European Society of Cardiology quality indicators for the cardiovascular pre-operative assessment and management of patients considered for non-cardiac surgery. Developed in collaboration with the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care.

AIMS: To establish a set of quality indicators (QIs) for the cardiovascular (CV) assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Quality Indicator Committee of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) in collaboration with Task Force members of the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS followed the ESC methodology for QI development. This included (1) identification, by constructing a conceptual framework of care, of domains of the CV assessment, and management of patients with risk factors or established cardiovascular disease (CVD) who are considered for or undergoing NCS, (2) development of candidate QIs following a systematic literature review, (3) selection of the final set of QIs using a modified Delphi method, and (4) evaluation of the feasibility of the developed QIs. In total, eight main and nine secondary QIs were selected across six domains: (1) structural framework (written policy), (2) patient education and quality of life (CV risk discussion), (3) peri-operative risk assessment (indication for diagnostic tests), (4) peri-operative risk mitigation (use of hospital therapies), (5) follow-up (post-discharge assessment), and (6) outcomes (major CV events). CONCLUSION: We present the 2022 ESC/ESAIC QIs for the CV assessment and management of patients with risk factors or established CVD who are considered for or are undergoing NCS y. These indicators are supported by evidence from the literature, underpinned by expert consensus, and align with the 2022 ESC Guidelines on CV assessment and management of patients undergoing NCS.

Assessment and Mitigation of Bleeding Risk in Atrial Fibrillation and Venous Thromboembolism: Executive Summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper.

While there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision for initiating and continuing anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static "one-off" assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by aging, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this executive summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with a view to summarizing "best practice" when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, and review established bleeding risk factors and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism, are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

Comparing atrial fibrillation guidelines: Focus on stroke prevention, bleeding risk assessment and oral anticoagulant recommendations.

Clinical practice in atrial fibrillation (AF) patient management is constantly evolving. In the past 3 years, various new AF guidelines or focused updates have been published, given this rapidly evolving field. In 2019, the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association published a focused update of the 2014 guidelines. In 2020, both the European Society of Cardiology and the Canadian Cardiovascular Society released their new guidelines. Finally, the most recent guidelines were those published in 2021 by the Asian Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, which updates their 2017 version and the 2021 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. In the present narrative review, we compare these guidelines, emphasizing similarities and differences in the following mainstay elements of patient care: thromboembolic risk assessment, oral anticoagulants (OACs) prescription, bleeding risk evaluation, and integrated patient management. A formal evaluation of baseline thromboembolic and bleeding risks and their reassessment during follow-up is evenly recommended, although some differences in using risk stratification scores. OACs prescription is highly encouraged where appropriate, and prescription algorithms are broadly similar. The importance of an integrated and multidisciplinary approach to patient care is emerging, aiming to address several different aspects of a multifaceted disease.

Assessment and mitigation of bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism: A Position Paper from the ESC Working Group on Thrombosis, in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association, the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care and the Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society.

Whilst there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision to initiate and continue anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both the thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static 'one off' assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by ageing, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this Consensus Document, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with the view to summarizing 'best practice' when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, review established bleeding risk factors, and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice.

European Society of Cardiology guidance for the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease during the COVID-19 pandemic: part 1-epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis.

AIMS: Since its emergence in early 2020, the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has reached pandemic levels, and there have been repeated outbreaks across the globe. The aim of this two-part series is to provide practical knowledge and guidance to aid clinicians in the diagnosis and management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in association with COVID-19. METHODS AND RESULTS: A narrative literature review of the available evidence has been performed, and the resulting information has been organized into two parts. The first, reported here, focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and diagnosis of cardiovascular (CV) conditions that may be manifest in patients with COVID-19. The second part, which will follow in a later edition of the journal, addresses the topics of care pathways, treatment, and follow-up of CV conditions in patients with COVID-19. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive review is not a formal guideline but rather a document that provides a summary of current knowledge and guidance to practicing clinicians managing patients with CVD and COVID-19. The recommendations are mainly the result of observations and personal experience from healthcare providers. Therefore, the information provided here may be subject to change with increasing knowledge, evidence from prospective studies, and changes in the pandemic. Likewise, the guidance provided in the document should not interfere with recommendations provided by local and national healthcare authorities.

