Search

Aims: Accurate selection of patients with severe heart failure (HF) who might benefit from advanced therapies is crucial. The present study investigates the performance of the available risk scores aimed at predicting the risk of mortality in patients with severe HF., Methods and Results: The risk of 1-year mortality was estimated in patients with severe HF enrolled in the HELP-HF cohort according to the MAGGIC, 3-CHF, ADHF/NT-proBNP, and GWTG-HF risk scores, the number of criteria of the 2018 HFA-ESC definition of advanced HF, I NEED HELP markers, domains fulfilled of the 2019 HFA-ESC definition of frailty, the frailty index, and the INTERMACS profile. In addition, we tested the performance of different machine learning (ML)-based models to predict 1-year mortality. At 1-year follow-up, 265 patients (23.1%) died. The prognostic accuracy, tested in the subgroup of patients with completeness of all data regarding the variables included in the scores (497/1149 patients), resulted moderate for MAGGIC, GWTG-HF, and ADHF/NT-proBNP scores (area under the curve [AUC] ≥0.70) and only poor for the other tools. All the scores lost accuracy in estimating the rate of 1-year mortality in patients at the highest risk. Support vector machine-based model had the best AUC among ML-based models, slightly outperforming most of the tested risk scores., Conclusion: Most of the scores used to predict the risk of mortality in HF performed poorly in real-world patients with severe HF and provided inaccurate estimate of the risk of 1-year mortality in patients at the highest risk. ML-based models did not significantly outperform the currently available risk scores and their use must be validated in large cohort of patients., (© 2025 The Author(s). European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aim: The role of malnutrition among patients with severe heart failure (HF) is not well established. We evaluated the incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of malnutrition in patients with severe HF., Methods and Results: Nutritional status was measured using the geriatric nutritional risk index (GNRI), based on body weight, height and serum albumin concentration, with malnutrition defined as GNRI ≤98. It was assessed in consecutive patients with severe HF, defined by at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker, enrolled at four Italian centres between January 2020 and November 2021. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. A total of 510 patients with data regarding nutritional status were included in the study (mean age 74 ± 12 years, 66.5% male). Among them, 179 (35.1%) had GNRI ≤98 (malnutrition). At multivariable logistic regression, lower body mass index (BMI) and higher levels of natriuretic peptides (B-type natriuretic peptide [BNP] > median value [685 pg/ml] or N-terminal proBNP > median value [5775 pg/ml]) were independently associated with a higher likelihood of malnutrition. Estimated rates of all-cause death at 1 year were 22.4% and 41.1% in patients without and with malnutrition, respectively (log-rank p < 0.001). The impact of malnutrition on all-cause mortality was confirmed after multivariable adjustment for relevant covariates (adjusted hazard ratio 2.03, 95% confidence interval 1.43-2.89, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: In a contemporary, real-world, multicentre cohort of patients with severe HF, malnutrition (defined as GNRI ≤98) was common and independently associated with an increased risk of mortality. Lower BMI and higher natriuretic peptides were identified as predictors of malnutrition in these patients., (© 2024 European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Frailty is highly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF), but a concordant definition of this condition is lacking. The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed in 2019 a new multi-domain definition of frailty, but it has never been validated., Methods and Results: Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to the number of HFA-ESC frailty domains fulfilled and to the cumulative deficits frailty index (FI) quintiles. Prevalence of frailty and of each domain was reported, as well as the rate of the composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization, its single components, and cardiovascular death in each group and quintile. Among 854 included patients, 37 (4.3%), 206 (24.1%), 365 (42.8%), 217 (25.4%), and 29 (3.4%) patients fulfilled zero, one, two, three, or four domains, respectively, while 179 patients had a FI < 0.21 and were considered not frail. The 1-year risk of adverse events increased proportionally to the number of domains fulfilled (for each criterion increase, all-cause death or HF hospitalization: hazard ratio [HR] 1.