2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This executive summary of the valvular heart disease guideline provides recommendations for clinicians to diagnose and manage valvular heart disease as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to March 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Reports, and other selected database relevant to this guideline. Structure: Many recommendations from the earlier valvular heart disease guidelines have been updated with new evidence and provides newer options for diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease. This summary includes only the recommendations from the full guideline which focus on diagnostic work-up, the timing and choice of surgical and catheter interventions, and recommendations for medical therapy. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in developing these guidelines.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. Structure: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

Heart Valve Endocarditis.

Heart valve replacement is the most common cardiac surgical operation performed worldwide for infective endocarditis (IE). Long-term durability and avoidance of infection relapse are the goals of the procedure. However, no detailed guidelines on prosthesis selection and surgical strategies are available, which should be guided by a comprehensive evaluation of the extent of the infection and its microbiological characteristics, the clinical profile of the patient and the risk of infection recurrence. Conventional mechanical or stented xenografts are the preferred choice for localized heart infection. In cases of complex IE with involvement of the root or the aorto-mitral continuity, the use of homograft is suggested according to the surgeon's and center's experience. The use of homograft needs to be balanced against the risk of structural degeneration. Prosthetic bioroot and prosthetic valved conduit with a mechanical or bioprosthetic valve are also considered acceptable alternatives in patients with aortic valve endocarditis. The further development of preservation techniques to enable the longer durability of allogeneic substitutes is required. We discuss current evidence for the use of valve substitutes in heart valve endocarditis and propose an evidence-based algorithm for the choice of treatment.

The Radial Artery for Coronary Bypass Grafting: The Fifth Decade.

BACKGROUND: In 1989, we reported the use of the radial artery as a second target conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting. However, underpowered randomized trials have reported differences in clinical outcomes between the radial artery and other grafts. As we approach 50 years of experience with radial artery grafting, we reviewed the literature to determine the second-best target vessel for coronary operations. METHODS: An electronic review of the literature with an emphasis on randomized controlled trials, propensity-matched observational series, and meta-analyses identified a large population of patients who received arterial conduit and saphenous vein grafts. RESULTS: The radial artery has been proven to be reliable as a second target conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting, with outcomes and patency rates superior to those for saphenous vein graft. It has also been proven to be both safe and effective as a third conduit in the territory of the right coronary artery. A paucity of evidence with few comparable series limits the use of the gastroepiploic artery. CONCLUSION: In its fifth decade of use, we can definitively conclude that the aorto-to-coronary radial bypass graft is the conduit of choice for coronary operations after the left internal thoracic artery to the left anterior descending artery.

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.

Recurrent wheezing 36 months after bronchiolitis is associated with rhinovirus infections and blood eosinophilia.

AIM: Links between respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis and asthma are well known, but few studies have dealt with wheezing following bronchiolitis induced by other viruses. We assessed the risk factors for recurrent wheezing in infants hospitalised for acute viral bronchiolitis. METHODS: We followed 313 infants for three years after they were hospitalised for bronchiolitis, caused by 14 different viruses, to identify risk factors for recurrent wheezing. Parents provided feedback on wheezing episodes during telephone interviews 12 (n = 266), 24 (n = 242) and 36 (n = 230) months after hospitalisation. RESULTS: The frequency of wheezing episodes diminished during the follow-up period: 137 children (51.7%) at 12 months, 117 (48.3%) at 24 months and 93 (40.4%) at 36 months. The risk of wheeze after three years was OR = 7.2 (95% CI 3.9-13.3) if they had episodes of wheezing during the first year after bronchiolitis, 16.8 (8.7-32.7) if they had episodes of wheezing during the second year and 55.0 (22.7-133.2) if they wheezed during both years. Blood eosinophils >400 cells/µL (OR 7.7; CI 1.4-41.8) and rhinovirus infections (3.1; 1.0-9.4) were the major risk factors for recurrent wheezing. CONCLUSION: Recurrent wheezing 36 months after infant bronchiolitis was associated with rhinoviruses and blood eosinophilia.

