There may be many predictors of anticoagulation-related gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the evidence have not been published. We conducted a systematic review to identify all risk factors for anticoagulant-associated GIB to inform risk prediction in the management of anticoagulation- related GIB.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to search PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases (from inception through January 21, 2022) using the following search terms: anticoagulants, heparin, warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, DOACs, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, risk factors. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, studies of risk factors for anticoagulation-related GIB were identified. Risk factors for anticoagulant-associated GIB were used as the outcome index of this review.
We included 34 studies in our analysis. For anticoagulant-associated GIB, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age, kidney disease, concomitant use of aspirin, concomitant use of the antiplatelet agent, heart failure, myocardial infarction, hematochezia, renal failure, coronary artery disease, helicobacter pylori infection, social risk factors, alcohol use, smoking, anemia, history of sleep apnea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, international normalized ratio (INR), obesity et al. Some of these factors are not included in current GIB risk prediction models. such as anemia, co-administration of gemfibrozil, co-administration of verapamil or diltiazem, INR, heart failure, myocardial infarction, etc.
The study found that anemia, co-administration of gemfibrozil, co-administration of verapamil or diltiazem, INR, heart failure, myocardial infarction et al. were associated with anticoagulation-related GIB, and these factors were not in the existing prediction models. This study informs risk prediction for anticoagulant-associated GIB, it also informs guidelines for GIB prevention and future research.

Paroxysmal supraventricular arrhythmias are a group of common rhythm disturbances that are often prevalent, frequently recurrent, sporadic, and life-threatening. These arrhythmias are precipitated by factors such as age, sex, and associated comorbidities. Typically, patients with paroxysmal arrhythmias are asymptomatic during evaluation, and the condition is often detected incidentally. Symptoms associated with these arrhythmias include palpitations, fatigue, light-headedness, chest discomfort, dyspnea, presyncope, and, less commonly, polyuria and serious psychological distress. In terms of treatment, common modalities include antiarrhythmic drug therapy and catheter ablation. When selecting drug therapy, factors such as comorbidities, patient-specific modifiers, preferences, follow-up frequency, and cost-effectiveness are taken into account. For long-term treatment, calcium channel blockers are often used instead of adenosine, while adenosine is preferred for acute attacks due to its higher efficacy. Comparatively, adenosine and verapamil are commonly used drugs in the emergency setting to treat paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia (PSVT). Adenosine exhibits a faster onset of action, but adverse effects occur more commonly, whereas verapamil has a slower onset of action and a lower incidence of adverse effects. We searched for articles from PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), and Science Direct, and these articles were reviewed systematically. After applying the search strategy to these databases, 195 articles were identified. Fourteen of these were finalized for review. The efficacy of adenosine versus verapamil in terminating acute attacks of PSVT is reviewed in our article.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common genetic heart disease and is a prevalent cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD). This study aims to establish the benefits and therapeutic value metoprolol or verapamil offer to patients who suffer from symptoms caused by HCM, with regard to resolving left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO), as well as improving a patient\'s quality of life and reducing symptoms. We conducted a systematic review to find clinical studies that described the use of metoprolol or verapamil in the management of HCM. Three databases were analyzed for studies, PubMed, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect. We discovered 6,260 potentially eligible records across all the databases. According to our eligibility criteria, we included four studies in this review. Metoprolol showed median left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) gradients of 25 mm Hg versus 72 mm Hg (P = 0.007) at rest, 28 mm Hg versus 62 mm Hg (P < 0.001) at peak exercise, and 45 mm Hg versus 115 mm Hg (P < 0.001) post-exercise. Verapamil also showed a statistically significant increase in exercise capacity. Both drugs have been shown to be safe to use with a good side effect profile; however, metoprolol was better tolerated in the patient population that was tested in the studies collected. In this study, metoprolol was effective in reducing LVOT and improving the quality of life in patients, while verapamil showed variable effects on both exercise capacity and baseline hemodynamics.

