Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Navitor System: Real-World United Kingdom Experience.

The Navitor transcatheter heart valve (THV) is the latest iteration of the Portico self-expanding valve system. Early prospective studies have shown promising outcomes, however, there is a lack of complementary 'real-world' data. This study aimed to assess early safety and efficacy outcomes of the Navitor THV using registry data from 6 high-volume United Kingdom transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) centers. Demographic, procedural, and in-hospital outcome data were retrieved from 6 United Kingdom centers. The primary safety end point was 30-day mortality. Primary efficacy end points were procedural success, mean aortic gradient, and ≥moderate paravalvular leak. Secondary end points included rates of new permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, and vascular injury. A total of 574 patients (mean age 83.4 years; 54.5% female) underwent Navitor TAVR between January 2020 and May 2023. The 30-day mortality in this patient cohort was 1.6%. Procedural success was 98.1%, mean echo-derived gradient post-TAVR was 7.7 ± 4.8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.2 to 8.3, p <0.001) and 5.1% of patients had ≥moderate paravalvular leak (sample proportion estimate [p̂] = 0.051, 95% CI [0.035, 0.073], p <0.001). New permanent pacemaker implantation to discharge was required in 11% (p̂ = 0.119, 95% CI 0.088 to 0.158, p <0.001), stroke occurred in 1.2% of patients (p̂ = 0.017, 95% CI 0.006 to 0.036, p <0.001) and significant vascular injury in 1.6% (p̂ = 0.014, 95% CI 0.005 to 0.032, p <0.001). In conclusion, early procedural outcomes with Navitor TAVR compare favorably to new-generation THVs. Procedural success was high with a low incidence of complications.

European Society of Cardiology Quality indicators for the care and outcomes of adults undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To develop a suite of quality indicators (QIs) for the evaluation of the care and outcomes for adults undergoing transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI). METHODS: We followed the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) methodology for the development of QIs. Key domains were identified by constructing a conceptual framework for the delivery of TAVI care. A list of candidate QIs were developed by conducting a systematic review of the literature. A modified Delphi method was then used to select the final set of QIs. Finally, we mapped the QIs to the EuroHeart Data Standards for TAVI to ascertain the extent to which the EuroHeart TAVI registry captures information to calculate the QIs. RESULTS: We formed an international group of experts in quality improvement and TAVI, including representatives from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions, the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the Association of Cardiovascular Nursing & Allied Professions. In total, 27 QIs were selected across eight domains of TAVI care, comprising 22 main (81%) and five secondary (19%) QIs. Of these, 19/27 (70%) are now being utilised in the EuroHeart TAVI registry. CONCLUSION: We present the 2023 ESC QIs for TAVI, developed using a standard methodology and in collaboration with ESC Associations. The EuroHeart TAVI registry allows calculation of the majority of the QIs, which may be used for benchmarking care and quality improvement initiatives.

Associations of health-related quality of life with major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events for individuals with ischaemic heart disease: systematic review, meta-analysis and evidence mapping.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in individuals with ischaemic heart disease (IHD). METHODS: Medline(R), Embase, APA PsycINFO and CINAHL (EBSCO) from inception to 3 April 2023 were searched. Studies reporting association of HRQoL, using a generic or cardiac-specific tool, with MACCE or components of MACCE for individuals with IHD were eligible for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale to assess the quality of the studies. Descriptive synthesis, evidence mapping and random-effects meta-analysis were performed stratified by HRQoL measures and effect estimates. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I2 statistic. RESULTS: Fifty-one articles were included with a total of 134 740 participants from 53 countries. Meta-analysis of 23 studies found that the risk of MACCE increased with lower baseline HeartQoL score (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.93) and Short Form Survey (SF-12) physical component score (PCS) (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.51). Risk of all-cause mortality increased with a lower HeartQoL (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.01), EuroQol 5-dimension (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.22), SF-36 PCS (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.41), SF-36 mental component score (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.30). CONCLUSIONS: This study found an inverse association between baseline values or change in HRQoL and MACCE or components of MACCE in individuals with IHD, albeit with between-study heterogeneity. Standardisation and routine assessment of HRQoL in clinical practice may help risk stratify individuals with IHD for tailored interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021234638.

