Search

Background: The clinical relevance of cardiac troponin (cTn) elevation in takotsubo syndrome (TTS) remains uncertain. The present study sought to investigate the role of cardiac troponin (cTn) elevations in mortality prediction of patients with Takotsubo syndrome (TTS)., Methods: Patients enrolled in the International Takotsubo (InterTAK) Registry from January 2011 to February 2020 with available data on peak cTn levels were included in the analysis. Peak cTn levels during the index hospitalization were used to define clinically relevant myocardial injury. The threshold at which clinically relevant myocardial injury drives mortality at 1 year was identified using restricted cubic spline analysis., Results: Out of 2'938 patients, 222 (7.6%) patients died during 1-year follow-up. A more than 28.8-fold increase of cTn above the upper reference limit was identified as threshold for clinically relevant myocardial injury. The presence of clinically relevant myocardial injury was significantly associated with an increased risk of mortality at 5 years (adjusted HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.18-2.12, p =.002). Clinically relevant myocardial injury was related to an increased 5-year mortality risk in patients with apical TTS (adjusted HR 1.57, 95% CI 1.21-2.03, p =.001), in presence of physical stressors (adjusted HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.22-2.11, p =.001), and in absence of emotional stressors (adjusted HR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.17-1.89, p =.001)., Conclusion: This study for the first time determined a troponin threshold for the identification of TTS patients at excess risk of mortality. These findings advance risk stratification in TTS and assist in identifying patients in need for close monitoring and follow-up., (© 2024 Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Few data are available on long-term drug therapy and its potential prognostic impact after Takotsubo syndrome (TTS). Aim of the study is to evaluate clinical characteristics and long-term outcome of TTS patients on Renin Angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi)., Methods: TTS patients were enrolled in the international multicenter GEIST (GErman Italian Spanish Takotsubo) registry. Median follow-up was 31 (Interquartile range 12-56) months. Comparison of RASi treated vs. untreated patients was performed within the overall population and after 1:1 propensity score matching for age, sex, comorbidities, type of trigger and in-hospital complications., Registration: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04361994, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04361994 RESULTS: Of the 2453 TTS patients discharged alive, 1683 (68%) received RASi therapy. Patients with RASi were older (age 71 ± 11 vs 69 ± 13 years, P = .01), with higher prevalence of hypertension (74% vs 53%, P < .01) and diabetes (19% v s15%, P = .01), higher admission left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (41 ± 11% vs 39 ± 12%, P < .01) and lower rates of in-hospital complications (18.9% vs 29.6%, P < .01). At multivariable analysis, RASi therapy at discharge was independently associated with lower mortality (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.87, P < .01). Survival analysis showed that at long term, patients treated with RASi had lower mortality rates in the overall cohort (log-rank P = .001). However, this benefit was not found among patients treated with RASi in the matched cohort (log-rank P = .168). Potential survival benefit of RASi were present, both in the overall and matched cohort, in 2 subgroups: patients with admission LVEF ≤ 40% (HR 0.54 95% CI 0.38-0.78, P = .001; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.37-0.95, P = .030) and diabetes (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.73, P = .002; HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21-0.82, P = .011)., Conclusions: Long-term therapy with RASi after a TTS episode was not associated with lower mortality rates at propensity score analysis. However, potential survival benefit can be found among patients with admission LVEF ≤ 40% or diabetes., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None reported., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Monilethrix is a rare hereditary hair disorder that is characterized by a beaded hair shaft structure and increased hair fragility. Patients may also present with keratosis pilaris and nail changes. Research has identified three genes responsible for autosomal dominant monilethrix (KRT81, KRT83, KRT86) and one responsible for the autosomal recessive form (DSG4)., Objectives: To investigate the genetic basis of autosomal dominant monilethrix in families with no pathogenic variants in any of the known monilethrix genes, and to understand the mechanistic basis of variant pathogenicity using a cellular model., Methods: Nine affected individuals from four unrelated families were included. A clinical diagnosis of monilethrix was assigned based on clinical examination and/or trichoscopy. Exome sequencing was performed in six individuals to identify pathogenic variants; Sanger sequencing was used for co-segregation and haplotype analyses. Cell culture experiments [immunoblotting, immunofluorescence and reverse transcription quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) analyses] were used to confirm variant pathogenicity, to determine the expression and subcellular localization of proteins, and to identify possible nonsense-mediated mRNA decay., Results: In six affected individuals with clinically suggested monilethrix, exome sequencing led to the identification of the nonsense variant c.1081G>T; p.(Glu361*) in KRT31, which was subsequently identified in other affected members of these families by Sanger sequencing. This variant led to the abolition of both the last three amino acids of the 2B subdomain and the complete C-terminal tail domain of keratin 31. Immunoblotting demonstrated that when co-expressed with its binding partner keratin 85, the truncated keratin 31 was still expressed, albeit less abundantly than the wildtype protein. Immunofluorescence revealed that p.(Glu361*) keratin 31 had an altered cytoskeletal localization and formed vesicular-like structures in the cell cytoplasm near the cell membrane. RT-qPCR analysis did not generate evidence for nonsense-mediated decay of the mutant transcript., Conclusions: This study is the first to identify pathogenic variants in KRT31 as a cause of autosomal dominant monilethrix. This highlights the importance of hair keratin proteins in hair biology, and will increase the molecular diagnostic yield for rare ectodermal phenotypes of hair and nail tissues., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Cardiogenic shock is a complex syndrome defined by systemic hypoperfusion and inadequate cardiac output arising from a wide array of underlying causes. Although the understanding of cardiogenic shock epidemiology, specific subphenotypes, haemodynamics, and cardiogenic shock severity staging has evolved, few therapeutic interventions have shown survival benefit. Results from seminal randomised controlled trials support early revascularisation of the culprit vessel in infarct-related cardiogenic shock and provide evidence of improved survival with the use of temporary circulatory support in selected patients. However, numerous questions remain unanswered, including optimal pharmacotherapy regimens, the role of mechanical circulatory support devices, management of secondary organ dysfunction, and best supportive care. This Review summarises current definitions, pathophysiological principles, and management approaches in cardiogenic shock, and highlights key knowledge gaps to advance individualised shock therapy and the evidence-based ethical use of modern technology and resources in cardiogenic shock., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MA reports speaker honoraria from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences, unrelated to the submitted work. RL reports research grants from Medtronic and LivaNova paid to their institution; consulting fees from Medtronic and LivaNova paid to their institution; speaker honoraria from Abiomed; travel support from Medtronic and LivaNova; lab supplies from Medtronic, unrelated to the submitted work; and is an advisory board member for Eurosets and Xenios (fees paid to institution). AM reports research grants from Roche, 4TEEN4, Sphyngotec, Abbott Diagnostics, and Windtree; consulting fees from Roche, Adrenomed, Corteria, and Fire1; speaker honoraria from Merck, Novartis, Roche, and Bayer; and lab supplies by Sphyngotec, unrelated to the submitted work; and is an advisory board member for Secret-HF, S-Form Pharma, and Implicity. DAM reports research grants from Abbott Laboratories, Abiomed, Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, Arca Biopharma, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Intarcia, Janssen, Merck & Co, Novartis, Pfizer, Poxel, Regeneron, Roche Diagnostics, Siemens, Softcell Medical, and Zora Biosciences (paid to the institution); consulting fees from Abbott Laboratories, Arca Biopharma, Merck & Co, Novartis, Regeneron, and Roche Diagnostics unrelated to the submitted work; and is an advisory board member for InCarda Therapeutics. DB reports a research grant from LivaNova paid to their institution; consulting fees from LivaNova, Xenios, Medtronic, Inspira, Cellenkos, and HBOX Therapies; and payment from UpToDate, unrelated to the submitted work. AC reports speaker honoraria from Getinge, Baxter, and Xenios unrelated to the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Risk stratification of sudden cardiac death after myocardial infarction and prevention by defibrillator rely on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Improved risk stratification across the whole LVEF range is required for decision-making on defibrillator implantation., Methods: The analysis pooled 20 data sets with 140 204 post-myocardial infarction patients containing information on demographics, medical history, clinical characteristics, biomarkers, electrocardiography, echocardiography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Separate analyses were performed in patients (i) carrying a primary prevention cardioverter-defibrillator with LVEF ≤ 35% [implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients], (ii) without cardioverter-defibrillator with LVEF ≤ 35% (non-ICD patients ≤ 35%), and (iii) without cardioverter-defibrillator with LVEF > 35% (non-ICD patients >35%). Primary outcome was sudden cardiac death or, in defibrillator carriers, appropriate defibrillator therapy. Using a competing risk framework and systematic internal-external cross-validation, a model using LVEF only, a multivariable flexible parametric survival model, and a multivariable random forest survival model were developed and externally validated. Predictive performance was assessed by random effect meta-analysis., Results: There were 1326 primary outcomes in 7543 ICD patients, 1193 in 25 058 non-ICD patients ≤35%, and 1567 in 107 603 non-ICD patients >35% during mean follow-up of 30.0, 46.5, and 57.6 months, respectively. In these three subgroups, LVEF poorly predicted sudden cardiac death (c-statistics between 0.50 and 0.56). Considering additional parameters did not improve calibration and discrimination, and model generalizability was poor., Conclusions: More accurate risk stratification for sudden cardiac death and identification of low-risk individuals with severely reduced LVEF or of high-risk individuals with preserved LVEF was not feasible, neither using LVEF nor using other predictors., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Current treatment recommendations for patients with heart failure and secondary mitral regurgitation include transcatheter edge-to-edge repair and mitral-valve surgery. Data from randomized trials comparing these therapies are lacking in this patient population., Methods: In this noninferiority trial conducted in Germany, patients with heart failure and secondary mitral regurgitation who continued to have symptoms despite guideline-directed medical therapy were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo either transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (intervention group) or surgical mitral-valve repair or replacement (surgery group). The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death, hospitalization for heart failure, mitral-valve reintervention, implantation of an assist device, or stroke within 1 year after the procedure. The primary safety end point was a composite of major adverse events within 30 days after the procedure., Results: A total of 210 patients underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 70.5±7.9 years, 39.9% were women, and the mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 43.0±11.7%. Within 1 year, at least one of the components of the primary efficacy end point occurred in 16 of the 96 patients with available data (16.7%) in the intervention group and in 20 of the 89 with available data (22.5%) in the surgery group (estimated mean difference, -6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -17 to 6; P<0.001 for noninferiority). A primary safety end-point event occurred in 15 of the 101 patients with available data (14.9%) in the intervention group and in 51 of the 93 patients with available data (54.8%) in the surgery group (estimated mean difference, -40 percentage points; 95% CI, -51 to -27; P<0.001)., Conclusions: Among patients with heart failure and secondary mitral regurgitation, transcatheter edge-to-edge repair was noninferior to mitral-valve surgery with respect to a composite of death, rehospitalization for heart failure, stroke, reintervention, or implantation of an assist device in the left ventricle at 1 year. (Funded by Abbott Vascular; MATTERHORN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02371512.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

