Search

Background Appropriate selection of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) or cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device can be challenging in patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. In this setting, limited information exists about the role of medical applications in helping physicians to choose the most useful device. Methods We developed a medical application that provides guidelines-based algorithms for helping doctors in decision process using the Apache Cordova application programming interface. e-CRTD App was tested in 36 consecutive patients (age 66.4 ± 8.5 years, 31 males) with diagnosis of heart failure (HF) addressed to electrophysiology laboratory for evaluation of ICD (N = 18) or CRT with defibrillator device (CRT-D; N = 18) implantation. Two separate teams evaluated each patient independently: expert electrophysiologists (Group A); cardiologists in training using the App (Group B). Results The outcomes of the clinical evaluation performed by Groups A and B were similar in 100% of patients in terms of classes of recommendations to device (Class I in eight cases, Class IIa in seven cases, Class III in the remaining 21). Surprisingly, the majority of indications from the general practitioners to cardiac device were inappropriate (N = 17 ICD, and N = 4 CRT-D, Class III); nevertheless, e-CRTD App helped Group B (nonexpert cardiologists) in excluding all these cases. Conclusions This study describes and validates a mobile application realized to help the decision-making process in HF patients candidate to ICD/CRT-D. This application supports physicians to assess the eligibility for ICD or CRT-D according to current guidelines in patients with LV dysfunction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Over the past decades, the improvements in the diagnostic power and availability of non-invasive cardiac imaging techniques have led to a decline of right heart catheterization (RHC) performance. However, RHC remains the gold standard for diagnosing pulmonary hypertension and an essential tool for the evaluation of patient candidacy to heart transplantation., Methods: This survey was carried out jointly by the Young Committee of GISE, with the support of the SICI-GISE Society, and the ICOT group, with the aim of evaluating how the interventional cardiology community perform RHC. A web-based questionnaire based on 20 questions was distributed to SICI-GISE members., Results: The survey was distributed to 1550 physicians with 174 (11%) responses. Most centers perform few procedures per year (<10 RHC/year) and a dedicated cardiologist is usually lacking. Patients were frequently admitted as ordinary hospitalization regimen and the most frequent indication for RHC was the hemodynamic assessment of pulmonary hypertension, followed by diagnostics of valvular diseases and advanced heart failure/heart transplantation. Indeed, the majority of participants (86%) are involved in transcatheter procedures for structural heart disease. The average time taken to perform the RHC was approximately 30-60 min. The femoral access (60%) was the most frequently used, usually by an echo-guided approach. Two-thirds of participants discontinued oral anticoagulant therapy before RHC. Only 27% of centers assess wedge position from an integrated analysis. Furthermore, the edge pressure is detected in the end-diastolic cardiac phase in half cases and in the end-expiratory phase in only 31%. The most commonly used method for cardiac output calculation was the indirect Fick method (58%)., Conclusions: Guidance on the best practice for performing RHC is currently lacking. A more precise standardization of this demanding procedure is warranted.

Background: Pulmonary embolism (PE) represents the third leading acute cardiovascular syndrome in the world and it is burdened with high mortality and morbidity rates. Percutaneous or catheter-based treatments of high- and intermediate-risk patients have garnered interest because of the limitations of both systemic thrombolysis and anticoagulation strategies. However, data on these techniques are heterogeneous and limited to small non-randomized evidences., Methods: This survey was jointly performed by the GISE Young Committee with the support of the SICI-GISE Society and ICOT group with the aim of evaluating the view of the cardiology community on interventional therapies for PE. A web-based questionnaire based on 19 questions was distributed to SICI-GISE and ICOT members., Results: The survey was distributed to 1550 physicians with 220 (14%) responses, 65% from North Italy. Multidisciplinary diagnostic and therapeutic pathways for patients with PE were not available in most centers (56%), and transcatheter treatment was available in 55% of centers, most of them at low volume (<5 percutaneous treatments/year). Among the devices used, mechanical thrombectomy was the predominant one (62%) in the absence of significant differences in the availability of devices within the three Italian geographic macro-areas. Respondents recognize the theoretical benefits of percutaneous treatment of PE, including: improving a prompt hemodynamic stabilization and respiratory exchange (89%) in high-risk patients, avoiding hemodynamic deterioration (39%) and right ventricular dysfunction (51%) in intermediate-risk patients, and reducing hemorrhagic complications related to systemic thrombolysis (36%). According to participants' judgement, the main factors limiting the use of percutaneous transcatheter treatment of PE in clinical practice are the lack of specific operator training (60%), lack of solid clinical data to support it (39%), difficult patient selection (34%), high costs (30%), and risk of procedural complications (26%)., Conclusions: Currently, transcatheter treatment of PE appears to be widely supported but poorly used in clinical practice. Solid evidences are needed regarding the safety and efficacy profile of the different available devices, the identification of patient selection criteria, alongside the enhancement of the availability of techniques and technologies.

Aims: To investigate the changes in left atrial strain (LAS) after correction of severe aortic stenosis (AS) with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and assess its prognostic impact., Methods and Results: One hundred consecutive patients with severe symptomatic AS who underwent TAVR at the Magna Graecia University of Catanzaro underwent echocardiographic examination including assessment of LAS before and after TAVR. Independent investigators collected outcome data and information. The primary study outcome was the difference in ΔLAS (postTAVR-preTAVR) between patients those met the main clinical endpoint (a composite of cardiovascular mortality and heart failure hospitalisation) and those not meeting the endpoint.During a median follow-up of 31 months, 35 patients (35%) met the combined clinical endpoint. The difference between LAS post-TAVR and LAS pre-TAVR (ΔLAS) was significantly larger in patients who met the combined endpoint (HR=0.76 (0.67-0.86); p<0.001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis including ΔLAS, EuroSCORE II and left ventricular ejection fraction showed that ΔLAS (HR=0.80, p<0.001) was the only independent predictor of the combined clinical endpoint. Finally, a Kaplan-Maier analysis showed that patients with a ΔLAS above its median value had a significantly better event-free survival compared with those below the median (p<0.001)., Conclusions: A lower reduction in ΔLAS after TAVR was an independent predictor of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death and hospitalisation for heart failure., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Functional assessment of coronary lesions has become an integral part of routine practice in most cath labs. Such evaluation is performed using a pressure wire that allows measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR). The latter has received a class I indication with level of evidence A according to the most recent European guidelines on myocardial revascularization for the assessment of angiographically moderate coronary lesions. The present document has the following objectives: 1) to summarize the theoretical basis of FFR; 2) to provide a guideline for vasodilator therapy; 3) to summarize scientific evidence supporting FFR; 4) to provide a model of health economy evaluation focusing on resource sparing associated with the use of FFR.