off digoxin (17.3% vs 20.1%, log-rank p = 0.46), and digoxin was not related to mortality following multivariable adjustment (hazard ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.539-1.402, p = 0.57). Similarly, all-cause mortality was similar in 220 propensity-score adjusted patients (17.3% vs 20.0%, log-rank p = 0.55). On Bayesian analyses, there was moderate to strong evidence suggesting a lack of difference between in unmatched cohort (BF10 0.091) and weak-to-moderate evidence in the matched cohort (BF10 0.296).

In this nationwide cohort, we did not find any evidence for an increased 1-year mortality in heart failure patients on digoxin.

PROSPERO identifier number CRD42023389.

Any RCT evaluating the effect of intravenous iron in patients with HFrEF and ID was eligible for inclusion. A complete search of the EMBASE and PubMed databases was conducted from inception until 15 September 2023. The primary outcome was the composite of the quality of life (QoL) questionnaires, while the secondary outcomes included first heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and all-cause mortality. Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

Of the 1035 references, 15 RCTs enrolling 6649 patients were included in this study. Intravenous iron was associated with significant improvement in the composite of QoL (standardized mean difference - 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 2.24 to - 0.48; p = 0.002), a significant reduction in first HF hospitalizations (hazard ratio [HR] 0.73, 95% CI 0.56-0.95; p = 0.02), and with no change in all-cause mortality (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.79-1.03; p = 0.12). The certainty of the evidence ranged from moderate to very low.

Intravenous iron is possibly associated with improved QoL and reduced HF hospitalizations, without impacting all-cause mortality. These findings not only support the use of intravenous iron in patients with HFrEF but also emphasize the need for well-designed and executed RCTs with granular outcome reporting and powered sufficiently to address the impact of intravenous iron on mortality in patients with HFrEF and ID.