ENPP1 (ectonucleotide pyrophosphatase/phosphodiesterase 1) plays a critical role by converting extracellular ATP to AMP, generating extracellular PPi, a potential inhibitor of calcification. Pathogenic variants in the ENPP1 cause generalized arterial calcification of infancy (GACI [OMIM 208000]). GACI, is an ultra-rare disease characterized by early-onset calcification of large and medium-sized arteries, leading to severe cardiovascular complications such as heart failure, pulmonary stenosis (PS), hypertension, and more. In this study, we report a novel homozygous splice-site pathogenic variant in ENPP1 (NM&#95;006208, c.2230 + 5G > A; p.Asp701Asnfs*2) residing in C-terminal nuclease-like domain (NLD) of ENPP1 protein in a Pakistani family diagnosed with severe valvular PS and mild right ventricular hypertrophy (RVH). cDNA assays confirmed the skipping of exon 21, and the splice product underwent nonsense-mediated decay. Functional studies on fibroblasts from the patient demonstrated increased calcification and decreased enzymatic activity of ENPP1, recapitulating the hallmarks of GACI. By combining genetic analysis with the in vitro study, we substantiate that ENPP1:c.2230 + 5G > A variant is pathogenic, underscoring its role in the development of GACI., Competing Interests: Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study adhered to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki and received formal approval from the Research Ethics Committee of the National Institute for Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering (NIBGE), Faisalabad, Pakistan. Written informed consent was obtained from the parents of the proband. Consent for publication Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Cardiogenic shock remains highly associated with early mortality, with mortality often exceeding 50%. We sought to determine the association between prognostic factors and in-hospital and 30-day mortality in cardiogenic shock., Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factors in cardiogenic shock, searching MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for records up to June 5, 2023. English-language studies that investigated prognostic factors and in-hospital and/or 30-day mortality in cardiogenic shock were included. Studies were excluded if they evaluated the pediatric population, were postmortem studies, or included fewer than 100 patients. The primary aim was to identify modifiable and non-modifiable prognostic factors associated with in-hospital and 30-day mortality in cardiogenic shock., Results: We identified 160 studies, including 2,459,703 patients with a median in-hospital mortality of 41.4% (interquartile range, 33.6% to 49.2%). The majority were retrospective cohort studies. Patient factors potentially associated with an increase in early mortality included an age greater than or equal to 75 years of age, peripheral arterial disease, chronic kidney disease, and female sex. Procedural and presentation factors potentially associated with increased mortality included out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, left main culprit artery, left ventricular ejection fraction less than 30%, dialysis, and need for mechanical circulatory support. Revascularization in the form of coronary artery bypass graft and percutaneous coronary intervention were potentially associated with reduced in-hospital mortality., Conclusions: This analysis quantifies the association between patient, presentation, and treatment-related factors and early mortality in cardiogenic shock. Increased certainty in the association of these prognostic factors with cardiogenic shock outcomes can aid in clinical risk assessment, development of risk tools, and analysis of clinical trials.

The management of cardiogenic shock is an ongoing challenge. Despite all efforts and tremendous use of resources, mortality remains high. Whilst reversing the underlying cause, restoring/maintaining organ perfusion and function are cornerstones of management. The presence of comorbidities and preexisting organ dysfunction increases management complexity, aiming to integrate the needs of vital organs in each individual patient. This review provides a comprehensive overview of contemporary literature regarding the definition and classification of cardiogenic shock, its pathophysiology, diagnosis, laboratory evaluation, and monitoring. Further, we distill the latest evidence in pharmacologic therapy and the use of mechanical circulatory support including recently published randomized-controlled trials as well as future directions of research, integrating this within an international group of authors to provide a global perspective. Finally, we explore the need for individualization, especially in the face of neutral randomized trials which may be related to a dilution of a potential benefit of an intervention (i.e., average effect) in this heterogeneous clinical syndrome, including the use of novel biomarkers, artificial intelligence, and machine learning approaches to identify specific endotypes of cardiogenic shock (i.e., subclasses with distinct underlying biological/molecular mechanisms) to support a more personalized medicine beyond the syndromic approach of cardiogenic shock., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Severe tricuspid regurgitation is associated with disabling symptoms and an increased risk of death. Data regarding outcomes after percutaneous transcatheter tricuspid-valve replacement are needed., Methods: In this international, multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 400 patients with severe symptomatic tricuspid regurgitation in a 2:1 ratio to undergo either transcatheter tricuspid-valve replacement and medical therapy (valve-replacement group) or medical therapy alone (control group). The hierarchical composite primary outcome was death from any cause, implantation of a right ventricular assist device or heart transplantation, postindex tricuspid-valve intervention, hospitalization for heart failure, an improvement of at least 10 points in the score on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary (KCCQ-OS), an improvement of at least one New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, and an improvement of at least 30 m on the 6-minute walk distance. A win ratio was calculated for the primary outcome by comparing all possible patient pairs, starting with the first event in the hierarchy., Results: A total of 267 patients were assigned to the valve-replacement group and 133 to the control group. At 1 year, the win ratio favoring valve replacement was 2.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.56 to 2.62; P<0.001). In comparisons of patient pairs, those in the valve-replacement group had more wins than the control group with respect to death from any cause (14.8% vs. 12.5%), postindex tricuspid-valve intervention (3.2% vs. 0.6%), and improvement in the KCCQ-OS score (23.1% vs. 6.0%), NYHA class (10.2% vs. 0.8%), and 6-minute walk distance (1.1% vs. 0.9%). The valve-replacement group had fewer wins than the control group with respect to the annualized rate of hospitalization for heart failure (9.7% vs. 10.0%). Severe bleeding occurred in 15.4% of the valve-replacement group and in 5.3% of the control group (P = 0.003); new permanent pacemakers were implanted in 17.4% and 2.3%, respectively (P<0.001)., Conclusions: For patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation, transcatheter tricuspid-valve replacement was superior to medical therapy alone for the primary composite outcome, driven primarily by improvements in symptoms and quality of life. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; TRISCEND II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04482062.)., (Copyright © 2024 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Aims: The optimal revascularization strategy for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), cardiogenic shock (CS), and multivessel disease remains controversial. The CULPRIT-SHOCK trial compared culprit lesion-only vs. immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), providing important data but leaving efficacy questions unresolved. To address lingering uncertainties and gain deeper insights, we performed a Bayesian reanalysis of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial data., Methods and Results: We conducted a Bayesian re-analysis of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial data using non-informative, sceptical, and enthusiastic priors. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% highest posterior density (HPD) intervals were calculated. We defined the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) as RR < 0.84. We performed subgroup analyses for key patient characteristics and assessed secondary outcomes and safety endpoints. Probabilities of benefit, achieving MCID, and harm were computed. Results are presented as median RR with probabilities of effect sizes. Bayesian reanalysis showed a median RR of 0.82 (95% HPD 0.66-1.04) with a non-informative prior, indicating a 95% probability of benefit and 59% probability of achieving MCID. Subgroup analyses revealed potentially stronger effects in males (RR 0.78, 73% probability of MCID), patients without diabetes (RR 0.76, 79% probability of MCID), and those with non-anterior ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI; RR 0.74, 76% probability of MCID). Secondary outcomes suggested potential benefits in mortality (RR 0.85) and need for renal replacement therapy (RR 0.72) but increased risks of recurrent MI (RR 2.84) and urgent revascularization (RR 2.88)., Conclusion: Our Bayesian reanalysis provides intuitive insights by quantifying probabilities of treatment effect sizes, offering further evidence favouring the culprit lesion-only PCI strategy in AMI patients with CS and multivessel disease. The analysis demonstrates a high probability of overall benefit, with a notable chance of achieving a minimally clinically important difference, particularly in specific subgroups. These findings not only support the consideration of culprit lesion-only PCI in certain patient populations but also underscore the need for careful risk-benefit assessment. Furthermore, our hypothesis-generating subgroup analyses, which show varying probabilities of achieving MCID, illuminate promising avenues for future targeted investigations in this critical patient population., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: The optimal timing for implementing mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in cardiogenic shock (CS) remains indeterminate. This study aims to evaluate patient