OBJECTIVE: At present, the therapies of dilated cardiomyopathy concentrated on the symptoms of heart failure and related complications. The study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy of a combination of various conventional and adjuvant drugs in treating dilated cardiomyopathy via network meta-analysis.
METHODS: The study was reported according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. From inception through 27 June 2022, the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, and Web of Science databases were searched for randomized controlled trials on medicines for treating dilated cardiomyopathy. The quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the Cochrane risk of bias assessment. R4.1.3 and Revman5.3 software were used for analysis.
RESULTS: There were 52 randomized controlled trials in this study, with a total of 25 medications and a sample size of 3048 cases. The network meta-analysis found that carvedilol, verapamil, and trimetazidine were the top three medicines for improving left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Ivabradine, bucindolol, and verapamil were the top 3 drugs for improving left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD). Ivabradine, L-thyroxine, and atorvastatin were the top 3 drugs for improving left ventricular end-systolic dimension (LVESD). Trimetazidine, pentoxifylline, and bucindolol were the top 3 drugs for improving the New York Heart Association classification (NYHA) cardiac function score. Ivabradine, carvedilol, and bucindolol were the top 3 drugs for reducing heart rate (HR).
CONCLUSIONS: A combination of different medications and conventional therapy may increase the clinical effectiveness of treating dilated cardiomyopathy. Beta-blockers, especially carvedilol, can improve ventricular remodeling, cardiac function, and clinical efficacy in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Hence, they can be used if patients tolerate them. If LVEF and HR do not meet the standard, ivabradine can also be used in combination with other treatments. However, since the quality and number of studies in our research were limited, large sample size, multi-center, and high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to corroborate our findings.

BACKGROUND: Extrapolating from efficacy in subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH), nimodipine has been used as a treatment for reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS). However, 4-hourly dosing is a practical limitation and verapamil has been proposed as an alternative. The potential efficacy, adverse effects, preferred dosing and formulation of verapamil for RCVS have not been systematically reviewed previously.
METHODS: A systematic review was conducted of the databases PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to July 2022 for peer-reviewed articles describing the use of verapamil for RCVS. This systematic review adheres to the PRISMA guidelines and was registered on PROSPERO.
RESULTS: There were 58 articles included in the review, which included 56 patients with RCVS treated with oral verapamil and 15 patients treated with intra-arterial verapamil. The most common oral verapamil dosing regimen was controlled release 120 mg once daily. There were 54/56 patients described to have improvement in headache following oral verapamil and one patient who died from worsening RCVS. Only 2/56 patients noted possible adverse effects with oral verapamil, with none requiring discontinuation. There was one case of hypotension from combined oral and intra-arterial verapamil. Vascular complications including ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke were recorded in 33/56 patients. RCVS recurrence was described in 9 patients, with 2 cases upon weaning oral verapamil.
CONCLUSIONS: While no randomised studies exist to support the use of verapamil in RCVS, observational data support a possible clinical benefit. Verapamil appears well tolerated in this setting and represents a reasonable treatment option. Randomised controlled trials including comparison with nimodipine are warranted.

Reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndrome (RCVS) is a rare phenomenon that can present in the postpartum period. We show the experience of a 35-year-old patient who presented with headache after an uncomplicated pregnancy and vaginal delivery. She was initially diagnosed with pre-eclampsia, and subsequently with RCVS following discovery of multifocal vascular narrowing on magnetic resonance arteriography (MRA). Verapamil was initiated, and at 1 month there was improvement intracranially, but cervical vertebral arterial narrowing, likely dissection, was discovered. Verapamil was continued and aspirin was initiated. Follow-up imaging 5 months postpartum demonstrated near-complete resolution of previously noted abnormalities, which remained stable at reimaging at 10 months postpartum. In conclusion, the symptoms of RCVS can mimic or coexist with pre-eclampsia. Early intracranial imaging such as MRA can permit timely diagnosis and facilitate appropriate management and follow-up.

Keloids are pathologic scars that pose a significant functional and cosmetic burden. They are challenging to treat, despite the multitude of treatment modalities currently available.
The aim of this study was to conduct an evidence-based review of all prospective data regarding keloid treatments published between 2010 and 2020.
A systematic literature search of PubMed (National Library of Medicine), Embase (Elsevier), and Cochrane Library (Wiley) was performed in November of 2020. Search strategies with the keywords \"keloid\" and \"treatment\" were performed by a medical librarian. The search was limited to prospective studies that were peer-reviewed, reported on clinical outcomes of keloid therapies, and were published in the English language between January 1, 2010, and November 24, 2020.
A total of 3462 unique citations were identified, of which 108 studies met inclusion criteria. Current literature supports silicone gel or sheeting with corticosteroid injections as first-line therapy for keloids. Adjuvant intralesional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), bleomycin, or verapamil can be considered, although mixed results have been reported with each. Laser therapy can be used in combination with intralesional corticosteroids or topical steroids with occlusion to improve drug penetration. Excision of keloids with immediate post-excision radiation therapy is an effective option for recalcitrant lesions. Finally, silicone sheeting and pressure therapy have evidence for reducing keloid recurrence.
This review was limited by heterogeneity of subject characteristics and study outcome measures, small sample sizes, and inconsistent study designs. Larger and more robust controlled studies are necessary to further understand the variety of existing and emerging keloid treatments, including corticosteroids, cryotherapy, intralesional injections, lasers, photodynamic therapy, excision and radiation, pressure dressings, and others.