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.62; all-cause death: HR 1.72, 95% CI 1.46-2.02, HF hospitalizations: subHR 1.21, 95% CI 1.04-1.31; cardiovascular death: HR 1.77, 95% CI 1.45-2.15). Consistent results were found stratifying the cohort for FI quintiles. The FI as a continuous variable demonstrated higher discriminative ability than the number of domains fulfilled (area under the curve = 0.68 vs. 0.64, p = 0.004)., Conclusion: Frailty in patients at risk for advanced HF, assessed via a multi-domain approach and the FI, is highly prevalent and identifies those at increased risk of adverse events. The FI was found to be slightly more effective in identifying patients at increased risk of mortality., (© 2024 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: Patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (EF) (HFrEF), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and preserved EF (HFpEF) may all progress to advanced HF, but the impact of EF in the advanced setting is not well established. Our aim was to assess the prognostic impact of EF in patients with at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF., Methods and Results: Patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' criterion from four centres were included in this analysis. Outcomes were assessed in patients with HFrEF (EF ≤ 40%), HFmrEF (EF 41-49%), and HFpEF (EF ≥ 50%) and with EF analysed as a continuous variable. The prognostic impact of medical therapy for HF in patients with EF < 50% and EF > 50% was also evaluated. All-cause death was the primary endpoint, and cardiovascular death was a secondary endpoint. Among 1149 patients enrolled [mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% males, 67.6% hospitalized, median follow-up 260 days (inter-quartile range 105-390 days)], HFrEF, HFmrEF, and HFpEF were observed in 699 (60.8%), 122 (10.6%), and 328 (28.6%) patients, and 1 year mortality was 28.3%, 26.2%, and 20.1, respectively (log-rank P = 0.036). As compared with HFrEF patients, HFpEF patients had a lower risk of all-cause death [adjusted hazard ratio (HR adj ) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.48-0.94, P = 0.022], whereas no difference was noted for HFmrEF patients. After multivariable adjustment, a lower risk of all-cause death (HR adj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-0.99, P = 0.017) and cardiovascular death (HR adj for 5% increase 0.94, 95% CI 0.88-1.00, P = 0.049) was observed at higher EF values. Beta-blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors or sacubitril/valsartan were associated with lower mortality in both EF < 50% and EF ≥ 50% groups., Conclusions: Among patients with HF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF, left ventricular EF is still of prognostic value., (© 2023 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aim: Persistent symptoms despite guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and poor tolerance of GDMT are hallmarks of patients with advanced heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, real-world data on GDMT use, dose, and prognostic implications are lacking., Methods and Results: We included 699 consecutive patients with HFrEF and at least one 'I NEED HELP' marker for advanced HF enrolled in a multicentre registry. Beta-blockers (BB) were administered to 574 (82%) patients, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARB/ARNI) were administered to 381 (55%) patients and 416 (60%) received mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA). Overall, ≥50% of target doses were reached in 41%, 22%, and 56% of the patients on BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively. Hypotension, bradycardia, kidney dysfunction and hyperkalaemia were the main causes of underprescription and/or underdosing, but up to a half of the patients did not receive target doses for unknown causes (51%, 41%, and 55% for BB, ACEi/ARB/ARNI and MRA, respectively). The proportions of patients receiving BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were lower among those fulfilling the 2018 HFA-ESC criteria for advanced HF. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI were associated with a lower risk of death or HF hospitalizations (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.84, and HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.95, respectively)., Conclusions: In a large, real-world, contemporary cohort of patients with severe HFrEF, with at least one marker for advanced HF, prescription and uptitration of GDMT remained limited. A significant proportion of patients were undertreated due to unknown reasons suggesting a potential role of clinical inertia either by the prescribing healthcare professional or by the patient. Treatment with BB and ACEi/ARB/ARNI was associated with lower mortality/morbidity., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The "I Need Help" markers have been proposed to identify patients with advanced heart failure (HF). We evaluated the prognostic impact of these markers on clinical outcomes in a real-world, contemporary, multicenter HF population., Methods: We included consecutive patients with HF and at least 1 high-risk "I Need Help" marker from 4 centers. The impact of the cumulative number of "I Need Help" criteria and that