characteristics and outcome associated with the time interval between CS onset and veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) implementation., Methods and Results: In this study, patients with CS treated with MCS at 15 tertiary care centres in three countries were enrolled. Patients treated with MCS were stratified into early (<2 h), intermediate (2-12 h) and delayed (≥12-24 h) MCS implantation by using the time interval between CS onset and MCS device implementation. Adjusted logistic and Cox regression models were fitted to assess the association between timing of MCS implementation, patient characteristics and 30-day mortality. A total of 330 patients with CS treated with VA-ECMO and/or microaxial flow pump were included in this study; 20.9% received early, 55.8% intermediate, and 23.3% delayed MCS. Although crude 30-day mortality was slightly lower in patients with early MCS (58.1% vs. 64.7% vs. 64.3%), adjusted analyses showed no significant association between timing of MCS implantation and 30-day all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] for early vs. intermediate MCS: 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-1.46, p = 0.74; HR for early vs. delayed MCS: 1.29, 95% CI 0.78-2.13, p = 0.33). Moreover, the incidence of complications, related and unrelated to MCS, did not differ significantly among groups., Conclusion: In this exploratory study of patients with CS treated with MCS, the timing of device implantation within 24 h after CS onset was not associated with mortality. This supports a restrictive MCS approach, reserving its application for patients experiencing CS deterioration despite conventional therapy., (© 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: In the randomized SOLVE-TAVI (compariSon of secOnd-generation seLf-expandable vs. balloon-expandable Valves and gEneral vs. local anesthesia in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial comparing newer-generation self-expanding valves (SEV) and balloon-expandable valves (BEV), as well as conscious sedation (CS) and general anesthesia (GA), clinical outcomes were similar both for valve and anesthesia comparison at 30 days and 1 year. Prosthesis durability may affect clinical outcomes during long-term follow-up. Moreover, the impact of the anesthesia strategy on long-term clinical outcomes is unknown so far., Objectives: The authors sought to compare clinical outcomes during 5-year follow-up in the randomized SOLVE-TAVI trial., Methods: In the randomized, multicenter, 2 × 2 factorial, open-label SOLVE-TAVI trial, 447 intermediate- to high-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using either SEV (Evolut R, Medtronic) or BEV (SAPIEN 3, Edwards Lifesciences) and also to CS vs GA. Patients were followed-up for 5 years., Results: During 5 years of follow-up, the combined predefined endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, moderate or severe paravalvular leakage, and permanent pacemaker implantation was similar in the SEV and BEV groups (67.7% vs 63.4%; HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.70-1.13; P = 0.34). Stroke rates at 5 years were lower in the SEV group (2.2% vs 9.6%; HR: 4.84; 95% CI: 1.65-14.18; P = 0.002). Regarding the anesthesia comparison, the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, and acute kidney injury occurred in 51.4% in the CS group and 61.3% in the GA group (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.62-1.04; P = 0.09). All-cause mortality at 5 years was lower for CS (41.5% vs 54.3%; HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.53-0.94; P = 0.02)., Conclusions: Transfemoral TAVR using either SEV and BEV as well as CS and GA showed similar clinical outcomes at 5 years using a combined clinical endpoint., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Funding was provided by the German Heart Research Foundation and the Helios Health Institute (formerly the Leipzig Heart Institute). The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data regarding the association of pulmonary hypertension (PH) and outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve edge-to-edge repair (T-TEER) are scarce., Objectives: To 1) investigate the impact of PH on outcomes after T-TEER and 2) to shed further light into the role of pre- and postcapillary PH in patients undergoing T-TEER for relevant tricuspid regurgitation (TR)., Methods: The study included patients from the EuroTR registry (NCT06307262) who underwent T-TEER for relevant TR from 2016 until 2023 with available invasive evaluation of sPAP using right heart catheterization. Study endpoints were procedural TR reduction, improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) function class and a combined endpoint of death or heart failure hospitalization (HFH) at two-years., Results: Among a total of 1230 patients (mean age 78.6 ±7.0 years; 51.4% women) increasing systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) was independently associated with increasing rates of two-year death or HFH (hazard ratio 1.027, 95% confidence interval 1.003-1.052, p=0.030; median survival follow up 343 (114-645) days). No significant survival differences were observed for patients with pre- vs. postcapillary PH. Sensitivity analysis revealed a sPAP value of 46 mmHg as optimized threshold for prediction of death or HFH. Being observed in 526 patients (42.8%), elevated sPAP > 46 mmHg was associated with more severe heart failure symptoms at baseline and follow-up. Importantly, NYHA functional class and TR severity significantly improved irrespective of PH., Conclusion: PH is an important outcome predictor in patients undergoing T-TEER for relevant TR. In contrast to previous studies, no significant differences were observed for patients with pre- and postcapillary PH in terms of survival free from HFH., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) and the efficacy and safety of extracorporeal life support (ECLS) may be affected by the timing of hospital admission., Objectives: The present ECLS-SHOCK substudy sought to investigate the prognostic impact of on-hours vs off-hours admission and the efficacy of ELCS according to the timing of hospital admission time in AMI-CS., Methods: Patients with AMI-CS enrolled in the multicenter, randomized ECLS-SHOCK trial from 2019 to 2022 were included. The prognosis of patients admitted during regular hours (ie, on-hours) was compared to patients admitted during off-hours. Thereafter, the prognostic impact of ECLS was investigated stratified by the timing of hospital admission. The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. Statistical analyses included Kaplan-Meier, univariable, and multivariable logistic regression analyses., Results: Of 417 patients enrolled in the ECLS-SHOCK trial, 48.4% (n = 202) were admitted during off-hours. Patients admitted during off-hours were younger (median age = 62 years [Q1-Q3: 55-69 years] vs 63 years [Q1-Q3: 58-71 years]; P = 0.036) and more commonly treated using initial femoral access for coronary angiography (79.0% [n = 158/200] vs 67.9% [n = 146/215]; P = 0.011). However, off-hours admission was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day all-cause mortality (off-hours vs on-hours: 46.0% [n = 93/202] vs 50.7% [n = 109/215]; OR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.56-1.22). Furthermore, ECLS had no prognostic impact on 30-day all-cause mortality in patients with AMI-CS admitted during on-hours (50.5% [n = 52/103] vs 50.9% [n = 57/112]; P = 0.95; OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.58-1.68) or in patients admitted during off-hours (45.3% [n = 48/106] vs 46.9% [n = 45/96]; P = 0.82; OR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.54-1.63). Finally, ECLS was associated with an increased risk of bleeding events, especially in patients admitted during on-hours., Conclusions: The prognosis in AMI-CS was not affected by admission time with a similar effect of ECLS during on- and off-hours., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosure Supported by the Else Kröner Fresenius Foundation, the German Heart Research Foundation, and the Helios Health Institute (formerly Leipzig Heart Institute). Dr Rassaf has received honoraria, lecture fees, and grant support from Edwards Lifesciences, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, Berlin Chemie, Daiicho-Sankyo, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novo Nordisk, Cardiac Dimensions, and Pfizer, all unrelated to this work; and is a cofounder of Bimyo GmbH, a company that develops cardioprotective peptides. Dr Clemmensen has previously or currently been involved in research contracts, consulting, and Speakers Bureau for Abbott, Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Aventis, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CeleCor, CytoSorbent, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli-Lilly, Evolva, Ferrer, Fibrex, Idorsia, Janssen, Merck, Myogen, Medtronic, Mitsubishi Pharma, The Medicines Company, Nycomed, Organon, Pfizer, Pharmacia, Philips, Regado, Sanofi, Searle, Servier, and ViFor Pharma; and has received research and/or educational grants from Abbott, Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Aventis, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CeleCor, CytoSorbent, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli-Lilly, Evolva, Ferrer, Fibrex, Idorsia, Janssen, Merck, Myogen, Medtronic, Mitsubishi Pharma, The Medicines Company, Nycomed, Organon, Pfizer, Pharmacia, Philips, Regado, Sanofi, Searle, Servier, and ViFor Pharma. Dr Linke has received grants from Novartis and Edwards Lifesciences; has received personal fees from Abbott, Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Meril, Novartis, Sanofi Genzyme, and Pfizer; and has received other fees from Picardia, Filterlex, and Transverse Medical outside the submitted work. Dr Pöss has received research grants (institutional) from German Cardiac Society, German Heart Research Foundation, Dr Rolf M. Schwiete Foundation, and Maquet Cardiopulmonary GmbH. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Activation of the immune system contributes to cardiovascular diseases. The role of human-specific long noncoding RNAs in cardioimmunology is poorly understood., Methods: Single-cell sequencing in peripheral blood mononuclear cells revealed a novel human-specific long noncoding RNA called HEAT4 (heart failure-associated transcript 4). HEAT4 expression was assessed in several in vitro and ex vivo models of immune cell activation, as well as in the blood of patients with heart failure (HF), acute myocardial infarction, or cardiogenic shock. The transcriptional regulation of HEAT4 was verified through cytokine treatment and single-cell sequencing. Loss-of-function and gain-of-function studies and multiple RNA-protein interaction assays uncovered a mechanistic role of HEAT4 in the monocyte anti-inflammatory gene program. HEAT4 expression and function was characterized in a vascular injury model in NOD.CB17-Prkdc scid/Rj mice., Results: HEAT4 expression was increased in the blood of patients with HF, acute myocardial infarction, or cardiogenic shock. HEAT4 levels distinguished patients with HF from people without HF and predicted all-cause mortality in a cohort of patients with HF over 7 years of follow-up. Monocytes, particularly anti-inflammatory CD16 + monocytes, which are increased in patients with HF, are the primary source of HEAT4 expression in the blood. HEAT4 is transcriptionally activated by treatment with anti-inflammatory interleukin-10. HEAT4 activates anti-inflammatory and inhibits proinflammatory gene expression. Increased HEAT4 levels result in a shift toward more CD16 + monocytes. HEAT4 binds to S100A9, causing a monocyte subtype switch, thereby reducing inflammation. As a result, HEAT4 improves endothelial barrier integrity during inflammation and promotes vascular healing after injury in mice., Conclusions: These results characterize a novel endogenous anti-inflammatory pathway that involves the conversion of monocyte subtypes into anti-inflammatory CD16 + monocytes. The data identify a novel function for the class of long noncoding RNAs by preventing protein secretion and suggest long noncoding RNAs as potential targets for interventions in the field of cardioimmunology., Competing Interests: None.