Cohort profile: Evaluation of the Methods and Management of Acute Coronary Events (EMMACE) Longitudinal Cohort.

AIMS: The Evaluation of the Methods and Management of Acute Coronary Events (EMMACE) longitudinal cohort study aims to investigate health trajectories of individuals following hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS AND RESULTS: EMMACE is a linked multicentre prospective cohort study of 14 899 patients with MI admitted to 77 hospitals in England who participated in the EMMACE-3 and -4 studies between 1st November 2011 and 24th June 2015. Long-term follow-up of the EMMACE cohorts was conducted through the EMMACE-XL (27th September 2020 to 31st March 2022) and EMMACE-XXL (1st July 2021 to 1st July 2023) studies. EMMACE collected individual participant data for health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measured by three-level EuroQol five-dimension and visual analogy scale at admission, 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and 10 years follow-up, as well as medications, medication adherence, beliefs about medicines, Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale, and illness perceptions. Participant data were deterministically linked to the Myocardial Infarction National Audit Project (MINAP) for information on baseline treatments and comorbidities, Hospital Episode Statistics Admitted Patient Care (for cause-specific hospitalization data), and the Office for National Statistics (for mortality data) up to 2020. CONCLUSION: EMMACE is a nationwide prospective cohort that will provide unique insights into fatal and non-fatal outcomes, medication adherence, and HRQoL following MI.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01808027 and NCT01819103.

Effectiveness of GRACE risk score in patients admitted to hospital with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (UKGRIS): parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of risk stratification using the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score (GRS) for patients presenting to hospital with suspected non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. DESIGN: Parallel group cluster randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Patients presenting with suspected non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome to 42 hospitals in England between 9 March 2017 and 30 December 2019. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged ≥18 years with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. INTERVENTION: Hospitals were randomised (1:1) to patient management by standard care or according to the GRS and associated guidelines. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were use of guideline recommended management and time to the composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, new onset heart failure hospital admission, and readmission for cardiovascular event. Secondary measures included the duration of hospital stay, EQ-5D-5L (five domain, five level version of the EuroQoL index), and the composite endpoint components. RESULTS: 3050 participants (1440 GRS, 1610 standard care) were recruited in 38 UK clusters (20 GRS, 18 standard care). The mean age was 65.7 years (standard deviation 12), 69% were male, and the mean baseline GRACE scores were 119.5 (standard deviation 31.4) and 125.7 (34.4) for GRS and standard care, respectively. The uptake of guideline recommended processes was 77.3% for GRS and 75.3% for standard care (odds ratio 1.16, 95% confidence interval 0.70 to 1.92, P=0.56). The time to the first composite cardiac event was not significantly improved by the GRS (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.16, P=0.37). Baseline adjusted EQ-5D-5L utility at 12 months (difference -0.01, 95% confidence interval -0.06 to 0.04) and the duration of hospital admission within 12 months (mean 11.2 days, standard deviation 18 days v 11.8 days, 19 days) were similar for GRS and standard care. CONCLUSIONS: In adults presenting to hospital with suspected non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome, the GRS did not improve adherence to guideline recommended management or reduce cardiovascular events at 12 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 29731761.

Association of beta-blockers beyond 1 year after myocardial infarction and cardiovascular outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Beta-blockers (BB) are an established treatment following myocardial infarction (MI). However, there is uncertainty as to whether BB beyond the first year of MI have a role in patients without heart failure or left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). METHODS: A nationwide cohort study was conducted including 43 618 patients with MI between 2005 and 2016 in the Swedish register for coronary heart disease. Follow-up started 1 year after hospitalisation (index date). Patients with heart failure or LVSD up until the index date were excluded. Patients were allocated into two groups according to BB treatment. Primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, unscheduled revascularisation and hospitalisation for heart failure. Outcomes were analysed using Cox and Fine-Grey regression models after inverse propensity score weighting. RESULTS: Overall, 34 253 (78.5%) patients received BB and 9365 (21.5%) did not at the index date 1 year following MI. The median age was 64 years and 25.5% were female. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the unadjusted rate of primary outcome was lower among patients who received versus not received BB (3.8 vs 4.9 events/100 person-years) (HR 0.76; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.04). Following inverse propensity score weighting and multivariable adjustment, the risk of the primary outcome was not different according to BB treatment (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.93 to 1.04). Similar findings were observed when censoring for BB discontinuation or treatment switch during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this nationwide cohort study suggests that BB treatment beyond 1 year of MI for patients without heart failure or LVSD was not associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes.