Improvement of myocardial performance (Tei) index closely reflects intrinsic improvement of cardiac function: assessment in revascularized hibernating myocardium.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial performance index (MPI), or Tei index, is an indicator of systolic and diastolic myocardial function. MPI increases in case of cardiac dysfunction; however, whether reversal of left ventricular dysfunction is also reflected by concomitant improvement (i.e., decrease) of MPI is unknown. METHODS: Fifty-two patients with chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy and viable myocardium by dobutamine stress echocardiography were studied by echocardiography before and more than 4 months after cardiac revascularization. Patients were in optimal medical therapy, which remained unchanged following revascularization. RESULTS: At baseline, ejection fraction (EF: 32 ± 6%) and wall motion score index (WMSI: 2.37 ± 0.32) were impaired, and MPI averaged 0.71 ± 0.19. Revascularization markedly improved EF (44 ± 10%, P < 0.0001) and WMSI (1.77 ± 0.44, P < 0.0001). MPI also improved (0.59 ± 0.26, P < 0.0001), and its decrease was significantly correlated with the improvement in EF (r =-0.68, P < 0.0001) and to the extent of viable myocardium (r =-0.45, P = 0.0007). Responders to revascularization (≥5% increase in EF at follow-up, n = 40% and 77%) achieved a significant improvement in MPI at follow-up in contrast with nonresponders (-23 ± 25% vs. 0.02 ± 0.18%, P = 0.001). Improvement in MPI was largely driven by a significant reduction in isovolumic contraction time (P < 0.001) with consequent prolongation of the ejection phase. CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic ischemic cardiomyopathy, MPI improves along with recovery of function, reflecting the intrinsic improvement of viable segments induced by revascularization.

Non-cardiac surgery in patients with valvular heart disease.

In patients with significant valvular heart disease (VHD) undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS), perioperative adverse cardiac events are a relevant issue. Although postoperative outcomes can be adversely affected by valve-related haemodynamic instability, recommended perioperative risk scores prioritise the risk of the surgical procedure and the presence of cardiovascular risk factors, neglecting the presence or extent of VHD. Perioperative management and anaesthetic approach should focus on the underlying type and severity of VHD, the compensatory mechanisms deployed by left ventricle and right ventricle and the type and risk of NCS. Due to the lack of randomised trials investigating different therapeutic approaches of valvular intervention prior to NCS, recommendations mainly rely on consensus opinion and inference based on large observational registries. As a general rule, valvular intervention is recommended prior to NCS in symptomatic patients or in those who meet standard criteria for cardiac intervention. In the absence of such conditions, it is reasonable to perform NCS with tailored anaesthetic management and close invasive perioperative haemodynamic monitoring. However, patient-specific management strategies should be discussed with the heart team preoperatively. Symptomatic patients with severe VHD or those undergoing high-risk NCS should ideally be treated at a high-volume medical centre that is equipped to manage haemodynamically complex patients during the perioperative period.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

Ischemic functional mitral regurgitation: from pathophysiological concepts to current treatment options. A systemic review for optimal strategy.

OBJECTIVE: The current treatment of ischemic functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) remains debated due to differences in inclusion criteria of randomized studies and baseline characteristics. Also, the role of left ventricular pathophysiology and the role of subvalvular apparatus have not been thoroughly investigated in recent literature. METHODS: A literature search was performed from PubMed inception to June 2020. RESULTS: Novel concepts of pathophysiology, such as the proportionate/disproportionate conceptual framework, the role of papillary muscles and left ventricular dysfunction, the impact of myocardial ischemia and revascularization, left ventricular remodeling, and the effect of restrictive annuloplasty or subvalvular procedures have been reviewed. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical benefits associated with the use of MitraClip is more evident in patients with disproportionate FMR with greater and sustained left ventricular reverse remodeling. Importantly, in the absence of myocardial revascularization, expansion of myocardial scar tissue and non-perfused areas of ischemic myocardium occur with time, and this impact on outcomes with a longer follow-up period cannot be quantified. In advanced phases of FMR, neither mitral ring annuloplasty nor percutaneous therapies could significantly modify the established pathoanatomic alterations.