Aims: This meta-analysis investigated the dose-response relationship between circulating galectin-3 levels and adverse outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF)., Methods and Results: PubMed and Embase were screened for studies on galectin-3 and HF. The outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality (ACM), and all-cause mortality or HF-related rehospitalization (ACM/HFR), with a follow-up time of more than 6 months. For categorical variables, comparisons between groups with the highest and lowest galectin-3 levels were pooled. For continuous variables, the risks of ACM and ACM/HFR increase per 1-standard deviation (SD) and 1-unit after logarithmic transformation galectin-3 levels were pooled. A random-effects model was employed to calculate the pooled results, and all pooled results were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Besides, a dose-response analysis was performed. Twenty-four cohort studies were included. In HF patients, higher circulating galectin-3 levels were significantly associated with a higher risk of long-term ACM (HR, 1.65; 95% CI 1.28-2.13; I 2  = 66%), and 1 ng/mL increase in galectin-3 was associated with a 4% (HR, 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.06; P = 0.002) increase in hazard. Similarly, higher circulating galectin-3 levels were significantly associated with a higher risk of long-term ACM/HFR (HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15 to 2.00; I 2  = 76%), and 1 ng/mL increase in galectin-3 was associated with a 3% (HR, 1.03; 95% CI 1.02-1.04; P < 0.001) increase in hazard. An increase of 1-SD in galectin-3 units was associated with a 29% increased hazard of long-term ACM (HR 1.29; 95% CI 1.13-1.48; I 2  = 42%) and a 22% increased hazard of ACM/HFR (HR 1.22; 95% CI 1.07-1.38; I 2  = 60%). Similarly, an increase of 1-log in galectin-3 units was associated with a 98% higher hazard of long-term ACM (HR 1.98; 95% CI 1.48-2.65; I 2  = 41%) and an 83% higher hazard of ACM/HFR in HF patients (HR 1.83; 95% CI 1.02-3.28; I 2  = 7%). Correlation analysis showed a moderate positive correlation between baseline galectin-3 and N terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide levels (r = 0.48, P = 0.045) and a weak negative correlation with eGFR (r = -0.39, P = 0.077)., Conclusions: Higher circulating galectin-3 levels after hospitalization of HF patients are linearly and positively associated with the risk of long-term ACM and ACM/HFR., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is characterized by impaired cardiac function, very high mortality, and limited treatment options. The proinflammatory signaling during different phases of CS is incompletely understood. We collected serum and plasma ( n = 44) as well as freshly isolated peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs, n = 7) of patients with CS complicating acute myocardial infarction on admission and after revascularization (24, 48, and 72 h) and of healthy controls (serum and plasma, n = 75; PBMCs, n = 12). PBMCs of patients with CS had increased gene expression of NLRP3 , CASP1 , PYCARD , IL1B , and IL18 and showed increased rates of pyroptosis (control, 4.7 ± 0.3 vs. 9.9 ± 1.7% in patients with CS, P = 0.02). Serum interleukin (IL)-1β levels were increased after revascularization. IL-18 and IL-6 were higher in patients with CS than in healthy controls but comparable before and after revascularization. Proinflammatory apoptosis-associated speck-like proteins containing CARD (ASC) specks were elevated in the serum of patients with CS on admission and increased after revascularization (admission, 11.1 ± 4.4 specks/µL; after 24 h, 19.0 ± 3.9, P = 0.02). ASC specks showed a significant association with 30-day mortality in patients with CS ( P < 0.05). The estimated regression coefficients and odds ratios indicated a positive relationship between ASC specks and mortality (odds ratio: 1.029, 95% confidence interval, 1.000 to 1.072; P = 0.02). Pyroptosis and circulating ASC specks are increased in patients with CS and are particularly induced after reperfusion. This underscores their potential role as a biomarker for poor outcomes in patients with CS. ASC specks represent promising new therapeutic targets for patients with CS with high inflammatory burden. NEW & NOTEWORTHY The expression of NLR family pyrin domain containing-3 (NLRP3) inflammasome-related genes and the rate of pyroptosis are increased in PBMCs from patients with CS. Furthermore, patients with CS are characterized by higher serum concentrations of ASC specks and IL-1β, IL-6, and IL-18. This current study adds circulating ASC specks to the portfolio of biomarkers for the identification of patients with a high inflammatory burden paving the way for precision medicine approaches to improve clinical outcomes.

Aims: In a recent meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, routine use of veno-arterial ECMO (VA-ECMO) did not improve outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS), while a microaxial flow pump reduced mortality in a selected group of patients with AMI-CS in the DanGer-Shock trial., Methods and Results: Individual patient data of patients included in four randomized clinical trials investigating the routine use of VA-ECMO in AMI-CS were centrally analysed. For the purpose of this sub-analysis, DanGer-Shock-like patients were analysed (STEMI only, presumed low likelihood of brain injury). The primary endpoint was 180-day all-cause mortality. A total of 202 patients (106 randomized to VA-ECMO and 96 to control) were included. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, angiographic and interventional features between the two groups. Mortality after 6 months was numerically lower with VA-ECMO between the groups [45% in VA-ECMO group vs. 51% in control group; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.56-1.26], while major bleeding (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.08-4.64) and peripheral vascular complications (OR, 3.65; 95% CI, 1.15-11.56) were increased with the use of VA-ECMO., Conclusion: In this exploratory subgroup analysis in patients with CS, STEMI, and a low likelihood of brain injury, there was no mortality benefit with the routine use of VA-ECMO. However, as indicated by the large confidence intervals, the statistical power was limited to draw definite conclusions., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The perception of takotsubo syndrome (TTS) has evolved significantly over the years, primarily driven by increased recognition of acute complications and mortality., Objectives: This study aimed to explore temporal trends in demographic patterns, risk factors, clinical presentations, and outcomes in patients with TTS., Methods: Patients diagnosed with TTS between 2004 and 2021 were enrolled from the InterTAK (International Takotsubo) registry. To assess temporal trends, patients were divided into 6 groups, each corresponding to a 3-year interval within the study period., Results: Overall, 3,957 patients were included in the study. There was a significant demographic transition, with the proportion of male patients rising from 10% to 15% (P = 0.003). Although apical TTS remained the most common form, the diagnosis of midventricular TTS increased from 18% to 28% (P = 0.018). The prevalence of physical triggers increased from 39% to 58% over the years (P < 0.001). There was a significant increase in 60-day mortality over the years (P < 0.001). However, a landmark analysis excluding patients who died within the first 60 days showed no differences in 1-year mortality (P = 0.150)., Conclusions: This study of temporal trends in TTS highlights a transition in patients demographic with a growing prevalence among men, increasing recognition of midventricular TTS type, and increased short-term mortality and rates of cardiogenic shock in recent years. This transition aligns with the rising prevalence of physical triggers, as expression of increased recognition of TTS in association with acute comorbidities., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Templin has received institutional grants from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, and SMT; and has received consulting grants from Biotronik, Microport, and Innova. Dr Airaksinen has received grants or has contracts with the Finnish Foundation for Cardiovascular Research; and has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Bayer, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and AstraZeneca. Dr Bauersachs has received grants from or has contracts with Abiomed, CVRx, Norgine, Roche, and Zoll; holds patents PCT/EP2007/008772 and PCT/EP2009/051986 for microRNA and downstream targets for diagnostics and therapeutic purposes; has received consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardior, Corvia, CVRx, Edwards, Norgine, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Vifor; and has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cardior, CVRx, Norgine, Novartis, Pfizer, and Vifor. Dr Boehm has received grants from or has contracts with Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft research support (DFG, SFB-TTR 219, S-01); has received speaker honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, Servier, and Vifor; and is on the advisory board of Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cytokinetics, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, ReCor, Servier, and Vifor. Dr Ferreira has received payments for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from A Menarini, Medinfar, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Biotronik, and Medtronic; and has received payments for participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board from Medtronic. Dr Dichtl has received consulting fees from Reata. Dr Kaiser has received consulting fees from the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health; and has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Medtronic, Abbott, and Europa Organization. Dr Kobza has received institutional grants on behalf of the Luzerner Kantonsspital from Biosense Webster, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Medtronik, and Sis-Medical; and has received consulting fees from Biosense Webster, Biotronik, and Medtronic. Dr Koenig has received grants and provision of reagents to the institution from Singulex, Dr.Beckmann Pharma, Abbott, and Roche Diagnostics; has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Amgen, Pfizer, The Medicines Company, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, Kowa, Corvidia Therapeutics, OMEICOS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novo Nordisk, New Amsterdam Pharma, TenSixteen Bio, Esperion, and Genentech; and has received lecture fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Amgen, Berlin-Chemie, Sanofi, and AstraZeneca. Dr Lüscher has received research or educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Vifor; is the president elect of the European Society of Cardiology; is chairman of the research committee of the Swiss Heart Foundation; is President of the Board of the Zurich Heart House; and is Trustee of the London Heart House. Dr Karakas has received grants or has contracts with Vifor Pharma and Daiichi-Sankyo; has received consulting fees or payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Vifor, Pharmacosmos, and Sphingotec; and has received equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services from Sphingotec and Vifor Pharma. Dr Niederseer has received consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Gerson Lehmann Group (GLG) Consulting, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer and Zoll; has received payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer; and has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Roffi has received institutional research grants from Boston Scientific, Cordis, Terumo, Biotronik, and Medtronic. Dr Ruschitzka has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers in the last 3 years; the Department of Cardiology (University Hospital of Zurich/University of Zurich), however, reports research, educational, and/or travel grants from Abbott, Abiomed, Alexion, Amgen, AstraZeneca, At the Limits Ltd, Bayer, Berlin Heart, B. Braun, Biosense Webster, Biosensors Europe AG, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bracco, Cardinal Health Switzerland, Concept Medical, Corteria, CSL, Daiichi-Sankyo, Diatools AG, Edwards Lifesciences, Guidant Europe NV, Hamilton Health Sciences, IHF, Innosuisse, Johnson/Johnson, Kaneka Corporation, Kantar, Kiniksa, Labormedizinisches Zentrum, MedAlliance, Medical Education Global Solutions, Medtronic, MicroPort, MSD, Mundipharma Medical Company, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Orion, Pfizer, Quintiles Switzerland Sarl, RecorMedical, Roche Diagnostics, Roche Pharma, Sahajanand IN, Sanofi, Sarstedt AG, Servier, SIS Medical, Sorin CRM SAS, SSS International Clinical Research, Stromal, Terumo Deutschland, Trama Solutions, V-Wave, Vascular Medical, Vifor, Wissens Plus, and ZOLL. Prof Ruschitzka has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers in the last 3 years; remuneration for the time spent in the following consulting activities were made directly to the University of Zurich and do not impact on his personal remuneration: AstraZeneca (IMC), Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Citi