Background: Energy drinks have been linked to an increase in emergency room visits and deaths. We aim to determine the impact of energy drinks on electrocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters in young healthy volunteers. Methods and Results: A randomized, double‐masked, placebo‐controlled, crossover study was conducted in healthy volunteers. Participants consumed 32 oz of either energy drink A, energy drink B, or placebo within 60 minutes on 3 study days with a 6‐day washout period in between. The primary end point of QT c interval and secondary end points of QT interval, PR interval, QRS duration, heart rate, and brachial and central blood pressures were measured at baseline, and every 30 minutes for 240 minutes. A repeated‐measures 2‐way analysis of variance was performed with the main effects of intervention, time, and an interaction of intervention and time. Thirty‐four participants were included (age 22.1±3.0 years). The interaction term of intervention and time was statistically significant for Bazett's corrected QT interval, Fridericia's corrected QT interval, QT , PR , QRS duration, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, central systolic blood pressure, and central diastolic blood pressure (all P <0.001). The maximum change from baseline in Bazett's corrected QT interval for drinks A, B, and placebo were +17.9±13.9, +19.6±15.8, and +11.9±11.1 ms, respectively ( P =0.005 for ANOVA ) ( P =0.04 and <0.01, respectively compared with placebo). Peripheral and central systolic and diastolic blood pressure were statistically significantly different compared with placebo (all P <0.001). Conclusion: Energy drinks significantly prolong the QT c interval and raise blood pressure. Clinical Trial Registration: URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 03196908.

Background: Caffeine in doses <400 mg is typically not considered arrhythmogenic, but little is known about the additional ingredients in energy drinks. We evaluated the ECG and blood pressure ( BP ) effects of high‐volume energy drink consumption compared with caffeine alone. Methods and Results: This was a randomized, double‐blind, controlled, crossover study in 18 young, healthy volunteers. Participants consumed either 946 mL (32 ounces) of energy drink or caffeinated control drink, both of which contained 320 mg of caffeine, separated by a 6‐day washout period. ECG , peripheral BP , and central BP measurements were obtained at baseline and 1, 2, 4, 6, and 24 hours post study drink consumption. The time‐matched, baseline‐adjusted changes were compared. The change in corrected QT interval from baseline in the energy drink arm was significantly higher than the caffeine arm at 2 hours (0.44±18.4 ms versus −10.4±14.8 ms, respectively; P =0.02). The QT c changes were not different at other time points. While both the energy drink and caffeine arms raised systolic BP in a similar fashion initially, the systolic BP was significantly higher at 6 hours when compared with the caffeine arm (4.72±4.67 mm Hg versus 0.83±6.09 mm Hg, respectively; P =0.01). Heart rate, diastolic BP , central systolic BP , and central diastolic BP showed no evidence of a difference between groups at any time point. Post energy drink, augmentation index was lower at 6 hours. Conclusions: The corrected QT interval and systolic BP were significantly higher post high‐volume energy drink consumption when compared with caffeine alone. Larger clinical trials validating these findings and evaluation of noncaffeine ingredients within energy drinks are warranted. Clinical Trial Registration: URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 02023723.

Unmanned aerial systems (UASs), known colloquially as drones, constitute a rapidly growing market, with sales that tripled in the 12 months ending in April 2016.[1][1] These drones are being used innovatively for photography, racing, security, and architecture, and their use will soon include

Optimizing plasma lipoproteins is the primary goal of pharmacotherapy and diet interventions in people at risk for cardiovascular diseases. Avocados offer a rich source of monounsaturated fat and may pose beneficial effects on the lipid profile. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials assessing the impact of avocados on TC, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and/or triglycerides (TG). We searched PUBMED, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and the Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews from their inception to February 2015. The weighted mean difference from baseline was calculated for all endpoints. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess heterogeneity, and funnel plots inspected to assess publication bias. Ten unique studies (n = 229) were included. Avocado consumption significantly reduced TC, LDL-C, and TG by -18.80 mg/dL (95% confidence interval [CI], -24.56 to -13.05; I(2), 46.9%), -16.50 mg/dL (95% CI, -22.91 to -10.10; I(2), 72.5%), -27.20 mg/dL (95% CI, -44.41 to -9.99; I(2), 91.1%) respectively. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased nonsignificantly by -0.18 mg/dL (95% CI, -3.23 to 2.88; I(2), 84.8%). Avocado-substituted diets significantly decrease TC, LDL-C, and TG levels. Substituting dietary fats with avocados versus adding to the free diet should be the primary recommendation strategy. Larger trials looking at the impact of avocados on major adverse cardiovascular events are warranted.

Objective: Hospitalizations associated with energy drinks have increased in the past decade. Whereas energy drinks are suspected to cause hemodynamic effects, the magnitude of risk remains controversial. We evaluated the effects of acute energy drink consumption on systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) and heart rate (HR). Data Sources: A search in PubMed, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane database through December 31, 2015, was performed. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Prospective clinical studies assessing the effects of commercially available energy drinks on BP and HR were included. A weighted mean change from baseline was calculated using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model for all end points. Data Synthesis: In all, 15 studies were included, encompassing a total of 340, 322, and 340 individuals for SBP, DBP, and HR, respectively. SBP and DBP increased significantly by 4.44 mm Hg (95% CI = 2.71 to 6.17; Cochrane Q P = 0.001) and 2.73 mm Hg (95% CI = 1.52 to 3.95; Cochrane Q P = 0.050), respectively. HR changed nonsignificantly by 0.80 beats per minute (95% CI = −1.26 to 2.87; Cochrane Q P < 0.001). The largest change in SBP was seen with drinks administering ≥200 mg of caffeine (6.44 mm Hg, 95% CI = 4.62 to 8.27). Conclusions: Our results indicate that acute consumption of caffeinated energy drinks significantly raises SBP and DBP. Further investigation of the ingredients in energy drinks and the impact of chronic energy drink consumption is warranted.