Antithrombotic therapy after heart valve surgery: contemporary practice in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: There is a lack of high-quality data informing the optimal antithrombotic drug strategy following bioprosthetic heart valve replacement or valve repair. Disparity in recommendations from international guidelines reflects this. This study aimed to document current patterns of antithrombotic prescribing after heart valve surgery in the UK. METHODS: All UK consultant cardiac surgeons were e-mailed a custom-designed survey. The use of oral anticoagulant (OAC) and/or antiplatelet drugs following bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement or mitral valve replacement, or mitral valve repair (MVrep), for patients in sinus rhythm, without additional indications for antithrombotic medication, was assessed. Additionally, we evaluated anticoagulant choice following MVrep in patients with atrial fibrillation. RESULTS: We identified 260 UK consultant cardiac surgeons from 36 units, of whom 103 (40%) responded, with 33 units (92%) having at least 1 respondent. The greatest consensus was for patients undergoing bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement, in which 76% of surgeons favour initial antiplatelet therapy and 53% prescribe lifelong treatment. Only 8% recommend initial OAC. After bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement, 48% of surgeons use an initial OAC strategy (versus 42% antiplatelet), with 66% subsequently prescribing lifelong antiplatelet therapy. After MVrep, recommendations were lifelong antiplatelet agent alone (34%) or following 3 months OAC (20%), no antithrombotic agent (20%), or 3 months OAC (16%). After MVrep for patients with established atrial fibrillation, surgeons recommend warfarin (38%), a direct oral anticoagulant (37%) or have no preference between the 2 (25%). CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in the use of antithrombotic drugs after heart valve surgery in the UK and a lack of high-quality evidence to guide practice, underscoring the need for randomized studies.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on heart valve disease.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines are evidence-based recommendations for health and care in England. In late 2021, NICE published its first ever guidance on the investigation and management of adults with heart valve disease. This followed on from recent updates to the international societal practice guidelines on heart valve disease produced by the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (in 2020) and the European Society of Cardiology and European Association for Cardiothoracic Surgery (in 2021). The purpose of the NICE guidance has significant differences from societal guidelines, as NICE guidance is designed for implementation within the UK's taxpayer-funded National Health Service and thus must account not just for clinical effectiveness of treatments but cost-effectiveness also. This explains some of the differences between recent recommendations from these bodies, most notably in the treatment of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, in which NICE clearly explains that cost implications influenced their final guidance (which differs from the recently published European and North American guidelines). The aims of this review article are to provide an overview of the scope and recommendations of the NICE guideline and to compare and contrast the guidelines, highlighting reasons for differences between the guidance from professional societies and NICE and discussing the relative strengths and weaknesses of the NICE guideline.

Getting the best from the Heart Team: guidance for cardiac multidisciplinary meetings.

The purpose of this document is to update the existing joint British Societies recommendations on multidisciplinary meetings (MDMs) published in 2015 to reflect changes in practice. We aim to provide guidance on the structure and function of MDMs which should be taking place in every cardiac surgical centre. Out of scope are MDMs that do not require the routine presence of a cardiac surgeon such as electrophysiology MDMs and those which are not provided in every centre, such as complex aortic surgery.