of each individual "I Need Help" criterion was evaluated. The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality or first HF hospitalization., Results: Among 1149 patients enrolled, the majority had 2 (30.9%) or 3 (22.6%) "I Need Help" criteria. A higher cumulative number of "I Need Help" criteria was independently associated with a higher risk of the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio for each criterion increase, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.11-1.27]; P <0.001), and patients with >5 criteria had the worst prognosis. Need of inotropes, persistently high New York Heart Association classes III and IV or natriuretic peptides, end-organ dysfunction, >1 HF hospitalization in the last year, persisting fluid overload or escalating diuretics, and low blood pressure were the individual criteria independently associated with a higher risk of the primary end point., Conclusions: In our HF population, a higher number of "I Need Help" criteria was associated with a worse prognosis. The individual criteria with an independent impact on mortality or HF hospitalization were need of inotropes, New York Heart Association class or natriuretic peptides, end-organ dysfunction, multiple HF hospitalizations, persisting edema or escalating diuretics, and low blood pressure., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Pagnesi reports personal fees from Abbott Laboratories, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Vifor Pharma, all outside the submitted work. Dr Stolfo reports personal fees from Novartis, Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and Acceleron, all outside the submitted work. Dr Adamo reports speaker fees from Abbott Vascular and Medtronic. Dr Merlo reports personal fees for congresses from Novartis, Vifor Pharma, and Pfizer and unrestricted research grant from Pfizer, all outside the submitted work. Dr Sinagra reports consulting fees from Novartis, Impulse Dynamics, and Biotronik and speaker fees and honoraria from Novartis, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Vifor Pharma, Menarini, and Akcea Therapeutics, all outside the submitted work. Dr Metra reports personal consulting honoraria of minimal amount from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Edwards Therapeutics, LivaNova, and Vifor Pharma for participation to advisory board meetings and executive committees of clinical trials. The other authors report no conflicts.

In patients with advanced heart failure (HF), defined according to the presence of at least one I-NEED-HELP criterium, the updated 2018 Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) criteria for advanced HF identify a subgroup of patients with HF with worse prognosis, but whether ischemic etiology has a relevant prognostic impact in this very high-risk cohort is unknown. Patients from the HELP-HF registry were stratified according to ischemic etiology and presence of advanced HF based on 2018 HFA-ESC criteria. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death and HF hospitalization at 1 year. Secondary end points were all-cause death, HF hospitalization, and cardiovascular death at 1 year. Ischemic etiology was a leading cause of HF, in both patients with advanced and nonadvanced HF (46.1% and 42.4%, respectively, p = 0.337). The risk of the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09 to 1.58) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.76) was increased in ischemic as compared with nonischemic patients. The risk of the primary end point was consistently higher in ischemic patients in both patients with advanced and nonadvanced HF (advanced HF, HR 1.50 95% CI 1.04 to 2.16; nonadvanced HF, HR 1.25 95% CI 1.01 to 1.56, p interaction  = 0.333), driven by an increased risk of mortality, mainly because of cardiovascular causes. In conclusion, ischemic etiology is the most common cause of HF in patients with at least one I-NEED-HELP marker and with or without advanced HF as defined by the 2018 HFA-ESC definition. In both patients with advanced and not-advanced HF, ischemic etiology carried an increased risk of worse prognosis., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Stolfo reports personal fees from Novartis, Merck, GSK, and Acceleron outside of the submitted work. Dr. Merlo reports personal fees from Pfizer, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Vifor Pharma outside of the present work. Dr. Sinagra reports consulting fees from Novartis, Impulse Dynamics, and Biotronik, and speaker and honoraria from Novartis, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Vifor Pharma, Menarini, and Akcea Therapeutics outside of the submitted work. Dr. Metra received personal consulting honoraria of minimal amount from Abbott, Amgen, Bayer, Edwards Therapeutics, LivaNova, and Vifor Pharma for participation in advisory board meetings and executive committees of clinical trials. