Cargando…

Prognostic value of left atrial volume index in acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

BACKGROUND: In the absence of mitral valve disease, increased left atrial volume (LAV) is a marker of diastolic dysfunction and long‐standing elevated left ventricle (LV) pressure. The aim of this study was to assess the role of increased baseline LAV in predicting clinical outcome of patients prese...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ahmeti, Artan, Bytyçi, Feriz S., Bielecka‐Dabrowa, Agata, Bytyçi, Ibadete, Henein, Michael Y.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7898886/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33372377
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12689
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In the absence of mitral valve disease, increased left atrial volume (LAV) is a marker of diastolic dysfunction and long‐standing elevated left ventricle (LV) pressure. The aim of this study was to assess the role of increased baseline LAV in predicting clinical outcome of patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: We systematically searched all electronic databases up to September 2020 in order to select clinical trials and observational studies, which assessed the predictive role of LAV indexed (LAVI) on clinical outcome in patients with ACS. Primary clinical endpoints were as follows: major adverse cardiac events (MACE), all‐cause mortality and hospitalization. Secondary endpoints were in‐hospital complications. RESULTS: A total of 2,705 patients from 11 cohort studies with a mean follow‐up 18.7 ± 9.8 months were included in the meta­analysis. Patients with low LAVI had low risk for MACE (15.9% vs. 33.7%; p < .01), long‐term all‐cause mortality (9.14% vs. 18.1%; p < .01), short‐term mortality (3.31% vs. 9.38%; p = .02) and lower hospitalization rate (11.6% vs. 25.5%; p < .01) compared to patients with increased LAVI. Atrial fibrillation and cardiogenic shock as in‐hospital events were lower (p < .05 for all) in patients with low LAVI but ventricular fibrillation/tachycardia was not different between groups (p = .14). CONCLUSION: Increased LAVI is an independent predictor of outcome in patients with ACS. Thus, assessment of LA index in these patients is important for better risk stratification and guidance towards optimum clinical management.