Research, Klub Class, Novo Nordisk, Radcliffe Group, Stiftung Pfizer Forschungspreis, and Vifor; remuneration for the following lectures were made directly to the University of Zurich and do not impact on his personal remuneration: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca (A+ Science AB), Bayer (At the Limits), Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific (CCE Services), Brigham and Women’s Hospital Boston, C.T.I GmbH, FomF, Hôpitaux Universitaires des Genève (GECORE), Luzerner Kantonsspital, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Medcon, Medscape (WebMD), Medtronic, Medworld, Novartis, Roche, Ruwag, Swiss Heart Failure Academy, The Hong Kong Heart Failure Society, Trama Solutions SL, Inselspital Bern, Charité–Universitätsmedizin Berlin (Medical Education Global Solutions), Romanian Society of Cardiology, ÖKG Österreichische Gesellschaft für Kardiologie, and Zoll; has received support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca (IMC/A+ Science AB), Boehringer Ingelheim, Centro Hospitaler de Vila Nova de Gaia, C.T.I. GmbH (Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf), European Society of Cardiology, Monocle, Novartis, Spektar Putovanja, Austrian Heart Failure Association, and Heart Failure Association of the ESC; remuneration for following Advisory Boards were made directly to the University of Zurich and do not impact on his personal remuneration: Bayer, Roche, IMC/AstraZeneca, and Amgen; and he has received secretarial and administrative support of the HFA for his role as President/Past-President for 2018 to 2020. Dr Schunkert has received consulting fees from Amgen, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck Sharp and Dohme, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, and Servier; has received honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events and support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi-Sankyo, Merck Sharp and Dohme, Novartis, Sanofi Aventis, Servier, and Synlab; and has received honoraria for his participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board of Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi-Sankyo, Novartis, and Amgen. Dr Wolfrum has received consulting fees from NVT/Biosensors as well as payments for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from NVT/Biosensors; and has equities in Hi-D Imaging, Winterthur, Switzerland. Dr Crea has received personal fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Abbott, Menarini, Chiesi, and Daiichi-Sankyo, outside of the submitted work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI) has been increasingly adopted in recent years for the treatment of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR). However, no dedicated risk stratification has been established for patients undergoing TTVI., Objectives: The aim of the present study was to propose a dedicated risk score for patients affected by severe TR undergoing TTVI., Methods: The score was derived from the TRIVALVE (International Multisite Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies Registry; NCT03416166) registry, according to data availability. A stepwise model approach was used on predictor variables to develop a scoring system for predicting 12-month mortality or rehospitalization using multivariable logistic regression. Internal discrimination, calibration, and validation were assessed using receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis and bootstrapping with 1,000 resamples., Results: A total of 483 patients were included in the study, with an overall 12-month mortality or rehospitalization rate of 19% (n = 94). The final risk score, ranging from 0 to 4.5, included the following 5 parameters (adjusted for age and gender): 1) atrial fibrillation at baseline; 2) glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min; 3) elevated gamma-glutamyl transferase/bilirubin levels; 4) signs of right heart failure; and 5) left ventricular ejection fraction <50%. The bias-corrected area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was 68% (95% CI: 62%-75%). A cutoff value of 2.5 demonstrated sensitivity of 65.4% and specificity of 60.5% for the outcome., Conclusions: The present study proposes a dedicated risk score for patients undergoing TTVI, providing an additional and simple tool for heart teams to select the best therapy for patients affected by severe TR., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Russo has received a fellowship training grant from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions, sponsored by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Adamo has received personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, and Novartis. Dr Hahn has received speaker fees from Abbott Structural, Baylis Medical, Edwards Lifesciences, and Philips Healthcare; has institutional consulting contracts for which she receives no direct compensation with Abbott Structural, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Novartis; has stock options with NaviGate; and is chief scientific officer for the Echocardiography Core Laboratory at the Cardiovascular Research Foundation for multiple industry-sponsored trials, for which she receives no direct industry compensation. Dr Andreas is a proctor, consultant, and speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Zoll; and has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and LSI Solutions. Dr Denti has received speaker honoraria from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Estevez-Loureiro is a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Nickenig has received honoraria for lectures or advisory board membership from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Schofer is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Sievert has received study honoraria to the institution, travel expenses, and consulting fees from 4tech Cardio, Abbott, Ablative Solutions, Adona Medical, Akura Medical, Ancora Heart, Append Medical, Axon, Bavaria Medizin Technologie, Bioventrix, Boston Scientific, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardiac Success, Cardimed, Cardionovum, CeloNova Biosciences, Contego, Coramaze, CroíValve, CSL Behring, CVRx, Dinova, Edwards Lifesciences, EndoBar, Endologix, EndoMatic, Esperion Therapeutics, Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech, Holistick Medical, InterShunt Technologies, Intervene, K2, Laminar, Life Tech Care, Magenta, Maquet Getinge Group, Metavention, Mitralix, Mokita, Neurotronic, NXT Biomedical, Occlutech, Recor, Renal Guard, Shifamed, Terumo, Trisol, Vascular Dynamics, Vectorious Medtech, Venus, Venock, Vivasure Medical, Vvital Biomed, and WhiteSwell. Dr Tang has served as a physician proctor for Medtronic; has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Abbott Structural Heart, and NeoChord; has served on the transcatheter aortic valve replacement advisory board for Abbott Structural Heart; and has served on the physician advisory board for JenaValve. Dr von Bardeleben has served for trials and as a principal investigator for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Windecker has received research, travel, or educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardinal Health, Cardiovalve, CorFlow Therapeutics, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Guerbet, Infraredx, Janssen-Cilag, Johnson & Johnson, Medicure, Medtronic, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Miracor Medical, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Organon, OrPha Suisse, Pfizer, Polares, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Sinomed, Terumo, Vifor, and V-Wave; has served as an advisory board member and/or a member of the steering or executive groups of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Edwards Lifesciences, Janssen, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Recardio, Sinomed, Terumo, V-Wave, and Xeltis, with payments to the institution but no personal payments; and is a member of the steering or executive committee groups of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding from industry, without impact on his personal remuneration. Dr Enriquez-Sarano is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences, ChemImage, Cryolife, and HighLife. Dr Maisano is a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Perifect, Xeltis, Transseptal Solutions, Magenta, and Cardiovalve; has received grant support from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, NVT, and Terumo; has received royalties from Edwards Lifesciences and 4Tech; and is a cofounder and shareholder of Transseptal Solutions, 4Tech, Cardiovalve, Magenta, Perifect, Coregard and SwissVortex. Dr Taramasso has received consultancy fees from Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, 4Tech, Boston Scientific, CoreMedic, Mitraltech, and SwissVortex (outside the submitted work). All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The extent to which infarct artery impacts the extent of myocardial injury and outcomes in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention is uncertain., Methods and Results: We performed a pooled analysis using individual patient data from 7 randomized STEMI trials in which myocardial injury within 30 days after primary percutaneous coronary intervention was assessed in 1774 patients by cardiac magnetic resonance (n=1318) or technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (n=456). Clinical follow-up was performed at a median duration of 351 days (interquartile range, 184-368 days). Infarct size and outcomes were assessed in anterior (infarct vessel=left anterior descending) versus nonanterior (non-left anterior descending) STEMI. Median infarct size (percentage left ventricular myocardial mass) was larger in patients with anterior compared with nonanterior STEMI (19.7% [interquartile range, 9.4%-31.7%] versus 12.6% [interquartile range, 5.1%-20.5%]; P <0.001). Patients with anterior compared with nonanterior STEMI were at higher risk for 1-year all-cause mortality (6.2% versus 3.6%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.66 [95% CI, 1.02-2.69]; P =0.04) and heart failure hospitalization (4.4% versus 2.6%; adjusted HR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.15-3.36]; P =0.01). Infarct size was a predictor of subsequent all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization in anterior STEMI (adjusted HR per 1% increase, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.03-1.07]; P <0.001), but not in nonanterior STEMI (adjusted HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.99-1.05]; P =0.19). The P value for this interaction was 0.04., Conclusions: Anterior STEMI was associated with substantially greater myonecrosis after primary percutaneous coronary intervention compared with nonanterior STEMI, contributing in large part to the worse prognosis in patients with anterior infarction.

In patients with prevalent or incident atrial fibrillation (AF) after successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) enrolled in the EdoxabaN Versus standard of care and theIr effectS on clinical outcomes in pAtients havinG undergonE Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation - in Atrial Fibrillation (ENVISAGE-TAVI AF) trial, the incidence of ischemic stroke (IS) and any stroke was numerically less in the edoxaban group than in the vitamin K antagonist (VKA) group. The present study aimed to identify risk factors associated with IS in an on-treatment subanalysis in patients from ENVISAGE-TAVI AF who received ≥1 dose of edoxaban or VKA. Baseline patient characteristics were compared in patients with and those without IS. Numerical variables were compared using a 1-way analysis of variance; categorical variables were compared using Fisher's exact test. Stepwise Cox regression determined patient characteristics associated with the first IS event. Of 1,377 patients, 41 (3.0%) experienced an IS, and 1,336 (97.0%) did not; baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were well balanced between groups. Most ISs occurred within 180 days of TAVI for edoxaban (57.9%) and VKA (68.2%). The rate of IS was 2.0/100 person-years for edoxaban versus 2.7/100 person-years for VKA. Independently associated with IS were history of systemic embolic events (hazard ratio 2.96, 95% confidence interval 1.26 to 7.00, p = 0.01) and pre-TAVI use of VKAs (hazard ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 4.20, p = 0.02). In conclusion, although the overall incidence of IS was small for patients with AF on edoxaban or VKA after successful TAVI, patients with a history of systemic embolic events or pre-TAVI use of VKAs may be at greater risk of IS after TAVI., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Hengstenberg is a clinical proctor for Boston Scientific and Edwards Lifesciences and reports payment for speaker bureaus, support for attending meetings, and advisory board participation from Daiichi Sankyo in addition to institutional funding from Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Ferrer, Medtronic, Novartis, Philips, Siemens, and Terumo. Dr. Unverdorben and Dr. Jin are employees of Daiichi Sankyo. Dr. Möllmann received personal fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, and Pfizer and support for attending meetings from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, and