2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This executive summary of the valvular heart disease guideline provides recommendations for clinicians to diagnose and manage valvular heart disease as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to March 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Reports, and other selected database relevant to this guideline. STRUCTURE: Many recommendations from the earlier valvular heart disease guidelines have been updated with new evidence and provides newer options for diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease. This summary includes only the recommendations from the full guideline which focus on diagnostic work-up, the timing and choice of surgical and catheter interventions, and recommendations for medical therapy. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in developing these guidelines.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This executive summary of the clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. These guidelines present an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: This clinical practice guideline for the evaluation and diagnosis of chest pain provides recommendations and algorithms for clinicians to assess and diagnose chest pain in adult patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from November 11, 2017, to May 1, 2020, encompassing randomized and nonrandomized trials, observational studies, registries, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through April 2021, were also considered. STRUCTURE: Chest pain is a frequent cause for emergency department visits in the United States. The "2021 AHA/ACC/ASE/CHEST/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR Guideline for the Evaluation and Diagnosis of Chest Pain" provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence on the assessment and evaluation of chest pain. This guideline presents an evidence-based approach to risk stratification and the diagnostic workup for the evaluation of chest pain. Cost-value considerations in diagnostic testing have been incorporated, and shared decision-making with patients is recommended.

Young athletes: Preventing sudden death by adopting a modern screening approach? A critical review and the opening of a debate.

Preventing sudden cardiac death (SCD) in athletes is a primary duty of sports cardiologists. Current recommendations for detecting high-risk cardiovascular conditions (hr-CVCs) are history and physical examination (H&P)-based. We discuss the effectiveness of H&P-based screening versus more-modern and accurate methods. In this position paper, we review current authoritative statements and suggest a novel alternative: screening MRI (s-MRI), supported by evidence from a preliminary population-based study (completed in 2018), and a prospective, controlled study in military recruits (in development). We present: 1. Literature-Based Comparisons (for diagnosing hr-CVCs): Two recent studies using traditional methods to identify hr-CVCs in >3,000 young athletes are compared with our s-MRI-based study of 5,169 adolescents. 2. Critical Review of Previous Results: The reported incidence of SCD in athletes is presently based on retrospective, observational, and incomplete studies. H&P's screening value seems minimal for structural heart disease, versus echocardiography (which improves diagnosis for high-risk cardiomyopathies) and s-MRI (which also identifies high-risk coronary artery anomalies). Electrocardiography is valuable in screening for potentially high-risk electrophysiological anomalies. 3. Proposed Project : We propose a prospective, controlled study (2 comparable large cohorts: one historical, one prospective) to compare: (1) diagnostic accuracy and resulting mortality-prevention performance of traditional screening methods versus questionnaire/electrocardiography/s-MRI, during 2-month periods of intense, structured exercise (in military recruits, in advanced state of preparation); (2) global costs and cost/efficiency between these two methods. This study should contribute significantly toward a comprehensive understanding of the incidence and causes of exercise-related mortality (including establishing a definition of hr-CVCs) while aiming to reduce mortality.

Effect of revascularizing viable myocardium on left ventricular diastolic function in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy.

AIMS: In patients with ischaemic left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and viable myocardium, revascularization improves systolic function. Diastolic dysfunction is also present in such patients; however, whether revascularization improves diastolic function also is largely unknown. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with chronic ischaemic cardiomyopathy [ejection fraction (EF) 32 +/- 6%, wall motion score index (WMSI) 2.45 +/- 0.33] and viable myocardium (low-dose dobutamine echocardiography) were examined at baseline and > or =4 months after revascularization. Diastolic function was assessed by transmitral pulsed-wave Doppler and tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) at the mitral annulus. RESULTS: At baseline, 62% of patients showed non-restrictive filling (non-RF) pattern, and 38% restrictive filling (RF) pattern. After revascularization, along with improvement in systolic function (EF 43 +/- 10%, WMSI 1.78 +/- 0.47, P = 0.0002 for both), diastolic filling improved in most patients, with only three patients still exhibiting RF pattern (P = 0.016); furthermore, E' velocity increased (32 +/- 42%, P = 0.0028) and E/E' decreased (-19 +/- 31%, P = 0.0378) compared with baseline. Left ventricular filling pressure also decreased, from 17.5 +/- 6.8 to 13.1 +/- 6.5 mmHg (P = 0.005). Improvement of diastolic function by TDI was related to the extent of viability at baseline (P = 0.0098) and to LV reverse remodelling after revascularization (P = 0.0092). CONCLUSION: In patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy, LV diastolic filling may largely improve after revascularization. Improvement of diastolic dysfunction is related to the amount of viable tissue and it may represent an additional advantage of revascularizing dyssinergic but viable myocardium.