Diagnostic accuracy of handheld cardiac ultrasound device for assessment of left ventricular structure and function: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Handheld ultrasound devices (HUD) has diagnostic value in the assessment of patients with suspected left ventricular (LV) dysfunction. This meta-analysis evaluates the diagnostic ability of HUD compared with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and assesses the importance of operator experience. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched in October 2020. Diagnostic studies using HUD and TTE imaging to determine LV dysfunction were included. Pooled sensitivities and specificities, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves were used to determine the diagnostic ability of HUD and evaluate the impact of operator experience on test accuracy. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies with 6062 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Experienced operators could predict reduced LV ejection fraction (LVEF), wall motion abnormality (WMA), LV dilatation and LV hypertrophy with pooled sensitivities of 88%, 85%, 89% and 85%, respectively, and pooled specificities of 96%, 95%, 98% and 91%, respectively. Non-experienced operators are able to detect cardiac abnormalities with reasonable sensitivity and specificity. There was a significant difference in the diagnostic accuracy between experienced and inexperienced users in LV dilatation, LVEF (moderate/severe) and WMA. The diagnostic OR for LVEF (moderate/severe), LV dilatation and WMA in an experienced hand was 276 (95% CI 58 to 1320), 225 (95% CI 87 to 578) and 90 (95% CI 31 to 265), respectively, compared with 41 (95% CI 18 to 94), 45 (95% CI 16 to 123) and 28 (95% CI 20 to 41), respectively, for inexperienced users. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis is the first to establish HUD as a powerful modality for predicting LV size and function. Experienced operators are able to accurately diagnose cardiac disease using HUD. A cautious, supervised approach should be implemented when imaging is performed by inexperienced users. This study provides a strong rationale for considering HUD as an auxiliary tool to physical examination in secondary care, to aid clinical decision making when considering referral for TTE. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020182429.

Genesis of a coronary-cameral fistula.

Coronary artery fistulae are a rare congenital abnormality. If such fistulae drain directly into a cardiac chamber, they are termed coronary-cameral fistulae. Such fistulae are usually congenital in origin or, occasionally, may arise as an iatrogenic complication of a cardiac procedure such as cardiac catheterization or surgery. We present a highly unusual case in which a patient presented to cardiac services on two occasions-nearly a decade apart-and was found to have coronary aneurysms initially, the largest of which expanded further and into the right atrium, thus creating a coronary-cameral fistula.

Outpatient management of heart valve disease following the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for present and future care.

The established processes for ensuring safe outpatient surveillance of patients with known heart valve disease (HVD), echocardiography for patients referred with new murmurs and timely delivery of surgical or transcatheter treatment for patients with severe disease have all been significantly impacted by the novel coronavirus pandemic. This has created a large backlog of work and upstaging of disease with consequent increases in risk and cost of treatment and potential for worse long-term outcomes. As countries emerge from lockdown but with COVID-19 endemic in society, precautions remain that restrict 'normal' practice. In this article, we propose a methodology for restructuring services for patients with HVD and provide recommendations pertaining to frequency of follow-up and use of echocardiography at present. It will be almost impossible to practice exactly as we did prior to the pandemic; thus, it is essential to prioritise patients with the greatest clinical need, such as those with symptomatic severe HVD. Local procedural waiting times will need to be considered, in addition to usual clinical characteristics in determining whether patients requiring intervention would be better suited having surgical or transcatheter treatment. We present guidance on the identification of stable patients with HVD that could have follow-up deferred safely and suggest certain patients that could be discharged from follow-up if waiting lists are triaged with appropriate clinical input. Finally, we propose that novel models of working enforced by the pandemic-such as increased use of virtual clinics-should be further developed and evaluated.

Role of viability imaging in the post-STICH era.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent results from prospective randomized controlled trials examining the management of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM) have questioned both the added value of revascularization over contemporary optimal medical therapy (OMT) and the use of viability testing as a gate-keeper to revascularization. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent trial evidence before discussing future perspectives in the field. RECENT FINDINGS: The Surgical Treatment of Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial, PPAR-2 trial and Heart Failure Revascularisation Trial have all reported their results within the past 5 years. None of these trials found revascularization superior to OMT in improving survival of ICM patients. Additionally, the STICH trial's viability substudy suggested that pretreatment viability testing was not beneficial. SUMMARY: ICM patients remain a clinical conundrum. The numerous limitations of the recent RCTs have led to uncertainty about optimal management. Revascularization continues to be offered to patients with evidence of myocardial viability. Further studies are required to answer the outstanding questions in the management of patients with ICM.