Pfizer. Dr. Van Mieghem reports grants or contracts from Abbott, Abiomed, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, PulseCath BV, and Siemens. Dr. Thiele is the president of the German Society of Cardiology. Dr. Nordbeck reports speaker honoraria from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH, and Pfizer. Dr. Rassaf reports personal and other fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, and Novartis. Dr. Moreno reports personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Ferrer, Medtronic, Philips, and Terumo. Dr. Mehran reports research grants to institution, support for attending meetings from Bayer and Daiichi Sankyo, and consulting fees from Daiichi Sankyo. Dr. Veltkamp reports grants or contracts from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, and Medtronic and consulting or advisory board participation for AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Javelin Ventures, and Portola Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Dangas reports research grants to institution, support for attending meetings from Bayer and Daiichi Sankyo, and consulting fees from Daiichi Sankyo. Dr. Lang has no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Percutaneous active mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are being increasingly used in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMICS) despite conflicting evidence regarding their effect on mortality. We aimed to ascertain the effect of early routine active percutaneous MCS versus control treatment on 6-month all-cause mortality in patients with AMICS., Methods: In this individual patient data meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials of potential interest were identified, without language restriction, by querying the electronic databases MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase, as well as ClinicalTrials.gov, up to Jan 26, 2024. All randomised trials with 6-month mortality data comparing early routine active MCS (directly in the catheterisation laboratory after randomisation) versus control in patients with AMICS were included. The primary outcome was 6-month all-cause mortality in patients with AMICS treated with early routine active percutaneous MCS versus control, with a focus on device type (loading, such as venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation [VA-ECMO] vs unloading) and patient selection. Hazard ratios (HRs) of the primary outcome measure were calculated using Cox regression models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42024504295., Findings: Nine reports of randomised controlled trials (n=1114 patients) were evaluated in detail. Overall, four randomised controlled trials (n=611 patients) compared VA-ECMO with a control treatment and five randomised controlled trials (n=503 patients) compared left ventricular unloading devices with a control treatment. Two randomised controlled trials also included patients who did not have AMICS, who were excluded (55 patients [44 who were treated with VA-ECMO and 11 who were treated with a left ventricular unloading device]). The median patient age was 65 years (IQR 57-73); 845 (79·9%) of 1058 patients with data were male and 213 (20·1%) were female. No significant benefit of early unselected MCS use on 6-month mortality was noted (HR 0·87 [95% CI 0·74-1·03]; p=0·10). No significant differences were observed for left ventricular unloading devices versus control (0·80 [0·62-1·02]; p=0·075), and loading devices also had no effect on mortality (0·93 [0·75-1·17]; p=0·55). Patients with ST-elevation cardiogenic shock without risk of hypoxic brain injury had a reduction in mortality with MCS use (0·77 [0·61-0·97]; p=0·024). Major bleeding (odds ratio 2·64 [95% CI 1·91-3·65]) and vascular complications (4·43 [2·37-8·26]) were more frequent with MCS use than with control., Interpretation: The use of active MCS devices in patients with AMICS did not reduce 6-month mortality (regardless of the device used) and increased major bleeding and vascular complications. However, patients with ST-elevation cardiogenic shock without risk of hypoxic brain injury had a reduction in mortality after MCS use. Therefore, the use of MCS should be restricted to certain patients only., Funding: The Heart Center Leipzig at Leipzig University and the Foundation Institut für Herzinfarktforschung., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests HT is the current president of the German Cardiac Society. JEM reports lecture fees from Abbott and Boehringer Ingelheim; institutional research grants from Abiomed and Novo Nordisk Foundation; travel support from Abiomed; equipment from Abiomed; and served as a data and safety monitoring board member for DanHeart. JB reports speaker fees from Resuscitec and Getinge. DB reports payment for travel expenses from Abiomed; and institutional support for steering committee membership. MF reports grants paid to their institution from the European Commission. HE reports speaker fees from Novartis; and travel expenses from Abbott paid to their institution. PO reports speaker fees from Getinge, Abiomed, Fresenius, Edwards Lifesciences, and AOP; and is the president of the Czech Society of Cardiology. PCS reports lecture fees from Abiomed and Abbott; and institutional research support from Abiomed. JP reports institutional research grants from the German Cardiac Society, Schwiete Foundation, German Heart Research Foundation, and Maquet. CH reports lecture fees from Abiomed. MH reports research support paid to their institution from the Heart Center Leipzig. AP reports lecture fees and institutional research grants from Abiomed. NM reports lecture fees from Abbott, Abiomed, AstraZeneca, B Braun, Biotronik, the British Society of Cardiovascular Imaging, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi Genzyme; grants paid to their institution from Abiomed; and unrestricted educational grants from Abiomed and BSCI. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Objectives : CT-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR) can improve the specificity of coronary CT-angiography (cCTA) for ruling out relevant coronary artery disease (CAD) prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, little is known about the reproducibility of CT-FFR and the influence of diffuse coronary artery calcifications or segment location. The objective was to assess the reliability of machine-learning (ML)-based CT-FFR prior to TAVR in patients without obstructive CAD and to assess the influence of image quality, coronary artery calcium score (CAC), and the location of measurement within the coronary tree. Methods : Patients assessed for TAVR, without obstructive CAD on cCTA were evaluated with ML-based CT-FFR by two observers with differing experience. Differences in absolute values and categorization into hemodynamically relevant CAD (CT-FFR ≤ 0.80) were compared. Results in regard to CAD were also compared against invasive coronary angiography. The influence of segment location, image quality, and CAC was evaluated. Results : Of the screened patients, 109/388 patients did not have obstructive CAD on cCTA and were included. The median (interquartile range) difference of CT-FFR values was -0.005 (-0.09 to 0.04) ( p = 0.47). Differences were smaller with high values. Recategorizations were more frequent in distal segments. Diagnostic accuracy of CT-FFR between both observers was comparable (proximal: Δ0.2%; distal: Δ0.5%) but was lower in distal segments (proximal: 98.9%/99.1%; distal: 81.1%/81.6%). Image quality and CAC had no clinically relevant influence on CT-FFR. Conclusions : ML-based CT-FFR evaluation of proximal segments was more reliable. Distal segments with CT-FFR values close to the given threshold were prone to recategorization, even if absolute differences between observers were minimal and independent of image quality or CAC.

Background and Aims: Glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors are recommended in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for bailout treatment in case of angiographic microvascular obstruction (MVO), also termed no-reflow phenomenon, after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with, however, lacking evidence (class IIa, level C)., Methods: The investigator-initiated, international, multicenter REVERSE-FLOW trial randomized 120 patients with AMI and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade ≤2 after primary PCI to optimal medical therapy with or without GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor. The primary endpoint was infarct size (%LV) assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Secondary endpoints included CMR-derived MVO and 30-day adverse clinical events. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02739711., Results: The population was predominantly male (76.7%) with a median age of 66 years and ST-elevation myocardial infarction in 73.3% of patients. Clinical and angiographic characteristics were well balanced between the cohorts. Patients in the treatment group (n=62) received eptifibatide (n=41) or tirofiban (n=21). Infarct size assessed by CMR imaging was similar in both study groups (25.4% of left ventricular mass [LV] vs. 25.2%LV; p=0.386). However, the number of patients with evidence of CMR-derived MVO (74.5% vs. 92.2%; p=0.017) and the extent of MVO (2.1%LV vs. 3.4%LV; p=0.025) were significantly reduced in the GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor group compared to controls. Thirty-day outcome showed an increased bleeding risk after GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor administration restricted to non-life-threatening bleedings (22.6% vs. 6.9%; p=0.016) without differences in all-cause mortality (4.8% vs. 3.4%; p=0.703)., Conclusions: Bailout GP IIb/IIIa inhibition in AMI patients with angiographic MVO failed to reduce the primary endpoint infarct size but decreased CMR-derived MVO and led to an increase in non-fatal bleeding events., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The percutaneous treatment of structural, valvular, and non-valvular heart disease (SHD) is rapidly evolving. The Core Curriculum (CC) proposed by the EAPCI describes the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that define competency levels required by newly trained SHD interventional cardiologists (IC) and provides guidance for training centres. SHD ICs are cardiologists who have received complete interventional cardiology training. They are multidisciplinary team specialists who manage adult SHD patients from diagnosis to follow-up and perform percutaneous procedures in this area. They are competent in interpreting advanced imaging techniques and master planning software. The SHD ICs are expected to be proficient in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. They may have selective skills in either the aortic area or mitral/tricuspid areas. In this case, they must still have common transversal competencies in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. Additional SHD domain competencies are optional. Completing dedicated SHD training, aiming for full aortic, mitral, and tricuspid competencies, requires at least 18 months. For full training in the aortic area, with basic competencies in mitral/tricuspid areas, the training can be reduced to 1 year. The same is true for training in the mitral/tricuspid area, with competencies in the aortic area. The SHD IC CC promotes excellence and homogeneous training across Europe and is the cornerstone of future certifications and patient protection. It may be a reference for future CC for national associations and other SHD specialities, including imaging and cardiac surgery.

The percutaneous treatment of structural, valvular, and non-valvular heart disease (SHD) is rapidly evolving. The Core Curriculum (CC) proposed by the EAPCI describes the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that define competency levels required by newly trained SHD interventional cardiologists (IC) and provides guidance for training centres. SHD ICs are cardiologists who have received complete interventional cardiology training. They are multidisciplinary team specialists who manage adult SHD patients from diagnosis to follow-up and perform percutaneous procedures in this area. They are competent in interpreting advanced imaging techniques and master planning software. The SHD ICs are expected to be proficient in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. They may have selective skills in either the aortic area or mitral/tricuspid areas. In this case, they must still have common transversal competencies in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. Additional SHD domain competencies are optional. Completing dedicated SHD training, aiming for full aortic, mitral, and tricuspid competencies, requires at least 18 months. For full training in the aortic area, with basic competencies in mitral/tricuspid areas, the training can be reduced to 1 year. The same is true for training in the mitral/tricuspid area, with competencies in the aortic area. The SHD IC CC promotes excellence and homogeneous training across Europe and is the cornerstone of future certifications and patient protection. It may be a reference for future CC for national associations and other SHD specialities, including imaging and cardiac surgery.