European Society of Cardiology quality indicators for the care and outcomes of adults with pulmonary arterial hypertension. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology.

AIMS: To develop a suite of quality indicators (QIs) for the evaluation of the care and outcomes for adults with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). METHODS AND RESULTS: We followed the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) methodology for the development of QIs. This included (i) the identification of key domains of care for the management of PAH, (ii) the proposal of candidate QIs following systematic review of the literature, and (iii) the selection of a set of QIs using a modified Delphi method. The process was undertaken in parallel with the writing of the 2022 ESC/European Respiratory Society (ERS) guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary hypertension and involved the Task Force chairs, experts in PAH, Heart Failure Association (HFA) members and patient representatives. We identified five domains of care for patients with PAH: structural framework, diagnosis and risk stratification, initial treatment, follow-up, and outcomes. In total, 23 main and one secondary QIs for PAH were selected. CONCLUSION: This document presents the ESC QIs for PAH, describes their development process and offers scientific rationale for their selection. The indicators may be used to quantify and improve adherence to guideline-recommended clinical practice and improve patient outcomes.

European Society of Cardiology quality indicators for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death.

To develop a suite of quality indicators (QIs) for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias (VA) and the prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD). The Working Group comprised experts in heart rhythm management including Task Force members of the 2022 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Clinical Practice Guidelines for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD, members of the European Heart Rhythm Association, international experts, and a patient representative. We followed the ESC methodology for QI development, which involves (i) the identification of the key domains of care for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD by constructing a conceptual framework of care, (ii) the development of candidate QIs by conducting a systematic review of the literature, (iii) the selection of the final set of QIs using a modified-Delphi method, and (iv) the evaluation of the feasibility of the developed QIs. We identified eight domains of care for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD: (i) structural framework, (ii) screening and diagnosis, (iii) risk stratification, (iv) patient education and lifestyle modification, (v) pharmacological treatment, (vi) device therapy, (vii) catheter ablation, and (viii) outcomes, which included 17 main and 4 secondary QIs across these domains. Following a standardized methodology, we developed 21 QIs for the management of patients with VA and the prevention of SCD. The implementation of these QIs will improve the care and outcomes of patients with VA and contribute to the prevention of SCD.

Data standards for atrial fibrillation/flutter and catheter ablation: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart).

AIMS: Standardized data definitions are essential for monitoring and assessment of care and outcomes in observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart) project of the European Society of Cardiology aimed to develop contemporary data standards for atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL) and catheter ablation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used the EuroHeart methodology for the development of data standards and formed a Working Group comprising 23 experts in AF/AFL and catheter ablation registries, as well as representatives from the European Heart Rhythm Association and EuroHeart. We conducted a systematic literature review of AF/AFL and catheter ablation registries and data standard documents to generate candidate variables. We used a modified Delphi method to reach a consensus on a final variable set. For each variable, the Working Group developed permissible values and definitions, and agreed as to whether the variable was mandatory (Level 1) or additional (Level 2). In total, 70 Level 1 and 92 Level 2 variables were selected and reviewed by a wider Reference Group of 42 experts from 24 countries. The Level 1 variables were implemented into the EuroHeart IT platform as the basis for continuous registration of individual patient data. CONCLUSION: By means of a structured process and working with international stakeholders, harmonized data standards for AF/AFL and catheter ablation for AF/AFL were developed. In the context of the EuroHeart project, this will facilitate country-level quality of care improvement, international observational research, registry-based RCTs, and post-marketing surveillance of devices and pharmacotherapies.

Methodology for the development of international clinical data standards for common cardiovascular conditions: European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart).

