Skip to main content

Daily Cardiology Research Analysis

3 papers

Three high-impact cardiology studies stood out: a randomized multicenter Circulation trial showed a biodegradable PFO closure device is noninferior to nitinol and radiographically disappears by 24 months; an individual participant data meta-analysis (EJPC) confirmed contemporary exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation reduces hospitalizations and improves quality of life; and a large JAMA Network Open target-trial emulation found broadly similar kidney/cardiovascular outcomes across liraglutide, s

Summary

Three high-impact cardiology studies stood out: a randomized multicenter Circulation trial showed a biodegradable PFO closure device is noninferior to nitinol and radiographically disappears by 24 months; an individual participant data meta-analysis (EJPC) confirmed contemporary exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation reduces hospitalizations and improves quality of life; and a large JAMA Network Open target-trial emulation found broadly similar kidney/cardiovascular outcomes across liraglutide, semaglutide, and dulaglutide, with nuanced differences in mortality and gallbladder events.

Research Themes

  • Comparative effectiveness of cardiometabolic therapies
  • Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation and outcomes
  • Biodegradable structural heart devices and long-term safety

Selected Articles

1. Transcatheter Closure of Patent Foramen Ovale With a Novel Biodegradable Device: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

85.5Level IRCTCirculation · 2025PMID: 41078120

In a multicenter randomized noninferiority trial (n=190), a biodegradable PFO closure device achieved a 6-month closure rate comparable to a nitinol device (90.6% vs 91.5%) with no device thrombosis, erosion, or deaths; echocardiographic signal of the biodegradable device disappeared by 24 months. One device required surgical removal due to intraprocedural deformation.

Impact: First randomized head-to-head evaluation demonstrates that a fully biodegradable PFO device maintains efficacy and safety while eliminating long-term foreign material, a potential paradigm shift in structural heart interventions.

Clinical Implications: Biodegradable PFO closure could reduce late device-related imaging artifacts and theoretical long-term risks (e.g., thrombus, erosion), supporting broader adoption pending longer-term stroke outcomes. Procedural vigilance remains essential due to rare intraprocedural deformation.

Key Findings

  • 6-month PFO closure success was 90.63% (biodegradable) vs 91.49% (nitinol), meeting noninferiority (lower 95% CI of difference -8.98% > -10% margin).
  • No deaths, embolism, device thrombus, or erosion occurred during follow-up; one surgical explantation for intraprocedural deformation.
  • Echocardiographic hyperechoic signal from the biodegradable device diminished within 1 year and disappeared by 24 months.

Methodological Strengths

  • Prospective multicenter randomized noninferiority design with prespecified endpoints
  • Direct head-to-head comparison with standard nitinol device and 24-month imaging follow-up

Limitations

  • Sample size (n=190) limits power for rare clinical endpoints (e.g., stroke recurrence)
  • Noninferiority framework; generalizability to diverse anatomies and operators requires further study

Future Directions: Assess long-term clinical endpoints (stroke recurrence, new-onset atrial fibrillation), device-related endothelialization, and cost-effectiveness; expand to broader anatomies and real-world registries.

2. Exercise-based Cardiac Rehabilitation for Coronary Heart disease - the CaReMATCH individual participant data meta-analysis.

78Level IMeta-analysisEuropean journal of preventive cardiology · 2025PMID: 41077559

An IPD meta-analysis of randomized trials (8 trials; n=4,975) showed that contemporary exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation reduces all-cause and cardiovascular-related hospitalizations (HR 0.68 and 0.62, respectively) and improves HRQoL up to 12 months, without a mortality effect. Benefits were consistent across most subgroups, with amplified effects in lower LVEF/fitness and lower baseline HRQoL groups.

Impact: Provides contemporary, high-quality, patient-level evidence confirming ExCR’s robust benefits on admissions and quality of life across diverse CHD populations.

Clinical Implications: ExCR should be systematically offered post-CHD events, with prioritization for patients with lower LVEF, lower exercise capacity, or poorer baseline HRQoL. Programs should emphasize adherence and access to maximize hospitalization reductions.

Key Findings

  • ExCR reduced all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.87) and CVD-related hospitalization (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.47–0.83).
  • ExCR improved health-related quality of life up to 12 months (utility index mean difference 0.032, 95% CI 0.003–0.061).
  • No significant effect on all-cause or CVD mortality; benefits were consistent across subgroups with stronger effects in lower LVEF/fitness and lower baseline HRQoL.

Methodological Strengths

  • Individual participant data meta-analysis of randomized trials published since 2010
  • Predefined outcomes with subgroup analyses to explore effect heterogeneity

Limitations

  • IPD available from 8 of 30 eligible trials; potential selection of contributing datasets
  • Heterogeneity in ExCR program content and intensity; blinding not feasible

Future Directions: Evaluate implementation strategies to improve uptake/adherence, cost-effectiveness across health systems, and integration with digital/remote CR to sustain HRQoL benefits.

3. Liraglutide vs Semaglutide vs Dulaglutide in Veterans With Type 2 Diabetes.

75.5Level IICohortJAMA network open · 2025PMID: 41082229

In a national VA target-trial emulation (n=21,790), liraglutide, semaglutide, and dulaglutide showed broadly similar hazards for kidney failure, CKM composite, and MACE. Liraglutide was associated with lower all-cause mortality versus dulaglutide (both ITT and per-protocol), while dulaglutide had fewer gallstones/cholecystitis than semaglutide.

Impact: Provides head-to-head comparative effectiveness across GLP-1RAs with rigorous target-trial emulation, informing agent selection beyond class effects in cardiometabolic care.

Clinical Implications: For most patients, selection among GLP-1RAs can prioritize access, tolerability, and cost given similar kidney/CV outcomes; nuanced signals (mortality differences, gallbladder events) may guide individualized choices pending RCT confirmation.

Key Findings

  • Kidney failure, CKM composite, and MACE risks were similar across liraglutide, semaglutide, and dulaglutide initiators.
  • Liraglutide showed lower all-cause mortality versus dulaglutide (ITT HR 0.69; PP HR 0.50); mortality benefit versus semaglutide was less consistent.
  • Dulaglutide had lower risk of gallstones and acute cholecystitis versus semaglutide.

Methodological Strengths

  • Active-comparator new-user design with target-trial emulation and weighted Cox models
  • Linked national datasets (VA, Medicare, USRDS) enabling comprehensive outcome ascertainment

Limitations

  • Observational design with potential residual confounding and healthy user bias
  • Predominantly male veterans may limit generalizability; per-protocol/ITT differences suggest adherence effects

Future Directions: Head-to-head randomized trials comparing GLP-1RAs on mortality and safety; mechanistic evaluation of gallbladder effects; subgroup analyses in women and diverse populations.