Aims: The optimal vascular access site for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) remains uncertain. While observational data favour transradial access (TRA) due to lower complication rates and mortality, transfemoral access (TFA) PCI offers advantages such as shorter access and procedure times, along with quicker escalation to mechanical circulatory support (MCS). In this study, we aimed to investigate factors associated with a transfemoral approach and compare mortality rates between TRA and TFA in AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI., Methods and Results: Data from a nationwide registry of AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI (2017-2021) were analysed. We compared patient demographics, procedural details, and outcomes between TRA and TFA groups. Logistic regression identified access site factors and radial-to-femoral crossover predictors. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis examined the impact of access site on mortality. Of the 1562 patients, 45% underwent TRA PCI, with an increasing trend over time. Transfemoral access patients were more often female, had a history of coronary artery bypass grafting, lower blood pressure, higher resuscitation and intubation rates, and elevated lactate levels. After PSM, 30-day mortality was lower in TRA (33% vs. 46%, P < 0.001). Predictors for crossover included left coronary artery interventions, multivessel PCI, and MCS initiation., Conclusion: Significant differences exist between TRA and TFA PCI in AMI-CS. Transfemoral access was more common in patients with worse haemodynamics and was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared with TRA. This mortality difference persisted in the PSM analysis., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: BS reports receiving speaker fees from Abbott, Abiomed, AstraZeneca and research funding from Abiomed, DFG and EKFS outside the submitted work. BC reports receiving speaker fees from Abiomed, and consultancy fees from Amgen, Sanofi, Boston Scientific and Philips, outside the submitted work. JH reports receiving research grants from Health~Holland, B. Braun, Infraredx/Nipro, ZonMw, Astra Zeneca and Abbott Vascular, outside the submitted work., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Transcatheter tricuspid valve interventions (TTVI) are increasingly used to treat patients with significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR). The evolution of concurrent mitral regurgitation (MR) severity after TTVI is currently unknown and may be pivotal for clinical decision-making. The aim of this study was to assess the evolution of MR after TTVI and to identify predictors of MR worsening and improvement., Methods and Results: This analysis is a substudy of the Trivalve Registry, an international registry designed to collect data on TTVI. This substudy included all patients with echocardiographic data on MR evolution and excluded those with a concomitant tricuspid and mitral transcatheter valve intervention or with a history of mitral valve intervention. The co-primary outcomes were MR improvement and worsening at two timepoints: pre-discharge and 2-month follow-up. This analysis included 359 patients with severe TR, mostly(80%) treated with tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair(T-TEER). MR improvement was found in 106(29.5%) and 99(34%) patients, while MR worsening in 34(9.5%) and 33(11%) patients at pre-discharge and 2-month follow-up, respectively. Annuloplasty and heterotopic replacement were associated with MR worsening. Independent predictors of MR improvement were: atrial fibrillation, T-TEER, acute procedural success, TR reduction, LVEDD>60 mm and beta-blocker therapy. Patients with moderate-to-severe/severe MR following TTVI showed significantly higher death rates., Conclusion: MR degree variation is common after TTVI, with most cases showing improvement. Clinical and procedural characteristics may predict the MR evolution, in particular procedural success and T-TEER play key roles in MR outcomes. TTVI may be beneficial even in the presence of functional MR., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Noack has received speaker honoraria and consultancy fees for his institution from Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Abdel-Wahab has received speaker honoraria and consultancy fees for his institution from Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Shortening the duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was shown to be effective and safe in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). We aimed to investigate the effect of 1 versus 3-month DAPT on outcomes after drug-eluting stent in HBR patients with or without chronic kidney disease (CKD). Data from 3 prospective single-arm studies (XIENCE Short DAPT Program) enrolling HBR patients after successful coronary implantation of cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (XIENCE, Abbott) were analyzed. Subjects were eligible for DAPT discontinuation at 1 or 3 months if free from ischemic events. The primary end point was all-cause death or any myocardial infarction. The key secondary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium Type 2 to 5 bleeding. Outcomes were assessed from 1 to 12 months after PCI. CKD was defined as baseline creatinine clearance <60 ml/min. Of 3,286 patients, 1,432 (43.6%) had CKD. One-month versus 3-month DAPT was associated with a similar 12-month risk of the primary outcome irrespective of CKD status (CKD: 9.5% vs 10.9%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.22; no-CKD: 6.6% vs 5.6%, adjusted hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.73; p interaction 0.299). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2 to 5 bleeding rates were numerically but not significantly lower with 1-month versus 3-month DAPT in both CKD (9.9% vs 12%) and no-CKD (6.4% vs 9.0%) patients. In conclusion, in HBR patients, 1-month versus 3-month DAPT was associated with a similar risk of ischemic complications and a trend toward fewer bleeding events at 12 months after PCI, irrespective of CKD status., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Roxana Mehran reports financial support was provided by Abbott. Dr. Richardt received an institutional research grant from Boston Scientific. Dr. Vranckx has received grants and/or personal fees from AstraZeneca, Terumo, Abbott Vascular, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer AG, and CLS Behring. Dr. Valgimigli reports grants and personal fees from Terumo, and has received personal fees from Astra Zeneca, Alvimedica/CID, Abbott Vascular, Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, CoreFLOW, IDORSIA PHARMACEUTICALS LTD, Universität Basel | Dept. Klinische Forschung, Vifor, personal Bristol Myers Squib SA, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Vesalio, Novartis, Chiesi, PhaseBio, outside the submitted work. Dr. Angiolillo reports receiving consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi and Vectura, outside the submitted work; Dr. Angiolillo also declares that his institution has received research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr. Bhatt discloses the following relationships - Advisory Board: Angiowave, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, High Enroll, Janssen, Level Ex, McKinsey, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novo Nordisk, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Stasys; Board of Directors: American Heart Association New York City, Angiowave (stock options), Bristol Myers Squibb (stock), DRS.LINQ (stock options), High Enroll (stock); Consultant: Broadview Ventures, Hims, SFJ, Youngene; Data Monitoring Committees: Acesion Pharma, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute, for the PORTICO trial, funded by St. Jude Medical, now Abbott), Boston Scientific (Chair, PEITHO trial), Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical (Chair, PERFORMANCE 2), Duke Clinical Research Institute, Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine (for the ENVISAGE trial, funded by Daiichi Sankyo; for the ABILITY-DM trial, funded by Concept Medical; for ALLAY-HF, funded by Alleviant Medical), Novartis, Population Health Research Institute; Rutgers University (for the NIHfunded MINT Trial); Honoraria: American College of Cardiology (Senior Associate Editor, Clinical Trials and News, ACC.org; Chair, ACC Accreditation Oversight Committee), Arnold and Porter law firm (work related to Sanofi/Bristol-Myers Squibb clopidogrel litigation), Baim Institute for Clinical Research (formerly Harvard Clinical Research Institute; RE-DUAL PCI clinical trial steering committee funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; AEGIS-II executive committee funded by CSL Behring), Belvoir Publications (Editor in Chief, Harvard Heart Letter), Canadian Medical and Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (clinical trial steering committees), CSL Behring (AHA lecture), Cowen and Company, Duke Clinical Research Institute (clinical trial steering committees, including for the PRONOUNCE trial, funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals), HMP Global (Editor in Chief, Journal of Invasive Cardiology), Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Guest Editor; Associate Editor), K2P (Co-Chair, interdisciplinary curriculum), Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD (CME steering committees), MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME (Course Director, Comprehensive Review of Interventional Cardiology), Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute (for the COMPASS operations committee, publications committee, steering committee, and USA national co-leader, funded by Bayer), WebMD (CME steering committees), Wiley (steering committee); Other: Clinical Cardiology (Deputy Editor); Patent: Sotagliflozin (named on a patent for sotagliflozin assigned to Brigham and Women's Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; neither I nor Brigham and Women's Hospital receive any income from this patent); Research Funding: Abbott, Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Alnylam, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi, CinCor, Cleerly, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, Owkin, Pfizer, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The Medicines Company, Youngene, 89Bio; Royalties: Elsevier (Editor, Braunwald's Heart Disease); Site Co-Investigator: Abbott, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, Endotronix, St. Jude Medical (now Abbott), Philips, SpectraWAVE, Svelte, Vascular Solutions; Trustee: American College of Cardiology; Unfunded Research: FlowCo. Dr. Toelg reports speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, and Biotronik. Dr. Maksoud is member of Abbott Vascular, Pfizer and Bristol Myer Squib speaker Bureau. Dr. Chehab has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott, speaker honoraria and/or personal fees from Edwards and Abbott and Biotronics. Dr. de la Torre Hernandez has received grants/research support from Abbott, Amgen, and Biotronik; he has received honoraria or consultation fees from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Biotronik, Abbott, Philips, IHT, and iVascular. Dr. Krucoff reports grants and/or personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Nipro, Medtronic, OrbusNeich, Terumo. Dr. Kunadian has received personal fees/honoraria from Bayer, Astra Zeneca, Abbott, Amgen, Daichii Sankyo. Dr. Varenne has received personal fees/honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Biosensors, and Astra Zeneca. Dr. Windecker reports research, travel or educational grants to the institution without personal remuneration from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Braun, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, Cordis Medical, Corflow Therapeutics, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Farapulse Inc. Fumedica, Guerbet, Idorsia, Inari Medical, InfraRedx, Janssen-Cilag, Johnson & Johnson, Medalliance, Medicure, Medtronic, Merck Sharp & Dohm, Miracor Medical, MonarQ, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Organon, OrPha Suisse, Pharming Tech. Pfizer, Polares, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Sinomed, Terumo, Vifor, V-Wave. Dr. Windecker served as advisory board member and/or member of the steering/executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Recardio, Sinomed, Terumo, and V-Wave with payments to the institution but no personal payments. He is also member of the steering/executive committee group of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without impact on his personal remuneration. Dr. Mehran reports institutional research grants from Abbott, Abiomed, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, CERC, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, DSI, Insel Gruppe AG, Medtronic, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, OrbusNeich, Philips, Transverse Medical, Zoll; personal fees from ACC, Boston Scientific, California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), Cine-Med Research, Janssen, WebMD, SCAI; consulting fees paid to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, AM-Pharma, Alleviant Medical, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, DSI, Duke University, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Novartis, Philips; Equity <1, if there are any other author, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper,., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is associated with systemic inflammation, obesity, metabolic syndrome, and gut microbiome