Keloids and hypertrophic scars can affect the appearance and normal function of patients, and may severely affect patients\' physical and mental health. Many methods have been used for the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars, there is no standardized method so far. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of verapamil and triamcinolone acetonide (TAC) in treating keloids and hypertrophic scars.
All studies from their inception date up to August 2022 were searched using four databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE). The weighted mean differences and the risk ratio were calculated for comparing continuous variables and dichotomous variables, respectively.
A total of nine randomized controlled trials involving 567 patients were identified. This meta-analysis indicated that TAC group showed significantly better effects compared with verapamil group in the reduction of height at 3 and 9 weeks, pliability at 3, 9, and 18 weeks, vascularity at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 weeks, whereas verapamil group showed significantly better effects compared with TAC group in the reduction of pliability at 21 and 24 weeks. Verapamil group showed a significantly lower incidence of skin atrophy, telangiectasia, and hypopigmentation compared with TAC group. However, the incidence of burning sensation in verapamil group was higher than that in TAC group.
Concerning the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars, TAC was more effective than verapamil for improving vascularity; TAC was superior to verapamil in improving height within 9 weeks of treatment; TAC produced superior result for improving pliability within 18 weeks of treatment, whereas verapamil produced superior result between 18 and 24 weeks of treatment. Verapamil had fewer adverse events than TAC and can be used as a safer alternative for the treatment of keloids and hypertrophic scars.
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

BACKGROUND: Giant cell arteritis (GCA) is a systemic vasculitis that may cause ischemic stroke. Rarely, GCA can present with aggressive intracranial stenoses, which are refractory to medical therapy. Endovascular treatment (EVT) is a possible rescue strategy to prevent ischemic complications in intracranial GCA but the safety and efficacy of EVT in this setting are not well-described.
METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to identify case reports and series with individual patient-level data describing EVT for intracranial GCA. The clinical course, therapeutic considerations, and technique of seven endovascular treatments in a single patient from the authors\' experience are presented.
RESULTS: The literature review identified 9 reports of 19 treatments, including percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) with or without stenting, in 14 patients (mean age 69.6 ± 6.3 years). Out of 12 patients 8 (66.7%) with sufficient data had > 1 pre-existing cardiovascular risk factor. All patients had infarction on MRI while on glucocorticoids and 7/14 (50%) progressed despite adjuvant immunosuppressive agents. Treatment was PTA alone in 15/19 (78.9%) cases and PTA + stent in 4/19 (21.1%). Repeat treatments were performed in 4/14 (28.6%) of patients (PTA-only). Non-flow limiting dissection was reported in 2/19 (10.5%) of treatments. The indications, technical details, and results of PTA are discussed in a single illustrative case. We report the novel use of intra-arterial calcium channel blocker infusion (verapamil) as adjuvant to PTA and as monotherapy, resulting in immediate improvement in cerebral blood flow.
CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment, including PTA with or without stenting or calcium channel blocker infusion, may be effective therapies in medically refractory GCA with intracranial stenosis.

To describe the clinical characteristics and therapeutic options available to paediatric patients with cluster headache.
Based on a literature search of the medical databases PubMed, LILACS, and Web of Science and using selected descriptors, we carried out a systematic review of case reports on cluster headache in paediatric patients published from 1990 to 2020.
Fifty-one patients (29 males, 22 females) with a mean (SD) age of 9 years 7 months (3y 10mo; range 2-16y) were diagnosed with cluster headache. The mean (SD) diagnosis was made 27.8 months (26.2mo) after the onset of cluster headache. Pain occurred at night or on waking up (76.5%) and consisted of 1 to 3 attacks per day (62.7%) lasting 30 to 120 minutes (68.6%). Headaches were unilateral (90.2%), had a pulsatile character (64.7%), and severe intensity (100%). There were autonomic manifestations (90.2%) predominantly ipsilateral to pain, in this order: lacrimation; conjunctival injection; nasal congestion; ptosis; eyelid oedema; and rhinorrhoea. Sumatriptan and oxygen inhalation were the most effective treatments for acute manifestation. Prophylaxis, corticosteroids, verapamil, and gabapentin were the most effective drugs.
Due to the small number of published studies, this review could not provide reliable data; however, it appears that cluster headache in children and adolescents is similar to adults, both in clinical characteristics and treatment. What this paper adds Cluster headache in children and adolescents is poorly studied. Cluster headache is uncommon before 10 years of age and diagnosis is difficult in the first few years of life. Treatment of cluster headache in children and adolescents is similar to that used in adults. The notion of the effectiveness of prophylactic treatment is based only on authors\' experience.