RESUMO
Background: Echocardiography is essential in cardiovascular medicine for screening, diagnosis, and monitoring. Artificial intelligence (AI) has the potential to improve echocardiography by reducing variability and analysis time. While 3D echocardiography is becoming more accurate, 2D imaging still dominates clinical care. We aimed to evaluate agreement in measures of left ventricular (LV) volumes and function between human readers, a fully automated AI 2D algorithm, and the 3D Heart Model. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 109 patients who underwent 2D and 3D transthoracic echocardiography. LV end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (LVEDV, LVESV) and ejection fraction (LVEF) were measured by two operators, a commercially available AI algorithm (US2ai), and the 3D Heart Model. Global longitudinal strain (GLS) was measured by the integrated semi-automated software and the AI algorithm. Outcomes included measures of agreement [bias, limit of agreement and Pearson's correlation (R)]. Results: For LV volume measurements, the AI algorithm was strongly correlated with the average of the human operators (r = 0.89 for LVEDV and r = 0.92 for LVESV), which was higher than between the operators (r = 0.74 and r = 0.84, respectively, p < 0.01). The same trend was seen for measures of reliability with respect to LVEDV, but not LVESV. AI demonstrated comparable performance to human operators in measuring LVEF, while the 3D Heart Model had a weaker correlation and reliability compared with human operators and AI measurements. The correlation between human operators and AI for GLS was only moderate. Conclusion: This study demonstrates AI-based echocardiography as a promising tool for accurately assessing LV volumes and LVEF in clinical practice. AI-based measures demonstrated a significantly lower inter-operator variability, thereby improving the consistency and reliability of these assessments. Moreover, AI may prove particularly effective for conducting retrospective bulk analyses, offering a valuable tool for comprehensive evaluations of past data.
RESUMO
Despite evidence-based therapies, patients presenting with atherosclerosis involving more than one vascular bed, such as those with peripheral artery disease (PAD) and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD), constitute a particularly vulnerable group characterized by enhanced residual long-term risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACE), as well as major adverse limb events (MALE). The latter are progressively emerging as a difficult outcome to target, being correlated with increased mortality. Antithrombotic therapy is the mainstay of secondary prevention in both patients with PAD or CAD; however, the optimal intensity of such therapy is still a topic of debate, particularly in the post-acute and long-term setting. Recent well-powered randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have provided data in favor of a more intense antithrombotic therapy, such as prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor or a therapy with aspirin combined with an anticoagulant drug. Both approaches increase bleeding and selection of patients is a key issue. The aim of this review is, therefore, to discuss and summarize the most up-to-date available evidence for different strategies of anti-thrombotic therapies in patients with chronic PAD and CAD, particularly focusing on studies enrolling patients with both types of atherosclerotic disease and comparing a higher- versus a lower-intensity antithrombotic strategy. The final objective is to identify the optimal tailored approach in this setting, to achieve the greatest cardiovascular benefit and improve precision medicine.