Management of Patients at Risk for and With Left Ventricular Thrombus: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Despite the many advances in cardiovascular medicine, decisions concerning the diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of left ventricular (LV) thrombus often remain challenging. There are only limited organizational guideline recommendations with regard to LV thrombus. Furthermore, management issues in current practice are increasingly complex, including concerns about adding oral anticoagulant therapy to dual antiplatelet therapy, the availability of direct oral anticoagulants as a potential alternative option to traditional vitamin K antagonists, and the use of diagnostic modalities such as cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, which has greater sensitivity for LV thrombus detection than echocardiography. Therefore, this American Heart Association scientific statement was commissioned with the goals of addressing 8 key clinical management questions related to LV thrombus, including the prevention and treatment after myocardial infarction, prevention and treatment in dilated cardiomyopathy, management of mural (laminated) thrombus, imaging of LV thrombus, direct oral anticoagulants as an alternative to warfarin, treatments other than oral anticoagulants for LV thrombus (eg, dual antiplatelet therapy, fibrinolysis, surgical excision), and the approach to persistent LV thrombus despite anticoagulation therapy. Practical management suggestions in the form of text, tables, and flow diagrams based on careful and critical review of actual study data as formulated by this multidisciplinary writing committee are given.

Psychological Health, Well-Being, and the Mind-Heart-Body Connection: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

As clinicians delivering health care, we are very good at treating disease but often not as good at treating the person. The focus of our attention has been on the specific physical condition rather than the patient as a whole. Less attention has been given to psychological health and how that can contribute to physical health and disease. However, there is now an increasing appreciation of how psychological health can contribute not only in a negative way to cardiovascular disease (CVD) but also in a positive way to better cardiovascular health and reduced cardiovascular risk. This American Heart Association scientific statement was commissioned to evaluate, synthesize, and summarize for the health care community knowledge to date on the relationship between psychological health and cardiovascular health and disease and to suggest simple steps to screen for, and ultimately improve, the psychological health of patients with and at risk for CVD. Based on current study data, the following statements can be made: There are good data showing clear associations between psychological health and CVD and risk; there is increasing evidence that psychological health may be causally linked to biological processes and behaviors that contribute to and cause CVD; the preponderance of data suggest that interventions to improve psychological health can have a beneficial impact on cardiovascular health; simple screening measures can be used by health care providers for patients with or at risk for CVD to assess psychological health status; and consideration of psychological health is advisable in the evaluation and management of patients with or at risk for CVD.

A Mistake Not to Be Repeated: What Can We Learn from the Underutilization of Statin Therapy for Efficient Dissemination of Cardioprotective Glucose Lowering Agents?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the factors contributing to underutilization of guideline-directed therapies, identify strategies to alleviate these factors, and apply these strategies for effective and timely dissemination of novel cardioprotective glucose-lowering agents. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent analyses demonstrate underutilization of cardioprotective glucose lowering agents despite guideline recommendations for their use. Major contributors to underutilization of guideline-directed therapies include therapeutic inertia, perceptions about side effects, and factors found at the level of the clinicians, patients, and the healthcare system. The recent emergence of several novel therapies, such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, for use in cardiovascular disease provides a unique avenue to improve patient outcomes. To effectively utilize novel cardioprotective glucose lowering agents to improve cardiovascular outcomes, clinicians must recognize and learn from prior barriers to application of guideline-directed therapies. Further endeavors are prudent to ensure uptake of novel agents.

Is There an Optimal Antiplatelet Strategy after Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease?

Gastrointestinal bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a not too uncommon clinical situation and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. After initial treatment, a number of clinical decisions must be made weighing the risks of ischemic events and future bleeding. In particular, healthcare providers must carefully balance the effectiveness of antiplatelet therapy in the secondary prevention of coronary events, primarily future spontaneous myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis, against the risk of major, most commonly gastrointestinal bleeding. The first question is whether a dual antiplatelet therapy strategy is required or if a single antiplatelet agent will suffice. Then, if a single antiplatelet agent is adequate, which agent should be continued. Although there is some guidance to answer some of these questions, there are inadequate evidence-based data for others. Below, we review the various considerations and summarize our approach and rationale to manage patients who had gastrointestinal bleeding after PCI.

