To summarize the association between vegetarian versus non-vegetarian diet on mortality due to ischemic heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, or all-cause mortality. We searched PubMed, Cochrane databases, and ClinicalTrials.Gov from the inception of the databases to October 2019 with no language restriction. Randomized controlled trials or prospective observational studies comparing the association between vegetarian versus non-vegetarian diets among adults and reporting major adverse cardiovascular outcomes were selected. We used Paule-Mandel estimator for tau2 with Hartung–Knapp adjustment for random effects model to estimate risk ratio [RR] with 95% confidence interval [CI].The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcome was ischemic heart disease mortality. Eight observational studies (n = 131,869) were included in the analysis. Over a weighted mean follow-up of 10.68 years, very low certainty of evidence concluded that a vegetarian diet compared with a non-vegetarian diet was associated with similar risk of all-cause (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.65–1.07, I²: 97%) or cerebrovascular mortality (RR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.63–1.14, I²: 90%), but was associated with a reduced risk of ischemic heart disease mortality (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.55–0.89, I²: 82%). A vegetarian diet, compared with a non-vegetarian diet, was associated with a reduced risk of ischemic heart disease mortality, whereas it had no effect on all-cause and cerebrovascular mortality. However, the results are to be considered with caution considering the low certainty of evidence. Despite recent studies supporting no restriction on animal protein intake gaining wide media attention and public traction, consideration for vegetarianism amongst those with risk factors for coronary artery disease should be contemplated.

Introduction: Catheter placement and stability are well‐known challenges in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation. As a result, steerable sheaths (SS) were developed to improve catheter stabilization and maintain proper catheter–tissue contact. The purpose of this systematic review and meta‐analysis is to see if employing a SS influences procedure outcome.Method: We performed a comprehensive literature search for studies that evaluated the efficacy and safety of SS compared to nonsteerable sheaths (NSS) in AF ablation. The primary outcome was the rate of atrial arrhythmia (AA) freedom by the time of the last follow‐up. The secondary outcomes were the procedure‐related complications and procedural characteristics. Risk ratio (RR) or the mean difference (MD) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the random‐effects model.Results: A total of 10 studies, including 967 AF patients (mean age: 59.2 ± 11.1 years, 516 patients managed with SS vs. 454 with NSS), were included. SS group showed a higher rate of freedom of AA compared to NSS (RR: 1.19; 95% CI 1.09–1.29; p < .001). Both techniques had similar rate for procedural‐related complication (RR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.50–2.39; p = .83). The SS strategy had a shorter procedure time (MD −10.6 [min], 95% CI −20.97, −0.20; p = .05) but comparable fluoroscopic and radiofrequency application times to the NSS group.Conclusions: The SS for AF catheter ablation not only reduced the total procedure time but also significantly increased the rate of successful ablation while maintaining a similar safety profile when compared to the traditional NSS.

Drug-induced thrombocytopenia requires a high suspicion for diagnosis and a broad investigation to exclude other etiologies of low platelets. Cessation of the offending agent often results in recovery of platelet counts. Many medications are known to cause a degree of thrombocytopenia. We present a rare case of severe thrombocytopenia associated with administration of azithromycin.