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The pulmonary artery catheter (PAC)-derived cardiac power index (CPI) has been found of prognostic value in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients. The original CPI equation included the right atrial pressure (RAP), accounting for heart filling pressure as a determinant of systolic myocardial work, but this term was subsequently omitted. We hypothesized that the original CPI formula (CPI RAP ) is superior to current CPI for risk stratification in CS., Methods and Results: A single-centre cohort of 80 consecutive Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) B-D CS patients with available PAC records was included. Overall in-hospital mortality was 21.3%. Results showed CPI RAP to be the strongest haemodynamic predictor of in-hospital death (p adj  = 0.038), outperforming CPI [area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves: 0.726 and 0.673, P-for-difference = 0.025]. When the population was stratified according to the identified CPI RAP (0.28 W/m 2 ) and accepted CPI (0.32 W/m 2 ) thresholds, the cohort with discordant indexes (low CPI RAP and high CPI) comprised a group of 13 patients featuring a congested phenotype with frequent right ventricle or biventricular involvement. In this group, in-hospital mortality was high (30.8%) similar to those with concordant low CPI and CPI RAP ., Conclusion: Incorporating RAP in CPI calculation (CPI RAP ) improves the prognostic yield in patients with CS SCAI B-D. A cut-off of 0.28 W/m 2 identifies patients at higher risk of in-hospital mortality. The improved prognostic value of CPI RAP may derive from identification of patients with more intravascular congestion who may experience substantial in-hospital mortality, uncaptured by the commonly used CPI equation., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) proposed a definition of advanced heart failure (HF) that has not been validated, yet. We assessed its prognostic impact in a consecutive series of patients with high-risk HF., Methods and Results: The HELP-HF registry enrolled consecutive patients with HF and at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker, evaluated at four Italian centres between 1 st January 2020 and 30 th November 2021. Patients meeting the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition were compared to patients not meeting this definition. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or first HF hospitalization. Out of 4753 patients with HF screened, 1149 (24.3%) patients with at least one high-risk 'I NEED HELP' marker were included (mean age 75.1 ± 11.5 years, 67.3% male, median left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] 35% [interquartile range 25%-50%]). Among them, 193 (16.8%) patients met the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition. As compared to others, these patients were younger, had lower LVEF, higher natriuretic peptides and a worse clinical profile. The 1-year rate of the primary endpoint was 69.3% in patients with advanced HF according to the HFA-ESC definition versus 41.8% in the others (hazard ratio [HR] 2.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.82-2.74, p < 0.001). The prognostic impact of the HFA-ESC advanced HF definition was confirmed after multivariable adjustment for relevant covariates (adjusted HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.57-2.50, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: The HFA-ESC advanced HF definition had a strong prognostic impact in a contemporary, real-world, multicentre high-risk cohort of patients with HF., (© 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common heart arrhythmia, and its prevalence increases with age. Oral Anticoagulant Therapy (OAT) with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) is essential to avoid thromboembolic events in AF. However, this treatment is associated with a high risk of bleeding and low adherence in elderly patients. Aim: The aim was to evaluate the real-world use of OAT in a population of patients aged ≥80 years in twenty-three Italian centers and to investigate the tolerance of and patient satisfaction with this therapy. Methods: The ISNEP Study is a multicenter cross-sectional study enrolling patients with AF and aged ≥80 years and treated with either NOACs or VKAs. A written questionnaire was administered to each patient to evaluate the adherence to and patient satisfaction with this therapy. Results: The study included 641 patients with a mean age of 85 (82−87) years. The use of NOACs was reported in 93.0% of cases, with the remaining 7.0% treated with VKAs. A history of stroke events was reported in five (11.1%) and one (0.2%) patients in the VKA and NOAC groups, respectively. The rate of referred ecchymosis/epistaxis was significantly higher in the VKA group compared to the NOAC group (p < 0.001). Patients receiving NOACs reported a substantial improvement in their quality of life compared to the VKA group. Conclusions: A small, but not negligible, proportion of elderly AF patients is still treated with VKAs. Patients treated with NOAC have a higher level of satisfaction with the therapy and complete adherence.