Oral Antiplatelet Therapy After Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Review.

IMPORTANCE: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States with an annual incidence of approximately 1 million. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel, ticagrelor, or prasugrel) reduces cardiovascular event rates after ACS. OBSERVATIONS: In 2016, the updated guidelines from the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recommended aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor for at least 12 months for patients with ACS. Since these recommendations were published, new randomized clinical trials have studied different regimens and durations of antiplatelet therapy. Recommendations vary according to the risk of bleeding. If bleeding risk is low, prolonged DAPT may be considered, although the optimal duration of prolonged DAPT beyond 1 year is not well established. If bleeding risk is high, shorter duration (ie, 3-6 months) of DAPT may be reasonable. A high risk of bleeding traditionally is defined as a 1-year risk of serious bleeding (either fatal or associated with a ≥3-g/dL drop in hemoglobin) of at least 4% or a risk of an intracranial hemorrhage of at least 1%. Patients at higher risk are 65 years old or older; have low body weight (BMI <18.5), diabetes, or prior bleeding; or take oral anticoagulants. The newest P2Y12 inhibitors, prasugrel and ticagrelor, are more potent, with high on-treatment residual platelet reactivity of about 3% vs 30% to 40% with clopidogrel and act within 30 minutes compared with 2 hours for clopidogrel. Clinicians should avoid prescribing prasugrel to patients with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack because of an increased risk of cerebrovascular events (6.5% vs 1.2% with clopidogrel, P = .002) and should avoid prescribing it to patients older than 75 years or who weigh less than 60 kg. The ISAR-REACT-5 trial found that prasugrel reduced rates of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year compared with ticagrelor among patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (9.3% vs 6.9%, P = .006) with no significant difference in bleeding. Recent trials suggested that discontinuing aspirin rather than the P2Y12 inhibitor may be associated with better outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Dual antiplatelet therapy reduces rates of cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Specific combinations and duration of dual antiplatelet therapy should be based on patient characteristics-risk of bleeding myocardial ischemia.

Inferior ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Presenting When Urgent Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Is Unavailable: Should We Adhere to Current Guidelines?

The pivotal studies that led to the recommendations for emergent reperfusion therapy for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were conducted for the most part over 25 years ago. At that time, contemporary standard treatments including aspirin, statin, and even anticoagulation were not commonly used. The 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation (ACCF)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines and the 2017 European Society of Cardiology guidelines give a class I recommendation (with the level of evidence A) for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) in patients with STEMI and ischemic symptoms of less than 12 h. However, if the patient presents to a hospital without pPCI capacity, and it is anticipated that pPCI cannot be performed within 120 min of first medical contact, fibrinolytic therapy is indicated (if there are no contraindications) (class I indication, level of evidence A). Our review of the pertinent literature shows that the current recommendation for inferior STEMI is based on the level of evidence lower than A. We can consider level B even C, supporting the recommendation for fibrinolytic therapy if pPCI is not available for inferior STEMI.

Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management of the No-Reflow Phenomenon.

Successful reperfusion of an infarct-related coronary artery by primary percutaneous intervention or fibrinolysis during acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) does not always restore myocardial tissue perfusion, a phenomenon termed "no-reflow." Herein we discuss the pathophysiology of this highly prevalent phenomenon and highlight the most salient aspects of its clinical diagnosis and management as well as the limitations of presently used methods. There is a great need for understanding the dynamic nature of no-reflow, as its occurrence is associated with poor cardiovascular outcomes. The no-reflow phenomenon may lend an explanation to the lack of further improvements in in-hospital mortality in STEMI patients despite decreases in door-to-balloon time. Hence, no-reflow potentially presents an important target for investigators interested in improving outcomes in STEMI.

