Application in medicine: Has artificial intelligence stood the test of time

Artificial intelligence (AI) has proven time and time again to be a game-changer innovation in every walk of life, including medicine. Introduced by Dr. Gunn in 1976 to accurately diagnose acute abdominal pain and list potential differentials, AI has since come a long way. In particular, AI has been aiding in radiological diagnoses with good sensitivity and specificity by using machine learning algorithms. With the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, AI has proven to be more than just a tool to facilitate healthcare workers in decision making and limiting physician-patient contact during the pandemic. It has guided governments and key policymakers in formulating and implementing laws, such as lockdowns and travel restrictions, to curb the spread of this viral disease. This has been made possible by the use of social media to map severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 hotspots, laying the basis of the smart lockdown strategy that has been adopted globally. However, these benefits might be accompanied with concerns regarding privacy and unconsented surveillance, necessitating authorities to develop sincere and ethical government-public relations

Safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for native aortic valve regurgitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: The objective of this study was to analyze the available literature on using transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for native aortic regurgitation (AR). Background: Surgical aortic valve replacement is the gold standard therapy for native AR. TAVR has emerged as an alternative approach in high-risk patients. Methods: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for reports of at least 5 patients undergoing TAVR for native AR. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, major bleeding, postprocedural moderate to severe AR, and device success. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis and a meta-regression were performed to study the effects of study level covariates on outcomes. Results: Nineteen studies (n =998 patients) were included. The rate of procedural success per Valve Academic Research Consortium - 2 (VARC-2) criteria was 86.2% (78.8%-92.2%]. Thirty-day mortality was 11.9% (9.4%-14.7%). Subgroup analysis showed the use of new generation valves was associated with lower 30-day mortality (P = 0.02) and higher device success (P = 0.009) compared with early generation valves. There was no significant difference (P = 0.13) in the rate of 30-day mortality between patients receiving purpose-specific [8.2% (4.3%-13.1%); I2 = 0%] and nonpurpose specific valves [13.0% (8.2%-18.6%); I2 = 25%]. However, device success was higher (P = 0.02) in patients who received purpose-specific valves [96.3% (92.2%-98.9%); I2 = 0%] compared with nonpurpose specific valves [84.4% (75%-91.9%); I2 =46%]. Conclusion: TAVR for native AR is associated with acceptable procedural success but increased early mortality. However, the safety and the efficacy of the procedure increased with newer valves