Dynamic risk assessment to improve quality of care in patients with atrial fibrillation: the 7th AFNET/EHRA Consensus Conference.

AIMS: The risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF) and its complications continues to increase, despite good progress in preventing AF-related strokes. METHODS AND RESULTS: This article summarizes the outcomes of the 7th Consensus Conference of the Atrial Fibrillation NETwork (AFNET) and the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) held in Lisbon in March 2019. Sixty-five international AF specialists met to present new data and find consensus on pressing issues in AF prevention, management and future research to improve care for patients with AF and prevent AF-related complications. This article is the main outcome of an interactive, iterative discussion between breakout specialist groups and the meeting plenary. AF patients have dynamic risk profiles requiring repeated assessment and risk-based therapy stratification to optimize quality of care. Interrogation of deeply phenotyped datasets with outcomes will lead to a better understanding of the cardiac and systemic effects of AF, interacting with comorbidities and predisposing factors, enabling stratified therapy. New proposals include an algorithm for the acute management of patients with AF and heart failure, a call for a refined, data-driven assessment of stroke risk, suggestions for anticoagulation use in special populations, and a call for rhythm control therapy selection based on risk of AF recurrence. CONCLUSION: The remaining morbidity and mortality in patients with AF needs better characterization. Likely drivers of the remaining AF-related problems are AF burden, potentially treatable by rhythm control therapy, and concomitant conditions, potentially treatable by treating these conditions. Identifying the drivers of AF-related complications holds promise for stratified therapy.

The Euro Heart Survey and EURObservational Research Programme (EORP) in atrial fibrillation registries: contribution to epidemiology, clinical management and therapy of atrial fibrillation patients over the last 20 years.

Management of atrial fibrillation (AF) may be challenging in clinical practice. Given the complexity of AF patients and the continuous advances in AF clinical management, there is a need for standardized programmes aimed at collecting so-called 'real-world clinical practice data' regarding the epidemiology, diagnostic/therapeutic/management practices and assessing adherence to guidelines. Over the past 20 years, the number of registries and surveys based on real-world AF patients has been dramatically increased. In Europe, based on the Euro Heart Survey (EHS) and the EURObservational Research Programme (EORP), a large series of studies based on these prospective, observational, large-scale multicentre registries on AF have been published. This narrative review gives an overview of these two projects on AF led by the European Society of Cardiology, focusing mainly on the contribution that these studies have provided to AF management and patient outcomes. Both the EHS and the EORP registries have collected a large amount of data regarding contemporary clinical practice, and despite some limitations, mainly related to their observational nature, these registries have contributed to our knowledge and clinical management of AF patients.

Patients' knowledge and attitudes regarding living with implantable electronic devices: results of a multicentre, multinational patient survey conducted by the European Heart Rhythm Association.

The purpose of this patient survey was to analyse the knowledge, experiences, and attitudes regarding cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIED) in patients with pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs), or cardiac resynchronization devices. Of the 1644 patients with CIEDs from seven European countries, 88% were over 50 years of age. Most patients (90%) knew what device they were implanted with and felt sufficiently informed about the indications for therapy. As many as 42% of patients needed additional information on the battery replacement and limitations in physical activity. The self-reported incidence of complications was 9%, and among these, a quarter of the respondents felt insufficiently informed about the possibility of complications and their management. The majority of patients (83%) were followed by face-to-face visits, which was the most commonly preferred follow-up strategy by the patients. Nearly 75% of the patients reported improved quality of life after device implantation, but about 40% had worries about their device. Less than 20% had discussed with their physician or thought about device handling in the end-of-life circumstances or end-stage disease. Notably, almost 20% of the ICD patients did not wish to answer the question regarding what they wanted to be done with their ICD in case of end-stage disease, indicating the challenges in approaching these issues.

