Cohort profile: the ESC EURObservational Research Programme Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infraction (NSTEMI) Registry.

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) EURObservational Research Programme (EORP) Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) Registry aims to identify international patterns in NSTEMI management in clinical practice and outcomes against the 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without ST-segment-elevation. Consecutively hospitalised adult NSTEMI patients (n = 3620) were enrolled between 11 March 2019 and 6 March 2021, and individual patient data prospectively collected at 287 centres in 59 participating countries during a two-week enrolment period per centre. The registry collected data relating to baseline characteristics, major outcomes (in-hospital death, acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, bleeding, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, and 30-day mortality) and guideline-recommended NSTEMI care interventions: electrocardiogram pre- or in-hospital, pre-hospitalization receipt of aspirin, echocardiography, coronary angiography, referral to cardiac rehabilitation, smoking cessation advice, dietary advice, and prescription on discharge of aspirin, P2Y12 inhibition, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), beta-blocker, and statin. The EORP NSTEMI Registry is an international, prospective registry of care and outcomes of patients treated for NSTEMI, which will provide unique insights into the contemporary management of hospitalised NSTEMI patients, compliance with ESC 2015 NSTEMI Guidelines, and identify potential barriers to optimal management of this common clinical presentation associated with significant morbidity and mortality.Since the start of EORP, the following companies have supported the programme: Abbott Vascular Inc. (2011–20), Amgen Cardiovascular (2009–18), AstraZeneca (2014–21), Bayer AG (2009–18), Boehringer Ingelheim (2009–19), Boston Scientific (2009–12), Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance (2011–19), Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH (2011–20), the Alliance Daiichi Sankyo Europe GmbH and Eli Lilly and Company (2014–17), Edwards (2016–19), Gedeon Richter Plc. (2014–16), Menarini Int. Op. (2009–12), MSD-Merck & Co. (2011–14), Novartis Pharma AG (2014–20), ResMed (2014–16), Sanofi (2009–11), Servier (2009–21), and Vifor (2019–22).S

Indications and practical approach to non-invasive ventilation in acute heart failure

In acute heart failure (AHF) syndromes significant respiratory failure (RF) is essentially seen in patients with acute cardiogenic pulmonary oedema (ACPE) or cardiogenic shock (CS). Non-invasive ventilation (NIV), the application of positive intrathoracic pressure through an interface, has shown to be useful in the treatment of moderate to severe RF in several scenarios. There are two main modalities of NIV: continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) and pressure support ventilation (NIPSV) with positive end expiratory pressure. Appropriate equipment and experience is needed for NIPSV, whereas CPAP may be administered without a ventilator, not requiring special training. Both modalities have shown to be effective in ACPE, by a reduction of respiratory distress and the endotracheal intubation rate compared to conventional oxygen therapy, but the impact on mortality is less conclusive. Non-invasive ventilation is also indicated in patients with AHF associated to pulmonary disease and may be considered, after haemodynamic stabilization, in some patients with CS. There are no differences in the outcomes in the studies comparing both techniques, but CPAP is a simpler technique that may be preferred in low-equipped areas like the pre-hospital setting, while NIPSV may be preferable in patients with significant hypercapnia. The new modality 'high-flow nasal cannula' seems promising in cases of AHF with less severe RF. The correct selection of patients and interfaces, early application of the technique, the achievement of a good synchrony between patients and the ventilator avoiding excessive leakage, close monitoring, proactive management, and in some cases mild sedation, may warrant the success of the technique

Cohort profile: the ESC EURObservational Research Programme Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infraction (NSTEMI) Registry

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) EURObservational Research Programme (EORP) Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) Registry aims to identify international patterns in NSTEMI management in clinical practice and outcomes against the 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without ST-segment-elevation.Consecutively hospitalised adult NSTEMI patients (n = 3620) were enrolled between 11 March 2019 and 6 March 2021, and individual patient data prospectively collected at 287 centres in 59 participating countries during a two-week enrolment period per centre. The registry collected data relating to baseline characteristics, major outcomes (in-hospital death, acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, bleeding, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, and 30-day mortality) and guideline-recommended NSTEMI care interventions: electrocardiogram pre- or in-hospital, pre-hospitalization receipt of aspirin, echocardiography, coronary angiography, referral to cardiac rehabilitation, smoking cessation advice, dietary advice, and prescription on discharge of aspirin, P2Y12 inhibition, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), beta-blocker, and statin.The EORP NSTEMI Registry is an international, prospective registry of care and outcomes of patients treated for NSTEMI, which will provide unique insights into the contemporary management of hospitalised NSTEMI patients, compliance with ESC 2015 NSTEMI Guidelines, and identify potential barriers to optimal management of this common clinical presentation associated with significant morbidity and mortality