AIMS: Data standards are consensual specifications for the representation of data arising from different sources. If provided with internationally harmonized variables, permissible values, and clinical definitions, they have the potential to enable reliable between- and within-country analysis of care and outcomes. The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart) is a European Society of Cardiology project that allows participating countries to collect patient data to undertake quality improvement, observational studies, drug and device surveillance, and registry-based randomized controlled trials for cardiovascular conditions. This paper describes the methodology for development of harmonized data standards for EuroHeart. METHODS AND RESULTS: We adopted a five-step process for the development of harmonized data standards. The process includes (i) identification of clinical domains for data standard development by evaluating specific cardiovascular conditions with high prevalence and opportunities for quality improvement; (ii) construction of data standard specifications by systematic review of the literature; (iii) selection of variables by a domain-specific Working Group using a modified Delphi method; (iv) validation of data standards by a domain-specific Reference Group; and (v) implementation of the developed data standards into an IT platform. CONCLUSION: This paper describes the approach adopted by EuroHeart for the development of clinical data standards for cardiovascular disease. The methodology has been developed and is used by EuroHeart to create a suite of international data standards for cardiovascular diseases. The EuroHeart data standards may be used to systematically capture individual patient data about clinical care and for research.

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.

Data standards for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart).

AIMS: Standardized data definitions are necessary for the quantification of quality of care and patient outcomes in observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart) project of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) aims to create pan-European data standards for cardiovascular diseases and interventions, including transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We followed the EuroHeart methodology for cardiovascular data standard development. A Working Group of 29 members representing 12 countries was established and included a patient representative, as well as experts in the management of valvular heart disease from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery. We conducted a systematic review of the literature and used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on a final set of variables. For each variable, the Working Group provided a definition, permissible values, and categorized the variable as mandatory (Level 1) or additional (Level 2) based on its clinical importance and feasibility. In total, 93 Level 1 and 113 Level 2 variables were selected, with the level 1 variables providing the dataset for registration of patients undergoing TAVI on the EuroHeart IT platform. CONCLUSION: This document provides details of the EuroHeart data standards for TAVI processes of care and in-hospital outcomes. In the context of EuroHeart, this will facilitate quality improvement, observational research, registry-based RCTs and post-marketing surveillance of devices, and pharmacotherapies. ONE-SENTENCE SUMMARY: The EuroHeart data standards for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are a set of internationally agreed data variables and definitions that once implemented will facilitate improvement of quality of care and outcomes for patients receiving TAVI.

Sex differences in health-related quality of life trajectories following myocardial infarction: national longitudinal cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate sex-based differences in baseline values and longitudinal trajectories of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in a large cohort of myocardial infarction (MI) survivors after adjusting for other important factors. DESIGN: Longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Population-based longitudinal study the Evaluation of the Methods and Management of Acute Coronary Events study linked with national cardiovascular registry. Data were collected from 77 hospitals in England between 1 November 2011 and 24 June 2015. PARTICIPANTS: 9551 patients with MI. Patients were eligible for the study if they were ≥18 years of age. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: HRQoL was measured by EuroQol five-dimension, visual analogue scale (EQ-5D, EQ VAS) survey at baseline, 1, 6 and 12 months after discharge. Multi-level linear and logistic regression models coupled with inverse probability weighted propensity scoring were used to evaluate sex differences in HRQoL following MI. RESULTS: Of the 9551 patients with MI and complete data on sex, 25.1% (2,397) were women. At baseline, women reported lower HRQoL (EQ VAS (mean (SD) 59.8 (20.4) vs 64.5 (20.9)) (median (IQR) 60.00 (50.00-75.00) vs 70.00 (50.00-80.00))) (EQ-5D (mean (SD) 0.66 (0.31) vs 0.74 (0.28)) (median (IQR) 0.73 (0.52-0.85) vs 0.81 (0.62-1.00))) and were more likely to report problems in each HRQoL domain compared with men. In the covariate balanced and adjusted multi-level model sex differences in HRQoL persisted during follow-up, with lower EQ VAS and EQ-5D scores in women compared with men (adjusted EQ VAS model sex coefficient: -4.41, 95% CI -5.16 to -3.66 and adjusted EQ-5D model sex coefficient: -0.07, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Women have lower HRQoL compared with men at baseline and during 12 months follow-up after MI. Tailored interventions for women following an MI could improve their quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04598048, NCT01808027, NCT01819103.

Association between heart failure quality of care and mortality: a population-based cohort study using nationwide registries.