Erdheim-Chester disease (ECD) is a rare multisystemic disorder of non-Langerhans histiocytic cells with a pleomorphic clinical presentation. It affects bones, skin, central nervous system, pituitary gland, ocular tissue, kidneys and perirenal tissue and lungs. Cardiac involvement presents usually with pericardial effusion and right atrial masses, but rarely with conduction system infiltration and subsequent arrhythmic events. Following the discovery of mutations of activating signaling kinase proteins (BRAF, MEK, ALK), the therapeutic landscape has changed to a more precise targeted treatment. Currently vemurafenib is approved for patient with end-organ dysfunction and BRAF-V600E mutation and the prognosis has dramatically improved. Here we present a case of ECD with electrical instability as main clinically relevant manifestation of cardiac involvement., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) is the preferred parameter applied for the non-invasive evaluation of LV systolic function in clinical practice. It has a well-recognized and extensive role in the clinical management of numerous cardiac conditions. Many imaging modalities are currently available for the non-invasive assessment of LVEF. The aim of this review is to describe their relative advantages and disadvantages, proposing a hierarchical application of the different imaging tests available for LVEF evaluation based on the level of accuracy/reproducibility clinically required.

Trials on intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) use in cardiogenic shock related to acute myocardial infarction have shown disappointing results. The role of IABP in cardiogenic shock treatment remains unclear, and new (potentially more potent) mechanical circulatory supports with arguably larger device profile are emerging. A reappraisal of the physiological premises of intra-aortic counterpulsation may underpin the rationale to maintain IABP as a valuable therapeutic option for patients with acute decompensated heart failure and tissue hypoperfusion. Several pathophysiological features differ between myocardial infarction- and acute decompensated heart failure-related hypoperfusion, encompassing cardiogenic shock severity, filling status, systemic vascular resistances rise, and adaptation to chronic (if preexisting) left ventricular dysfunction. IABP combines a more substantial effect on left ventricular afterload with a modest increase in cardiac output and would therefore be most suitable in clinical scenarios characterized by a disproportionate increase in afterload without profound hemodynamic compromise. The acute decompensated heart failure syndrome is characterized by exquisite afterload-sensitivity of cardiac output and may be an ideal setting for counterpulsation. Several hemodynamic variables have been shown to predict response to IABP within this scenario, potentially guiding appropriate patient selection. Finally, acute decompensated heart failure with hypoperfusion may frequently represent an end stage in the heart failure history: IABP may provide sufficient hemodynamic support and prompt end-organ function recovery in view of more definitive heart replacement therapies while preserving ambulation when used with a transaxillary approach.

Background: Concurrent evidence about cardiogenic shock (CS) characteristics, treatment and outcome does not represent a global spectrum of patients and is therefore limited. The aim of this study was to investigate these regional differences., Methods: To investigate regional differences in presentation characteristics, treatments and outcomes of patients treated with all types of cardiogenic shock (CS) in a single calendar year on a multi-national level. Consecutive patients from 19 tertiary care hospitals in 13 countries with CS who were treated between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018 were enrolled in this study., Results: In total, 699 cardiogenic shock patients were included in this study. Of these patients, 440 patients (63%) were treated in European hospitals and 259 (37%) were treated in Non-European hospitals. Female patients (P<0.01) and patients with a previous myocardial infarction (P=0.02) were more likely to present at Non-European hospitals; whereas older patients (P=0.01) and patients with cardiogenic shock due to acute heart failure (P<0.01) were more likely to present at European hospitals. Vasopressor use was more likely in Non-European hospitals (P=0.04), whereas use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) was more likely in European hospitals (P<0.01). Despite adjustment for relevant confounders, 30-day in-hospital mortality risk was comparably high in CS patients treated in European vs. Non-European hospitals (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.84-1.39, P=0.56)., Conclusion: Despite marked heterogeneity in characteristics and treatment of CS patients, including fewer use of MCS but more frequent use of vasopressors in Non-European hospitals, 30-day in-hospital mortality did not differ between regions.