Hypertension and cardiac arrhythmias: a consensus document from the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and ESC Council on Hypertension, endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE).

Hypertension is a common cardiovascular risk factor leading to heart failure (HF), coronary artery disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease and chronic renal insufficiency. Hypertensive heart disease can manifest as many cardiac arrhythmias, most commonly being atrial fibrillation (AF). Both supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias may occur in hypertensive patients, especially in those with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) or HF. Also, some of the antihypertensive drugs commonly used to reduce blood pressure, such as thiazide diuretics, may result in electrolyte abnormalities (e.g. hypokalaemia, hypomagnesemia), further contributing to arrhythmias, whereas effective control of blood pressure may prevent the development of the arrhythmias such as AF. In recognizing this close relationship between hypertension and arrhythmias, the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Council on Hypertension convened a Task Force, with representation from the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), and Sociedad Latinoamericana de Estimulación Cardíaca y Electrofisiología (SOLEACE), with the remit to comprehensively review the available evidence to publish a joint consensus document on hypertension and cardiac arrhythmias, and to provide up-to-date consensus recommendations for use in clinical practice. The ultimate judgment regarding care of a particular patient must be made by the healthcare provider and the patient in light of all of the circumstances presented by that patient.

Differences in attitude, education, and knowledge about oral anticoagulation therapy among patients with atrial fibrillation in Europe: result of a self-assessment patient survey conducted by the European Heart Rhythm Association.

The purpose of this patient survey was to analyse the knowledge about blood thinning medications relative to gender, age, education, and region of residence in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). A total of 1147 patients with AF [mean age 66 ± 13 years, 529 (45%) women] from eight European countries responded to this survey. Most patients understood that the indication for anticoagulation therapy was to 'thin the blood', but 8.1% responded that the purpose of the medication was to treat the arrhythmia. Patients with college or university grades reported less frequent deviations from their target INR range compared with those without schooling (2.8% vs. 5.1%, P < 0.05). The awareness of anticoagulation-related risk of bleedings was lowest in patients without schooling (38.5%) and highest in those with college and university education (57.0%), P < 0.05. The same pattern was also observed regarding patient's awareness of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs): 56.5% of the patients with university education and only 20.5% of those without schooling (P < 0.05) knew about NOACs, indicating that information about new anticoagulation therapies remains well below the target. Bleeding events were statistically less frequent in patients on NOACs compared with vitamin K antagonists. The education level and patients' knowledge have a direct influence on the global management of the anticoagulation.

Patients' attitude and knowledge about oral anticoagulation therapy: results of a self-assessment survey in patients with atrial fibrillation conducted by the European Heart Rhythm Association.

The purpose of this European Heart Rhythm Association survey was to assess the attitude, level of education, and knowledge concerning oral anticoagulants (OACs) among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) taking vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or antiplatelets. A total of 1147 patients with AF [mean age 66 ± 13 years, 529 (45%) women] from 8 selected European countries responded to this survey. The overall use of OACs and antiplatelets was 77 and 15.3%, respectively. Of the patients taking OACs, 67% were on VKAs, 33% on NOACs, and 17.9% on a combination of OACs and antiplatelets. Among patients on VKAs, 91% correctly stated the target international normalized ratio (INR) level. The proportion of patients on VKA medication who were aware that monthly INR monitoring was required for this treatment and the proportion of patients on NOAC who knew that renal function monitoring at least annually was mandatory for NOACs was 76 and 21%, respectively. An indirect estimation of compliance indicated that 14.5% of patients temporarily discontinued the treatment, and 26.5% of patients reported having missed at least one dose. The survey shows that there is room for improvement regarding education and adherence of patients taking OACs, particularly regarding monitoring requirements for NOACs.