changes. Increased trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO) levels are predictive for mortality in HFpEF. The TMAO precursor trimethylamine (TMA) is synthesized by the intestinal microbiome, crosses the intestinal barrier and is metabolized to TMAO by hepatic flavin-containing monooxygenases (FMO). The intricate interactions of microbiome alterations and TMAO in relation to HFpEF manifestation and progression are analyzed here., Methods: Healthy lean (L-ZSF1, n = 12) and obese ZSF1 rats with HFpEF (O-ZSF1, n = 12) were studied. HFpEF was confirmed by transthoracic echocardiography, invasive hemodynamic measurements, and detection of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). TMAO, carnitine, symmetric dimethylarginine (SDMA), and amino acids were measured using mass-spectrometry. The intestinal epithelial barrier was analyzed by immunohistochemistry, in-vitro impedance measurements and determination of plasma lipopolysaccharide via ELISA. Hepatic FMO3 quantity was determined by Western blot. The fecal microbiome at the age of 8, 13 and 20 weeks was assessed using 16s rRNA amplicon sequencing., Results: Increased levels of TMAO (+ 54%), carnitine (+ 46%) and the cardiac stress marker NT-proBNP (+ 25%) as well as a pronounced amino acid imbalance were observed in obese rats with HFpEF. SDMA levels in O-ZSF1 were comparable to L-ZSF1, indicating stable kidney function. Anatomy and zonula occludens protein density in the intestinal epithelium remained unchanged, but both impedance measurements and increased levels of LPS indicated an impaired epithelial barrier function. FMO3 was decreased (- 20%) in the enlarged, but histologically normal livers of O-ZSF1. Alpha diversity, as indicated by the Shannon diversity index, was comparable at 8 weeks of age, but decreased by 13 weeks of age, when HFpEF manifests in O-ZSF1. Bray-Curtis dissimilarity (Beta-Diversity) was shown to be effective in differentiating L-ZSF1 from O-ZSF1 at 20 weeks of age. Members of the microbial families Lactobacillaceae, Ruminococcaceae, Erysipelotrichaceae and Lachnospiraceae were significantly differentially abundant in O-ZSF1 and L-ZSF1 rats., Conclusions: In the ZSF1 HFpEF rat model, increased dietary intake is associated with alterations in gut microbiome composition and bacterial metabolites, an impaired intestinal barrier, and changes in pro-inflammatory and health-predictive metabolic profiles. HFpEF as well as its most common comorbidities obesity and metabolic syndrome and the alterations described here evolve in parallel and are likely to be interrelated and mutually reinforcing. Dietary adaption may have a positive impact on all entities., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose of Review: To discuss future research themes and study design in cardiogenic shock., Recent Findings: Cardiogenic shock research faces multiple challenges, hindering progress in understanding and treating this life-threatening condition. Cardiogenic shock's heterogeneous nature poses challenges in patient selection for clinical trials, potentially leading to variability in treatment responses and outcomes. Ethical considerations arise due to the acuity and severity of the condition, posing challenges in obtaining informed consent and conducting randomized controlled trials where time to treatment is pivotal., Summary: This review discusses research in this area focusing on the importance of phenotyping patients with cardiogenic shock, based on artificial intelligence, machine learning, and unravel new molecular mechanisms using proteomics and metabolomics. Further, the future research focus in mechanical circulatory support and targeting inflammation is reviewed. Finally, newer trial designs including adaptive platform trials are discussed., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Transthyretin 'wild-type' amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTRwt-CM) is a differential diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). The clinical work-up for ATTRwt-CM is challenging. Considering a combination of clinical variables specific for ATTRwt-CM might aid in identifying patients at risk., Methods and Results: Sixty patients (78 ± 6 years, 8% female) were diagnosed with ATTRwt-CM by endomyocardial biopsy. Preserved ejection fraction (LVEF >45%) was present in 41 of the patients. Those were 1:1 propensity score age- and sex-matched to a cohort of patients with HFpEF. ATTRwt-CM patients had less obesity (P = 0.01) and higher septal thickness (IVSd, P < 0.01) as well as more diastolic dysfunction (E/e', P < 0.01). On multivariable regression IVSd > 14 mm, E/e' > 14 and absence of obesity (P > 0.01 for all) were identified as predictors for ATTRwt-CM. A weighted point-based score was derived with IVSd > 14 mm = 1 point; absence of obesity = 2 points; and E/e' > 14 = 3 points. Area under the curve (AUC) for the summation score was 0.91 (0.84-0.97, P < 0.01) and a score of more than 3 points predicted ATTRwt-CM with good sensitivity (78%) and specificity (90%). The score was validated in an external cohort of 142 patients with ATTRwt-CM and 419 HFpEF patients showing sufficient accuracy (AUC 0.91, 0.88-0.94, P < 0.01). A value greater than 3 points demonstrated a high sensitivity (93%) and a negative predictive value of 97%., Conclusions: A score based on basic clinical and echocardiographic features helps to distinguish ATTRwt-CM from typical HFpEF. This could facilitate the diagnostic work-up for these patients and enable earlier disease screening on a large scale., (© 2024 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Purpose of Review: Treatment of cardiogenic shock remains largely driven by expert consensus due to limited evidence from randomized controlled trials. In this review, we aim to summarize the approach to the management of patients with cardiogenic shock in the ICU prior to mechanical circulatory support (MCS)., Recent Findings: Main topics covered in this article include diagnosis, monitoring, initial management and key aspects of pharmacological therapy in the ICU for patients with cardiogenic shock., Summary: Despite efforts to improve therapy, short-term mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock is still reaching 40-50%. Early recognition and treatment of cardiogenic shock are crucial, including early revascularization of the culprit lesion with possible staged revascularization in acute myocardial infarction (AMI)-CS. Optimal volume management and vasoactive drugs titrated to restore arterial pressure and perfusion are the cornerstone of cardiogenic shock therapy. The choice of vasoactive drugs depends on the underlying cause and phenotype of cardiogenic shock. Their use should be limited to the shortest duration and lowest possible dose. According to recent observational evidence, assessment of the complete hemodynamic profile with a pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) was associated with improved outcomes and should be considered early in patients not responding to initial therapy or with unclear shock. A multidisciplinary shock team should be involved early in order to identify potential candidates for temporary and/or durable MCS., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Data on the prognostic impact of residual tricuspid regurgitation (TR) after tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (T-TEER) are scarce. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate 2-year survival and symptomatic outcomes of patients in relation to residual TR after T-TEER., Methods and Results: Using the large European Registry of Transcatheter Repair for Tricuspid Regurgitation (EuroTR registry) we investigated the impact of residual TR on 2-year all-cause mortality and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class at follow-up. The study further identified predictors for residual TR ≥3+ using a logistic regression model. The study included a total of 1286 T-TEER patients (mean age 78.0 ± 8.9 years, 53.6% female). TR was successfully reduced to ≤1+ in 42.4%, 2+ in 40.0% and 3+ in 14.9% of patients at discharge, while 2.8% remained with TR ≥4+ after the procedure. Residual TR ≥3+ was an independent multivariable predictor of 2-year all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 2.06, 95% confidence interval 1.30-3.26, p = 0.002). The prevalence of residual TR ≥3+ was four times higher in patients with higher baseline TR (vena contracta >11.1 mm) and more severe tricuspid valve tenting (tenting area >1.92 cm 2 ). Of note, no survival difference was observed in patients with residual TR ≤1+ versus 2+ (76.2% vs. 73.1%, p = 0.461). The rate of NYHA functional class ≥III at follow-up was significantly higher in patients with residual TR ≥3+ (52.4% vs. 40.5%, p < 0.001). Of note, the degree of TR reduction significantly correlated with the extent of symptomatic improvement (p = 0.012)., Conclusions: T-TEER effectively reduced TR severity in the majority of patients. While residual TR ≥3+ was associated with worse outcomes, no differences were observed for residual TR 1+ versus 2+. Symptomatic improvement correlated with the degree of TR reduction., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is a gut-derived peptide secreted in response to nutritional and inflammatory stimuli. Elevated GLP-1 levels predict adverse outcome in patients with acute myocardial infarction or sepsis. GLP-1 holds cardioprotective effects and GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce cardiovascular events in high-risk patients with diabetes. In this study, we aimed to investigate the capacity of GLP-1 to predict outcome in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating myocardial infarction., Methods: Circulating GLP-1 levels were serially assessed in 172 individuals during index PCI and day 2 in a prospectively planned biomarker substudy of the IABP-SHOCK II trial. All-cause mortality at short- (30 days), intermediate- (1 year), and long-term (6 years) follow-up was used for outcome assessment., Results: Patients with fatal short-term outcome (n = 70) exhibited higher GLP-1 levels [86 (interquartile range 45-130) pM] at ICU admission in comparison to patients with 30-day survival [48 (interquartile range 33-78) pM; p < 0.001] (n = 102). Repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant interaction of GLP-1 dynamics from baseline to day 2 between survivors and non-survivors (p = 0.04). GLP-1 levels above vs. below the median proved to be predictive for short- [hazard ratio (HR) 2.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50-3.94; p < 0.001], intermediate- [HR 2.46; 95% CI 1.62-3.76; p < 0.001] and long-term [HR 2.12; 95% CI 1.44-3.11; p < 0.001] outcome by multivariate Cox-regression analysis., Conclusion: Elevated plasma levels of GLP-1 are an independent predictor for impaired prognosis in patients with myocardial infarction complicated by CS. The functional relevance of GLP-1 in this context is currently unknown and needs further investigations., Trial Registration: www., Clinicaltrials: gov Identifier: NCT00491036., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: none declared.

Aims: The prospective GULLIVE-R study aimed to evaluate adherence to guideline-recommended secondary prevention, physicians' and patients' estimation of cardiac risk, and patients' knowledge about target values of risk factors after acute myocardial infarction (AMI)., Methods and Results: We performed a prospective study enrolling patients 9-12 months after AMI. Guideline-recommended secondary prevention therapies and physicians as well as patients' estimation about their risk and patients' knowledge about target values were prospectively collected. Between July 2019 and June 2021, a total of 2509 outpatients were enrolled in 150 German centres 10 months after AMI. The mean age was 66 years, 26.4% were women, 45.3% had ST elevation myocardial infarction, 54.7% had non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, and 93.6% had revascularization (84.0% percutaneous coronary intervention, 7.4% coronary artery bypass graft, 1.8% both). Guideline-recommended secondary drug therapies were prescribed in over 80% of patients, while only about 50% received all five recommended drugs (aspirin, P2Y12 inhibitors, statins, beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors), and regular exercise was performed by only one-third. About 90% of patients felt well informed about secondary prevention, but the correct target value for blood pressure was known in only 37.9% and for LDL-cholesterol in only 8.2%. Both physicians and patients underestimated the objective risk of future AMIs as determined by the thormbolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) risk score for secondary prevention., Conclusion: There is still room for improvement in patient education and implementation of guideline-recommended non-pharmacological and pharmacological secondary prevention therapies in patients in the chronic phase after AMI., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: U.Z.: Speaker honoraria from Astra Zeneca, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer Healthcare, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Ferrer, Medicines Company, MSD, Novartis, Sanofi. F.G.: Research support from Astra Zenca. M.K., S.O., M.H., H.T., and K.W.: none., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For commercial re-use, please contact reprints@oup.com for reprints and translation rights for reprints. All other permissions can be obtained through our RightsLink service via the Permissions link on the article page on our site—for further information please contact journals.permissions@oup.com.)