Yasser Al-Khadra

Background: Systemic thrombolysis (ST) may not be ideal for many patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE) due to bleeding risk. In this analysis, we evaluated the safety and effectiveness of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) as an alternative to ST for acute PE. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years who underwent MT and/or ST for PE were identified from the National Inpatient Sample database from 2016 to 2017. Patients who underwent catheter-directed thrombolysis were excluded. We compared in-hospital outcomes of both groups in this retrospective study. Results: Of 16 890 patients who received an intervention for acute PE, 1380 (8.2%) received MT and 15 510 (91.8%) received ST. There was no difference in age between both groups. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients who received MT than that in those who received ST (11.9% vs 20.6%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.29–0.93, p=0.028). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of periprocedural bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and acute kidney injury between the 2 groups (p≥0.608 for all). Patients who received MT had a higher rate of respiratory complications (19.0% vs 11.6%, OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.06–3.03, p=0.030) and discharge to an outside facility (34.1% vs 19.2%, OR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.41–3.37, p<0.001) than those who received ST. Conclusion: Mortality was significantly lower with MT than that with ST, but larger randomized studies are needed to validate this. The use of MT should be individualized on the basis of the patients’ clinical presentation, risk profile, and local resources. Clinical Impact: In this study, we utilized the National Inpatient Sample database to study the in-hospital outcomes of pulmonary embolism patients who underwent mechanical thrombectomy compared to those who underwent systemic thrombolysis. We found that the patients who were diagnosed with pulmonary embolism and underwent mechanical thrombectomy had significantly lower mortality compared to those who were treated using systemic thrombolysis. This study was the first of its kind, utilizing the national inpatient sample database for evaluation of mechanical thrombectomy in comparison with the standard of care. These result would direct further randomized controlled trials for better evaluation of the utilization of mechanical thrombectomy in the correct clinical context. Furthermore, our study demonstrated comparable peri-operative complications between the mechanical thrombectomy group and the systemic thrombolysis group. These results would direct clinicians to consider mechanical thrombectomy if clinically indicated given the promising results.

Background Recent data have shown an advantage of rhythm control over rate control for the treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). Nevertheless, the data regarding efficacy of catheter ablation (CA) compared with antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) in patients with AF is lacking. Therefore, we sought to evaluate recurrence of arrhythmia, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular deaths, stroke/TIA, and all-cause readmissions of CA compared with AAD in patients with AF. Methods Systematically searched through PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and Cochrane for randomized control trials that compared CA and AAD in atrial fibrillation patients. Review Manager 5.4 and OpenMetaAnalyst were used to analyze the data. Data was pooled for the outcomes using random-effect models (DerSimonian and Laird) and reported as pooled odds ratio (OR). Results A total of 4822 patients were included. The CA group had 2417 patients while the AAD group included 2405 patients. Pooled data demonstrated that the CA arm had a statistically significant decrease in risk for recurrence of arrhythmia as compared to AAD (OR 0.25; [95% CI, 0.18–0.36]; p < 0.001). All-cause readmission was statistically significantly lower in CA as compared to AAD (OR 0.33; [95%CI, 0.17–0.63]; p < 0.001). For other secondary outcomes, there was no statistically significant difference between CA and AAD with regard to all-cause mortality (OR 0.75; [95% CI, 0.55–1.03]), cardiovascular death (OR 0.76; [95% CI, 0.22–2.54]), bleeding (OR 1.09, [95% CI 0.74, 1.61]), or stroke/TIA outcome (OR 0.90, [95% CI, 0.59–1.37]). Conclusions In this study of pooled data from 16 RCTs, CA utilization for atrial fibrillation had improved freedom from arrhythmia as well as reduced all-cause readmission compared with AAD.

Background: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common malignancies worldwide and the fourth leading cause of cancer deaths in the world. The association between HCC and cannabis has been identified in mice; however, to our knowledge has not been identified in humans. Therefore, we aim to investigate the relation between HCC and cannabis use in humans. Methods: Using data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between 2002 and 2014, we identified the patients with HCC and cannabis use diagnosis using the International Classification of Disease 9^th version codes (ICD-9). Then, we identified patients without cannabis use as the control group. We adjusted for multiple potential confounders and performed multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine the association between cannabis abuse and HCC. Results: A total of 101,231,036 patients were included in the study. Out of the total, 996,290 patients (1%) had the diagnosis of cannabis abuse versus 100,234,746 patients (99%) in the control group without cannabis abuse. We noticed that patients with cannabis abuse were younger (34 vs 48 years), had more males (61.7% vs 41.4%) and more African Americans (29.9% vs 14.2%) compared with the control group (P<0.001 for all). Besides, patients with cannabis use had more hepatitis B, hepatitis C, liver cirrhosis, and smoking, but had less obesity and gallstones, (P<0.001 for all). Using multivariable logistic regression, and after adjusting for potential confounders, patients with cannabis abuse were 55% less likely to have HCC (adjusted Odds Ratio {aOR}, 0.45, 95% Confidence Interval {CI}, 0.42-0.49, P<0.001) compared with patients without cannabis abuse. Conclusion: Based on our large database analysis, we found that cannabis use patients were 55% less likely to have HCC compared to patients without cannabis use. Further prospective studies are needed to assess the role of cannabis use on HCC.