Risk Assessment of Stroke in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Current Shortcomings and Future Directions.

Atrial fibrillation is a well-known risk factor for cardioembolic stroke; a number of risk stratification scoring systems have been developed to help differentiate which patients would stand to benefit from anticoagulation. However, these scoring systems cannot be utilized in patients whose atrial fibrillation has not been diagnosed. As implantable cardiac monitors become more prevalent, it becomes possible to identify occult, subclinical atrial fibrillation. With this data, it is also possible to examine the relationship between episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and thromboembolism and the total burden of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk. The data gleaned from these devices provides insight and raises questions regarding the underlying mechanism of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation, and in doing so, exposes shortcomings in the present clinical use of current risk scoring systems, specifically, the inability to account for atrial fibrillation burden and to apply scores at all in subclinical atrial fibrillation.

Surgery for Aortic Dilatation in Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Valves: A Statement of Clarification From the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

Two guidelines from the American College of Cardiology (ACC), the American Heart Association (AHA), and collaborating societies address the risk of aortic dissection in patients with bicuspid aortic valves and severe aortic enlargement: the "2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Thoracic Aortic Disease" (Circulation. 2010;121:e266-e369) and the "2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease" (Circulation. 2014;129:e521-e643). However, the 2 guidelines differ with regard to the recommended threshold of aortic root or ascending aortic dilatation that would justify surgical intervention in patients with bicuspid aortic valves. The ACC and AHA therefore convened a subcommittee representing members of the 2 guideline writing committees to review the evidence, reach consensus, and draft a statement of clarification for both guidelines. This statement of clarification uses the ACC/AHA revised structure for delineating the Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence to provide recommendations that replace those contained in Section 9.2.2.1 of the thoracic aortic disease guideline and Section 5.1.3 of the valvular heart disease guideline.

Sexual activity and ischemic heart disease.

Human sexuality is an important aspect of health and quality of life. Many patients with ischemic heart disease - and their partners - are concerned that sexual activity could exacerbate their cardiac condition, possibly causing myocardial infarction or cardiac death. Patients with ischemic heart disease who wish to initiate or resume sexual activity should be evaluated with a thorough medical history and physical examination. Sexual activity is reasonable for individuals with no or mild angina and those who can exercise ≥ 3-5 METS without angina, excessive dyspnea, or ischemic ST segment changes. For the patient who is considered not be at low cardiovascular (CV) risk or in whom the CV risk is unknown, an exercise stress test is reasonable in order to determine his or her exercise capacity and to ascertain if symptoms or ischemia may occur. Regular exercise and cardiac rehabilitation can be effective in reducing the risk of CV complications associated with sexual activity for the patient with ischemic heart disease.

JACC: Advances Expert Panel Perspective: Shared Decision-Making in Multidisciplinary Team-Based Cardiovascular Care.

Shared decision-making (SDM) and multidisciplinary team-based care delivery are recommended across several cardiology clinical practice guidelines. However, evidence for benefit and guidance on implementation are limited. Informed consent, the use of patient decision aids, or the documentation of these elements for governmental or societal agencies may be conflated as SDM. SDM is a bidirectional exchange between experts: patients are the experts on their goals, values, and preferences, and clinicians provide their expertise on clinical factors. In this Expert Panel perspective, we review the current state of SDM in team-based cardiovascular care and propose best practice recommendations for multidisciplinary team implementation of SDM.

Do We Still Need Aspirin in Coronary Artery Disease?

