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.

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: 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Are the dynamic changes of the aortic root determinant for thrombosis or leaflet degeneration after transcatheter aortic valve replacement?

The role of the aortic root is to convert the accumulated elastic energy during systole into kinetic flow energy during diastole, in order to improve blood distribution in the coronary tree. Therefore, the sinuses of Valsalva of the aortic root are not predisposed to accept any bulky material, especially in case of uncrushed solid calcific agglomerates. This concept underlines the differences between surgical aortic valve replacement, in which decalcification is a main part of the procedure, and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Cyclic changes in shape and size of the aortic root influence blood flow in the Valsalva sinuses. Recent papers have been investigating the dynamic changes of the aortic root and whether those differences might be correlated with clinical effects, and this paper aims to summarize part of this flourishing literature. Post-TAVR aortic root remodeling, dynamic flow and TAVR complications might have a fluidodynamic background, and clinically observed side effects such as thrombosis or leaflet degeneration should be further investigated in basic researches. Also, aortic root changes could impact valve type and size selection, affecting the decision of over-sizing or under-sizing in order to prevent valve embolization or coronary ostia obstruction.

Mitral regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) might have an associated significant MR that can potentially lead to left ventricular (LV) failure after procedure. Considering the specific alterations in the mitral valve in TAVR scenario and the widespread use of TAVR in recent years, it appears important to know and understand the anatomical, functional and clinical implications to develop adequate strategies for the future. Patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) have been generally excluded from randomized clinical trials, making poor the impact that associated MR can have on clinical outcomes after TAVR. Several factors must be considered whose presence influences the severity of MR. For example, the elevated prevalence of coronary disease with consequent ischemic MR may account for LV dilation observed at the end stage of aortic stenosis. Evidence randomized studies and registries suggests that the rate of concomitant moderate-to-severe MR in patients undergoing TAVR oscillates between 2% and 33%, and patients with moderate to severe MR may have hemodynamic frailty with clinical deterioration during mechanical intervention. Short- and long-term outcomes, including cardiac mortality, appear to be influenced by the existence of preoperative moderate-to-severe MR or by the postprocedural worsening of mild MR, generally due to adverse LV remodeling. The incidence and the prognostic effect of concomitant MR in patients undergoing TAVR requires specific attention as might trigger adjunctive strategy treatment which should be carefully evaluated in clinical trials. KEYWORDS: Mitral regurgitation (MR); mitral valve; transcatheter aortic valve; transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Mitral regurgitation: lessons learned from COAPT and MITRA-Fr.

Recent studies about percutaneous treatment of secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) underlined the importance of left ventricular geometry and features of mitral valve as determinants of procedural and long-term success. Guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT), transcatheter mitral valve treatment (TMVT) and surgical procedures (mitral valve replacement, mitral valve repair at level of the annulus or subvalvular apparatus) have been extensively evaluated but not adequately compared in current clinical studies. A detailed analysis of the results of the study about transcatheter mitral valve repair would allow to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of such procedure and would provide potential indications for improving the quality of percutaneous and surgical repair in patients with moderate-to-severe secondary MR. Patients with proportionate MR (i.e., MR severity is proportional to the amount of left ventricular dilatation) are prone to respond to the optimization of medical therapy, while patients with disproportionate MR (i.e., MR severity is disproportionately higher than predicted by left ventricular dilatation, with high EROA and small left ventricle) are likely to benefit from additional repair. The identification of specific subpopulation of "high responders", based on the anatomic characteristics of the mitral valve and the relative dimensions of the annulus, the regurgitation and the left ventricle, can also apply to medical therapy. However, some pivotal component of MR (such as the symmetry of tethering and the differences in biomechanical features of leaflets) are not adequately investigated in current studies and warrant further evaluation.

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.

A narrative review of early surgery versus conventional treatment for infective endocarditis: do we have an answer?

The most appropriate strategy and timing for surgery in infective endocarditis (IE) remains an argument of debate. Despite some authors promote the adoption of an early surgical approach (within 48 hours) to limit mortality and complications, no robust randomized trials are available on this argument and the evidence on this subject remain at the "expert opinion" level. Additionally, the different messages promulgated by the American and European guidelines contributed to fuel confusion regarding the relative priority of the surgical over medical therapy in IE. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines individuates three level of urgency: emergency surgery, to be performed within 24 hours; urgent surgery, recommended within a few days; elective surgery to be performed after 1-2 weeks of antibiotic therapy. Urgent surgery is recommended for most cases of IE. In the American Heart Association (AHA)'s guidelines define early surgery as "during the initial hospitalization and before completion of a full course of antibiotics." Some of the available evidences showed that are no proven benefits in delaying surgery if a definite diagnosis of IE has been established. However, this argument is controversial across the literature and several factors including the center specific experience can play a role in decision-making. In this review the latest evidences on IE clinical and surgical characteristics along with the current studies on the adoption of an early surgical approach are analyzed to clarify whether enough evidence is available to inform an update of the guidelines.