Search

Regular atrial tachycardias classically are classified into flutter or tachycardia, depending on the rate and presence of a stable baseline on the ECG. However, current understanding of electrophysiology atrial tachycardias makes this classification obsolete, because it does not correlate with mechanisms. The proposed classification is based on electrophysiologic mechanisms, defined by mapping and entrainment. Radiofrequency ablation of a critical focus or isthmus can afford proof. Focal tachycardias are characterized by radial spread of activation and endocardial activation not covering the whole cycle. Ablation of the focus of origin interrupts the tachycardia. The mechanism of focal firing is difficult to ascertain by clinical methods. Macroreentrant tachycardias are characterized by circular patterns of activation that cover the whole cycle. Fusion can be shown during entrainment on the ECG or by multiple endocardial recordings. Ablation of a critical isthmus interrupts the tachycardia. Macroreentry can occur around normal structures (terminal crest, eustachian ridge) or around atrial lesions. The anatomic bases of these tachycardias must be defined, to guide appropriate treatment. Atrial flutter is a mere description of continuous undulation on the ECG, and only some strictly defined typical flutter patterns correlate with right atrial macroreentry bounded by the tricuspid valve, terminal crest, and caval vein orifices. This classification should be considered open, as some classically described tachycardias, such as reentrant sinus tachycardia, inappropriate sinus tachycardia, and type II atrial flutter, cannot be classified accurately. Furthermore, the possibility of fibrillatory conduction makes the limits with atrial fibrillation still ill defined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Heart failure is a prevalent condition that is generally treated in primary care. The aim of this study was to assess how primary-care physicians think that heart failure should be managed, how they implement their knowledge, and whether differences exist in practice between countries.Methods: The survey was undertaken in 15 countries that had membership of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) between Sept 1, 1999, and May 31, 2000. Primary-care physicians' knowledge and perceptions about the management of heart failure were assessed with a perception survey and how a representative sample of patients was managed with an actual practice survey.Findings: 1363 physicians provided data for 11062 patients, of whom 54% were older than 70 years and 45% were women. 82% of patients had had an echocardiogram but only 51% of these showed left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Ischaemic heart disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, and major valve disease were all common. Physicians gave roughly equal priority to improvement of symptoms and prognosis. Most were aware of the benefits of ACE inhibitors and beta blockers. 60% of patients were prescribed ACE inhibitors, 34% beta blockers but only 20% received these drugs in combination. Doses given were about 50% of targets suggested in the ESC guidelines. If systolic dysfunction was documented, ACE inhibitors were more likely and beta blockers less likely to be prescribed than when there was no evidence of systolic dysfunction.Interpretation: Results from this survey suggest that most patients with heart failure are appropriately investigated, although this finding might be as a result of high rates of hospital admissions. However, treatment seems to be less than optimum, and there are substantial variations in practice between countries. The inconsistencies between physicians' knowledge and the treatment that they deliver suggests that improved organisation of care for heart failure is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) patients represent a growing population with increasing use of acute emergency department (ED) care. Providing comprehensive ED care necessitates an understanding of the most common clinical scenarios to improve morbidity and mortality in this population. The aim of this position document is to provide a consensus regarding the management of the most common clinical scenarios of ACHD patients presenting to the ED., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The international consortium TACTICS (Transnational Alliance for Regenerative Therapies in Cardiovascular Syndromes) has recently addressed key priorities in the field of cell-based therapy for cardiac repair, identifying the efficacy of translational research as one of the main challenges to ultimately improve the quality of life of patients with ischemic disease. Much of the controversy and confusion surrounding cardiac regenerative therapy stems from insufficient rigor in the conduct of preclinical studies, and there is an increasing recognition of a number of problems that undermine its quality that may contribute to translational failure. Here, we introduce well defined stages for preclinical research, and put forth proposals that should promote more rigorous preclinical work, in an effort to improve its quality and translatability. To augment the utility of preclinical research and its translation, it is necessary to (1) improve the quality of preclinical research, (2) promote collaborative efforts, and (3) enhance the sharing of knowledge and protocols. In particular, confirmatory (stage III) preclinical studies should be considered as a preamble to clinical studies and therefore must adhere to their standards of quality (including internal validity, standardization of protocols, and multicenter design). To increase transparency and minimize bias, these studies should be prospectively registered in an independent, open database. Ultimately, these recommendations should be implemented in the daily routine of investigators and in the policies of institutions, journals, and funding agencies., (© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.)