Aspirin has for some time been used as a first-line treatment for acute coronary syndromes, including ST-elevation myocardial infarction, for secondary prevention of established coronary disease, and for primary prevention in patients at risk of coronary artery disease. Although aspirin has been in use for decades, the available evidence for its efficacy largely predates the introduction of other drugs, such as statins and P2Y12 inhibitors. Based on recent trials, the recommendation for aspirin use as primary prevention has been downgraded. In addition, P2Y12 inhibitors given as a single antiplatelet therapy have been associated with a lower incidence of bleeding than dual antiplatelet therapy in combination with aspirin in patients with stable and unstable coronary artery disease. The aim of this review is to discuss the role of aspirin considering the available evidence for primary prevention, secondary prevention for stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, and after percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass revascularization.

Association of pessimism with cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality.

Poor psychological health is associated with Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, cardiac syndrome X, coronary microcirculatory dysfunction, peripheral artery disease, or spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Data regarding pessimism, cardiovascular disease (CVD) events and mortality and all-cause mortality remained inconclusive. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to provide an overview of the association between pessimism, CVD outcomes and mortality. A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted from inception through July 2022 for studies evaluating pessimism and adverse outcomes. A total of 17 studies published between 1966 and July 2022 met our inclusion criteria, for a total of 232,533 individuals. Pooled hazard ratios were calculated in random-effects meta-analyses. Based on pooled analysis of adjusted HRs, pessimism was associated with adjusted HR of 1.13 (95% CI 1.07-1.19) for all-cause mortality with minimal heterogeneity (I2 = 28.5%). Based on pooled analysis of adjusted HRs, pessimism was associated with adjusted HR of 1.30 (95% CI 0.43-3.95) for CHD mortality, adjusted HR of 1.41 (95% CI 1.05-1.91) for CVD mortality, and adjusted HR of 1.43 (95% CI 0.64-3.16) for stroke. In conclusion, pessimism seems to be significantly associated with a higher risk for and poorer outcomes from CVD events than optimistic styles. There are genetic and other bases for these life approaches, but behavioral, cognitive and meditative interventions can modify patients' level of pessimism, hopefully leading to better medical outcomes. Testing this theory would yield highly useful and practical data for clinical care.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Concise Review for Clinicians.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) combines two antiplatelet agents to decrease the risk of thrombotic complications associated with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. Emerging data about the duration of DAPT is being published continuously. New approaches are trying to balance the time, benefits, and risks for patients taking DAPT for established cardiovascular diseases. Short-term dual DAPT of 3-6 months, or even 1 month in high-bleeding risk patients, is equivalent in terms of efficacy and effectiveness compared to long-term DAPT for patients who experienced percutaneous coronary intervention in an acute coronary syndrome setting. Prolonged DAPT beyond 12 months reduces stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiovascular events, and myocardial infarction rates but increases bleeding risk. Extended DAPT does not significantly benefit stable coronary artery disease patients in reducing stroke, myocardial infarction, or cardiovascular death. Ticagrelor and aspirin reduce cardiovascular events in stable coronary artery disease with diabetes but carry a higher bleeding risk. Antiplatelet therapy duration in atrial fibrillation patients after percutaneous coronary intervention depends on individual characteristics and bleeding risk. Antiplatelet therapy is crucial for post-coronary artery bypass graft and transcatheter aortic valve implantation; Aspirin (ASA) monotherapy is preferred. Antiplatelet therapy duration in peripheral artery disease depends on the scenario. Adding vorapaxar and cilostazol may benefit secondary prevention and claudication, respectively. Carotid artery disease patients with transient ischemic attack or stroke benefit from antiplatelet therapy and combining ASA and clopidogrel is more effective than ASA alone. The optimal duration of DAPT after carotid artery stenting is uncertain. Resistance to ASA and clopidogrel poses an incremental risk of deleterious cardiovascular events and stroke. The selection and duration of antiplatelet therapy in patients with cardiovascular disease requires careful consideration of both efficacy and safety outcomes. The use of combination therapies may provide added benefits but should be weighed against the risk of bleeding. Further research and clinical trials are needed to optimize antiplatelet treatment in different patient populations and clinical scenarios.