Background: Left ventricular thrombus (LVT) is not uncommon and pose a risk of systemic embolism, which can be mitigated by adequate anticoagulation. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly being used as alternatives to warfarin for anticoagulation, but their efficacy and safety profile has been debated. We aim to compare the therapeutic efficacy and safety of DOACs versus warfarin for the treatment of LVT. Methodology: We systematically searched PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane library, and LILCAS databases from inception to 14th August 2020 to identify relevant studies comparing warfarin and DOACs for LVT treatment and used the pooled data extracted from retrieved studies to perform a meta-analysis. Results: We report pooled data on 1955 patients from 8 studies, with a mean age of 61 years and 59.7 years in warfarin and DOACs group, respectively. The pooled odds ratio for thrombus resolution was 1.11 (95% CI 0.51–2.39) on comparing warfarin to DOAC, but it did not reach a statistical significance (p = 0.76). The pooled risk ratio (RR) of stroke or systemic embolization and bleeding in patients treated with warfarin vs DOACs was 1.04 (95% CI 0.64–1.68; p = 0.85), and 1.15 (95% CI 0.62–2.13; p = 0.57), respectively; with an overall RR of 1.09 (95% CI 0.70–1.70; p = 0.48) for mortality. Conclusions: DOACs appears to be non-inferior or at least as effective as warfarin in the treatment of left ventricular thrombus without any statistical difference in stroke or bleeding complications.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been reported to cause worse outcomes in patients with underlying cardiovascular disease, especially in patients with acute cardiac injury, which is determined by elevated levels of high-sensitivity troponin. There is a paucity of data on the impact of congestive heart failure (CHF) on outcomes in COVID-19 patients. We conducted a literature search of PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases from 11/1/2019 till 06/07/2020, and identified all relevant studies reporting cardiovascular comorbidities, cardiac biomarkers, disease severity, and survival. Pooled data from the selected studies was used for metanalysis to identify the impact of risk factors and cardiac biomarker elevation on disease severity and/or mortality. We collected pooled data on 5,967 COVID-19 patients from 20 individual studies. We found that both non-survivors and those with severe disease had an increased risk of acute cardiac injury and cardiac arrhythmias, our pooled relative risk (RR) was — 8.52 (95% CI 3.63–19.98) (p<0.001); and 3.61 (95% CI 2.03–6.43) (p=0.001), respectively. Mean difference in the levels of Troponin-I, CK-MB, and NT-proBNP was higher in deceased and severely infected patients. The RR of in-hospital mortality was 2.35 (95% CI 1.18–4.70) (p=0.022) and 1.52 (95% CI 1.12–2.05) (p=0.008) among patients who had pre-existing CHF and hypertension, respectively. Cardiac involvement in COVID-19 infection appears to significantly adversely impact patient prognosis and survival. Pre-existence of CHF, and high cardiac biomarkers like NT-pro BNP and CK-MB levels in COVID-19 patients correlates with worse outcomes.

The prognostic value of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in patients with wild-type transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis treated with tafamidis is unknown. This retrospective study included patients with wtATTR who underwent baseline cardiopulmonary exercise testing and were treated with tafamidis from August 31, 2018, until March 31, 2020. Univariate logistic and multivariate cox-regression models were used to predict the occurrence of the primary outcome (composite of mortality, heart transplant, and palliative inotrope initiation). A total of 33 patients were included (median age 82 years, interquartile range [IQR] 79-84 years), 84% were Caucasians and 79% were males). Majority of patients had New York Heart Association functional class III disease at baseline (67%). The baseline median peak oxygen consumption (VO2) and peak circulatory power (CP) were 11.35 mL/kg/min (IQR 8.5-14.2 mL/kg/min) and 1485.8 mm Hg/mL/min (IQR 988-2184 mm Hg/mL/min), respectively, the median ventilatory efficiency was 35.7 (IQR 31-41.2). After 1 year of follow-up, 11 patients experienced a primary end point. Upon multivariate analysis, the low peak VO2 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.79, P = .007], peak CP (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.98-0.99, P = .02), peak oxygen pulse (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.97, P = .03), and exercise duration of less than 5.5 minutes (HR 5.82, 95% CI 1.29-26.2, P = .02) were significantly associated with the primary outcome. Tafamidis-treated patients with wtATTR who had baseline low peak VO2, peak CP, peak O2 pulse, and exercise duration of less than 5.5 minutes had worse outcomes.

We performed a retrospective review comparing outcomes between traditional ice storage (ICE) with short ischemic times (4 hours) using data from the GUARDIAN registry, a retrospective observational trial. To minimize baseline differences, propensity-matched (PSM) cohorts for site and era were performed. SherpaPak Cardiac Transport System travel distance was almost 10-fold greater than ICE (82 miles ICE vs. 765 miles SCTS). There was no significant difference in primary graft dysfunction (PGD) (20.8% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.58), length of stay (LOS) (24.7 vs. 24.8, p = 0.98), posttransplant mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (25.1% vs. 20.3%, p = 0.34), and 30 day survival (100% vs. 98.6%, p = 0.20). SherpaPak Cardiac Transport System showed statistically significant reduction in 24 hour inotrope scores (17.6 vs. 13.6, p = 0.007) and right ventricular (RV) dysfunction (31.1% vs. 15.7%, p = 0.002). Propensity-matched cohorts showed statistically similar rates of MCS utilization and PGD, but SCTS trended toward less RV dysfunction (26.0% vs. 16.2%, p = 0.11) and lower inotrope scores (16.5 vs. 12.9, p = 0.06) despite almost double the ischemic time. In conclusion, donor heart preservation with SCTS continues to be effective in prolonged ischemic times without sacrificing postheart transplantation clinical outcomes. This may aid in expanding donor organ geography.

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy (TCM), also known as broken heart syndrome or stress-induced cardiomyopathy, is a rare condition with an estimated incidence of 0.02% of all hospitalizations in United States and 2% of all acute coronary syndrome presentations. TCM predominately presents as a transient wall motion abnormality of the left ventricular apex due to emotional or physical stress. Cardiac rupture in the setting of TCM is an extremely rare phenomenon with limited published case reports. We present a case of a 75-year-old female who had cardiac rupture secondary to TCM and performed a literature review using Ovid MEDLINE for published cases showing this association. After the literature review, we found 20 cases showing this association, which are listed in a tabular fashion.