Clinical utility and prognostic value of appropriateness criteria in stress echocardiography for the evaluation of valvular heart disease.

We examined the prognostic value of stress echocardiography appropriateness criteria for evaluation of valvular heart disease in 100 consecutive patients. Of the studies, 49%, 36%, and 15% were classified as appropriate, uncertain, and inappropriate, respectively. Over a median of 12.6 months, 24 events (12 deaths and 12 heart failure admissions) occurred. The 12-month event-free survival was significantly reduced in patients with appropriate or uncertain studies compared with patients with inappropriate studies (p = 0.04 and p = 0.005, respectively). There was no survival difference between patients with an appropriate or uncertain indication (p = 0.1). The only independent predictors of events were a positive stress echocardiogram (hazard ratio: 15.5, p < 0.0001) and left ventricular ejection fraction (hazard ratio: 0.95, p = 0.02). The appropriateness criteria for evaluation of valvular heart disease provide the ability to differentiate between patients at high- (appropriate group) and low- (inappropriate group) risk of cardiac events. Reclassification of the uncertain group may improve the differential value of these criteria.

Echocardiography in the era of multimodality cardiovascular imaging.

Echocardiography remains the most frequently performed cardiac imaging investigation and is an invaluable tool for detailed and accurate evaluation of cardiac structure and function. Echocardiography, nuclear cardiology, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and cardiovascular-computed tomography comprise the subspeciality of cardiovascular imaging, and these techniques are often used together for a multimodality, comprehensive assessment of a number of cardiac diseases. This paper provides the general cardiologist and physician with an overview of state-of-the-art modern echocardiography, summarising established indications as well as highlighting advances in stress echocardiography, three-dimensional echocardiography, deformation imaging, and contrast echocardiography. Strengths and limitations of echocardiography are discussed as well as the growing role of real-time three-dimensional echocardiography in the guidance of structural heart interventions in the cardiac catheter laboratory.

The hibernating myocardium: current concepts, diagnostic dilemmas, and clinical challenges in the post-STICH era.

A very large body of evidence--predominantly retrospective--suggests that revascularization is superior to optimal medical therapy in patients with a significant amount of 'hibernating' myocardium. Contemporary cardiological practice has embraced this standard of practice, as many centres worldwide place great emphasis upon the results of viability testing by non-invasive imaging techniques in determining the need for coronary revascularization. This practice has been challenged by the recent results of the Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial, which suggested both lack of mortality benefit from revascularization and also from viability testing. In this review article, we have summarized the pathophysiology of hibernating myocardium, briefly discussed each of the non-invasive imaging modalities used in contemporary practice for detecting myocardial hibernation before critically appraising the prospective studies in this field, most importantly the main STICH trial and viability sub-study. STICH was clearly a complex trial but has not ended the question over the benefit of revascularization in ischaemic heart failure. Finally, we have suggested a possible methodology for an 'ideal trial' designed to evaluate the role of revascularization in such patients and also explored how viability testing should be used in clinical practice in the post-STICH era.

The role of urgent transthoracic echocardiography in the evaluation of patients presenting with acute chest pain.

Chest pain is one of the most frequent reasons for presentation to the Emergency Department. The possible causes of chest pain are numerous and diverse, but importantly, several conditions, such as acute coronary syndrome, pulmonary embolism and aortic dissection, require urgent management and, in some cases, may be life-threatening. In such situations, a prompt and accurate diagnosis is vital. Two-dimensional echocardiography is a safe, painless and rapid test that can be performed in the Emergency Department and ensure a correct diagnosis as well as identify other complications and help institute appropriate management strategies swiftly. We review the current indications for urgent echocardiography in this article, with reference to international management guidelines where available, when managing patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome, acute pulmonary embolism, acute aortic dissection, acute pericarditis and trauma. We also discuss the differences between comprehensive and FOcussed Cardiac UltraSound (FOCUS) echocardiography studies, along with the associated quality control and medicolegal implications.