AIMS: To evaluate the quality of heart failure (HF) care using the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) quality indicators (QIs) for HF and to assess whether better quality of care is associated with improved outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a nationwide cohort study using the Swedish HF registry, consisting of patients with any type of HF at their first outpatient visit or hospitalization. Independent participant data for quality of HF care was evaluated against the ESC QIs for HF, and association with mortality estimated using multivariable Cox regression. In total, 43 704 patients from 80 hospitals across Sweden enrolled between 2013-2019 were included, with median follow-up 23.6 months. Of the 16 QIs for HF, 13 could be measured and 5 were inversely associated with all-cause mortality during follow-up. Higher attainment (≥50% vs. <50% attainment) of the composite opportunity-based score (combination of QIs into a single score) for patients with reduced ejection fraction was associated with lower all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 0.81; 95% confidence interval 0.72-0.91). Attainment of the composite score was less in the outpatient than inpatient setting (adjusted odds ratio 0.85; 95% confidence interval 0.72-0.99). Quality of care varied across hospitals, with assessment of health-related quality of life being the indicator with the widest variation in attainment (interquartile range 61.7%). CONCLUSION: Quality of HF care may be measured using the ESC HF QIs. In Sweden, attainment of HF care evaluated using the QIs demonstrated between and within hospital variation, and many QIs were inversely associated with mortality.

Rates of Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in England and Wales: Impact of COURAGE and ORBITA Trials.

Background There are limited data about how COURAGE (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation) and ORBITA (Objective Randomized Blinded Investigation With Optimal Medical Therapy of Angioplasty in Stable Angina) trials have impacted percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practices at regional or national level. We evaluated temporal trends in elective PCI rates for stable angina and, specifically, examined the impact of the COURAGE and ORBITA trials on PCI practices in England and Wales. Methods and Results We used national PCI data comprising >1.2 million patients undergoing PCI between January 2006 and December 2019. Patient demographics, procedural details, and clinical outcomes were analyzed, and temporal trends in PCI rates for stable angina were compared before and after the publication of the COURAGE and ORBITA trials. Of 1 245 802 PCI procedures, 430 248 (34.5%) were performed for stable angina. Over the study period, the number of elective PCI procedures per year (30 823 in 2006 to 34 103 in 2019) and per 100 000 population estimates (50.7 in 2006 to 58.4 in 2019) remained stable. The proportion of patients undergoing elective PCI without angina symptoms almost doubled from 5.1% to 9.7%. The incidence rate of elective PCI volume after the COURAGE trial, published in 2007, was not different from before the trial was published (incidence rate ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.69-1.62]). It also remained stable after the publication of the ORBITA trial in 2017 (incidence rate ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.74-1.23]). Conclusions In this nationwide analysis, rates of elective PCI for stable angina remained stable over 14 years. Publication of the COURAGE and ORBITA trials had no impact on elective PCI activity.

Data standards for acute coronary syndrome and percutaneous coronary intervention: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart).

Standardized data definitions are essential for monitoring and benchmarking the quality of care and patient outcomes in observational studies and randomized controlled trials. There are no contemporary pan-European data standards for the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart) project of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) aimed to develop such data standards for ACS and PCI. Following a systematic review of the literature on ACS and PCI data standards and evaluation of contemporary ACS and PCI registries, we undertook a modified Delphi process involving clinical and registry experts from 11 European countries, as well as representatives from relevant ESC Associations, including the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and Acute CardioVascular Care (ACVC). This resulted in final sets of 68 and 84 'mandatory' variables and several catalogues of optional variables for ACS and PCI, respectively. Data definitions were provided for these variables, which have been programmed as the basis for continuous registration of individual patient data in the online EuroHeart IT platform. By means of a structured process and the interaction with major stakeholders, internationally harmonized data standards for ACS and PCI have been developed. In the context of the EuroHeart project, this will facilitate country-level quality of care improvement, international observational research, registry-based randomized trials, and post-marketing surveillance of devices and pharmacotherapies.

Data standards for heart failure: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart).