Background: Myocarditis lacks systematic characterization in COVID-19 patients., Methods: We enrolled consecutive patients with newly diagnosed myocarditis in the context of COVID-19 infection. Diagnostic and treatment strategies were driven by a dedicated multidisciplinary disease unit for myocarditis. Multimodal outcomes were assessed during prospective follow-up., Results: Seven consecutive patients (57% males, age 51 ± 9 y) with acute COVID-19 infection received a de novo diagnosis of myocarditis. Endomyocardial biopsy was of choice in hemodynamically unstable patients ( n = 4, mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 25 ± 9%), whereas cardiac magnetic resonance constituted the first exam in stable patients ( n = 3, mean LVEF 48 ± 10%). Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analysis revealed an intra-myocardial SARS-CoV-2 genome in one of the six cases undergoing biopsy: in the remaining patients, myocarditis was either due to other viruses ( n = 2) or virus-negative ( n = 3). Hemodynamic support was needed for four unstable patients (57%), whereas a cardiac device implant was chosen in two of four cases showing ventricular arrhythmias. Medical treatment included immunosuppression (43%) and biological therapy (29%). By the 6-month median follow-up, no patient died or experienced malignant arrhythmias. However, two cases (29%) were screened for heart transplantation., Conclusions: Myocarditis associated with acute COVID-19 infection is a spectrum of clinical manifestations and underlying etiologies. A multidisciplinary approach is the cornerstone for tailored management.

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a fast and radical transformation in social, economic, and healthcare networks. COVID-19 outbreak may thus have profound indirect consequences on clinical presentation and management of patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Aim of this study was to assess clinical features of patients with STEMI during COVID-19 pandemic., Methods: This single-center, prospective study from a regional public service healthcare hub in Milan included all consecutive patients with STEMI admitted to our institute from February 21 to April 1, 2020 (during COVID-19 pandemic). These patients were compared with a historical cohort of patients admitted for STEMI during the analogous time period (February 21 to April 1) in 2018 and 2019, in terms of time from symptoms onset to hospital admission, clinical characteristics, and in-hospital outcomes., Results: A total of 26 patients were admitted for STEMI during the study period, and 7 (26.9%) of these patients tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. On admission, medical therapy, including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers use, was similar between cohorts. Median (interquartile range) time from symptoms onset to hospital admission was significantly longer in 2020 as compared to the historical cohort (15.0 [2.0-48.0] versus 2.0 [1.0-3.0] hours; P <0.01). A higher proportion of patients presenting with late presentation STEMI was observed in 2020 compared with the historical cohort (50.0% versus 4.8%; P <0.01). Primary percutaneous coronary intervention resulted indicated in 80.8% of patients in 2020 compared with 100% in the historical cohort ( P =0.06). In-hospital death, thromboembolism, mechanical ventilation, or hemodynamic decompensation needing inotropic or mechanical support were similar between years., Conclusions: These preliminary results from a cardiovascular regional public service healthcare hub demonstrate a significantly longer time from symptoms onset to hospital admission among patients with STEMI during COVID-19 pandemic compared with the same time period in the previous 2 years.

Background: Mitral valve prolapse (MVP) is characterized by an abnormal movement of the valvular apparatus which may affect the papillary muscles (PMs) function and structure. Aim of the study was to investigate abnormal PM signal in MVP by using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)., Methods and Results: We enrolled 47 consecutive patients with MVP evaluated by cardiac MRI. Additional groups included healthy volunteers, patients with moderate-to-severe mitral regurgitation (not caused by MVP) and patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Visual assessment of the PM signals was carried out and the signal intensity (SI) of both the antero-lateral and postero-medial PMs was normalized by that of the left ventricular (LV) parietal myocardium. Our results show that in the MVP group only, the PM signal intensity was significantly lower compared to the one of the LV parietal myocardium. This sign did not correlate with either LV late gadolinium enhancement or positive anamnesis for significant arrhythmias., Conclusions: In MVP patients only, PM signal is significantly reduced compared to LV parietal myocardium ("darker appearance"). The described findings are not clearly related to evidence of myocardial fibrosis, as assessed by MRI, and to previous occurrence of complex ventricular arrhythmias.