Standardized data definitions are essential for assessing the quality of care and patient outcomes in observational studies and randomized controlled trials. The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomized Trials (EuroHeart) project of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) aims to create contemporary pan-European data standards for cardiovascular diseases, including heart failure (HF). We followed the EuroHeart methodology for cardiovascular data standard development. A Working Group including experts in HF registries, representatives from the Heart Failure Association of the ESC, and the EuroHeart was formed. Using Embase and Medline (2016-21), we conducted a systematic review of the literature on data standards, registries, and trials to identify variables pertinent to HF. A modified Delphi method was used to reach a consensus on the final set of variables. For each variable, the Working Group developed data definitions and agreed on whether it was mandatory (Level 1) or additional (Level 2). In total, 84 Level 1 and 79 Level 2 variables were selected for nine domains of HF care. These variables were reviewed by an international Reference Group with the Level 1 variables providing the dataset for registration of patients with HF on the EuroHeart IT platform. By means of a structured process and interaction with international stakeholders, harmonized data standards for HF have been developed. In the context of the EuroHeart, this will facilitate quality improvement, international observational research, registry-based randomized trials, and post-marketing surveillance of devices and pharmacotherapies across Europe.

Subcutaneous ICD for more and transvenous ICD for few?!

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have been shown to reduce the risk of sudden cardiac death in primary or secondary prevention with thousands of ICDs implanted every year worldwide. Whilst ICD are more commonly implanted transvenously (TV), this approach carries high risk of peri- and post-procedural complications. Subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) have been introduced to overcome the intravascular complications of TV system by placing all metalware outside the chest cavity for those with an indication for a defibrillator and no pacing requirements. In conclusion, a review of the current guidelines recommendations regarding S-ICD may be needed considering the emerging evidence which shows high efficacy and safety with contemporary devices and programming algorithms. A stronger recommendation may be developed for selective patients who have an indication for single-chamber ICD in the absence of negative screening, recurrent monomorphic ventricular tachycardia, cardiac resynchronization therapy, or pacemaker indication. These criteria encapsulate a large proportion (around 70%!) of all ICD eligible patients.

European Society of Cardiology quality indicators for the care and outcomes of adults with heart failure. Developed by the Working Group for Heart Failure Quality Indicators in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology.

AIMS: To develop a suite of quality indicators (QIs) for the evaluation of the quality of care for adults with heart failure (HF). METHODS AND RESULTS: We followed the ESC methodology for QI development, which involved (i) the identification of the key domains of care for the management of HF by constructing a conceptual framework of HF care, (ii) the development of candidate QIs by conducting a systematic review of the literature, (iii) the selection of the final set of QIs using a modified Delphi method, and (iv) the evaluation of the feasibility of the developed QIs. The Working Group comprised experts in HF management including Task Force members of the 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Clinical Practice Guidelines for HF, members of the Heart Failure Association (HFA), Quality Indicator Committee and a patient representative. In total, 12 main and 4 secondary QIs were selected across five domains of care for the management of HF: (1) structural framework, (2) patient assessment, (3) initial treatment, (4) therapy optimization, and (5) assessment of patient health-related quality of life. CONCLUSION: We present the ESC HFA QIs for HF, describe their development process and provide the scientific rationale for their selection. The indicators may be used to quantify and improve adherence to guideline-recommended clinical practice and thus improve patient outcomes.

European Society of Cardiology methodology for the development of quality indicators for the quantification of cardiovascular care and outcomes.

AIMS: It is increasingly recognized that tools are required for assessing and benchmarking quality of care in order to improve it. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) is developing a suite of quality indicators (QIs) to evaluate cardiovascular care and support the delivery of evidence-based care. This paper describes the methodology used for their development. METHODS AND RESULTS: We propose a four-step process for the development of the ESC QIs. For a specific clinical area with a gap in care delivery, the QI development process includes: (i) the identification of key domains of care by constructing a conceptual framework of care; (ii) the construction of candidate QIs by conducting a systematic review of the literature; (iii) the selection of a final set of QIs by obtaining expert opinions using the modified Delphi method; and (iv) the undertaking of a feasibility assessment by evaluating different ways of defining the QI specifications for the proposed data collection source. For each of the four steps, key methodological areas need to be addressed to inform the implementation process and avoid misinterpretation of the measurement results. CONCLUSION: Detailing the methodology for the ESC QIs construction enables healthcare providers to develop valid and feasible metrics to measure and improve the quality of cardiovascular care. As such, high-quality evidence may be translated into clinical practice and the 'evidence-practice' gap closed.