Antithrombotic therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome complicated by cardiogenic shock or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a Joint Position Paper from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Thrombosis, in association with the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

© The Author 2020. This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy following peer review. The version of record [Gorog et al., Antithrombotic therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome complicated by cardiogenic shock or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a Joint Position Paper from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Thrombosis, in association with the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), European Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Pharmacotherapy, pvaa009] is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjcvp/pvaa009.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

The frail patient undergoing cardiac surgery: lessons learned and future perspectives

Frailty is a geriatric condition characterized by the reduction of the individual's homeostatic reserves. It determines an increased vulnerability to endogenous and exogenous stressors and can lead to poor outcomes. It is an emerging concept in perioperative medicine, since an increasing number of patients undergoing surgical interventions are older and the traditional models of care seem to be inadequate to satisfy these patients' emerging clinical needs. Nowadays, the progressive technical and clinical improvements allow to offer cardiac operations to an older, sicker and frail population. For these reasons, a multidisciplinary team involving cardiac surgeons, clinical cardiologists, anesthesiologists, and geriatricians, is often needed to assess, select and provide tailored care to these high-risk frail patients to optimize clinical outcomes. There is unanimous agreement that frailty assessment may capture the individual's biological decline and the heterogeneity in risk profile for poor health-related outcomes among people of the same age. However, since commonly used preoperative scores for cardiac surgery fail to capture frailty, a specific preoperative assessment with dedicated tools is warranted to correctly recognize, measure and quantify frailty in these patients. On the contrary, pre-operative and post-operative interventions can reduce the risk of complications and support patient recovery promoting surgical resilience. Minimally invasive cardiac procedures aim to reduce surgical trauma and may be associated with better clinical outcome in this specific sub-group of high-risk patients. Among postoperative adverse events, the occurrence of delirium represents a risk factor for several unfavorable outcomes including mortality and subsequent cognitive decline. Its presence should be carefully recognized, triggering an adequate, evidence based, treatment. There is evidence, from several cross-section and longitudinal studies, that frailty and delirium may frequently overlap, with frailty serving both as a predisposing factor and as an outcome of delirium and delirium being a marker of a latent condition of frailty. In conclusion, frail patients are at increased risk to experience poor outcome after cardiac surgery. A multidisciplinary approach aimed to recognize more vulnerable individuals, optimize pre-operative conditions, reduce surgical invasivity and improve post-operative recovery is required to obtain optimal long-term outcome

Quality indicators for the care and outcomes of adults with atrial fibrillation

Aims To develop quality indicators (QIs) that may be used to evaluate the quality of care and outcomes for adults with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods and results We followed the ESC methodology for QI development. This methodology involved (i) the identification of the domains of AF care for the diagnosis and management of AF (by a group of experts including members of the ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Task Force for AF); (ii) the construction of candidate QIs (including a systematic review of the literature); and (iii) the selection of the final set of QIs (using a modified Delphi method). Six domains of care for the diagnosis and management of AF were identified: (i) Patient assessment (baseline and follow-up), (ii) Anticoagulation therapy, (iii) Rate control strategy, (iv) Rhythm control strategy, (v) Risk factor management, and (vi) Outcomes measures, including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). In total, 17 main and 17 secondary QIs, which covered all six domains of care for the diagnosis and management of AF, were selected. The outcome domain included measures on the consequences and treatment of AF, as well as PROMs. Conclusion This document defines six domains of AF care (patient assessment, anticoagulation, rate control, rhythm control, risk factor management, and outcomes), and provides 17 main and 17 secondary QIs for the diagnosis and management of AF. It is anticipated that implementation of these QIs will improve the quality of AF care

2020 Update of the quality indicators for acute myocardial infarction : a position paper of the Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care : the study group for quality indicators from the ACVC and the NSTE-ACS guideline group

Aims Quality indicators (QIs) are tools to improve the delivery of evidence-base medicine. In 2017, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) developed a set of QIs for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), which have been evaluated at national and international levels and across different populations. However, an update of these QIs is needed in light of the accumulated experience and the changes in the supporting evidence. Methods and results The ESC methodology for the QI development was used to update the 2017 ACVC QIs. We identified key domains of AMI care, conducted a literature review, developed a list of candidate QIs, and used a modified Delphi method to select the final set of indicators. The same seven domains of AMI care identified by the 2017 Study Group were retained for this update. For each domain, main and secondary QIs were developed reflecting the essential and complementary aspects of care, respectively. Overall, 26 QIs are proposed in this document, compared to 20 in the 2017 set. New QIs are proposed in this document (e.g. the centre use of high-sensitivity troponin), some were retained or modified (e.g. the in-hospital risk assessment), and others were retired in accordance with the changes in evidence [e.g. the proportion of patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) treated with fondaparinux] and the feasibility assessments (e.g. the proportion of patients with NSTEMI whom risk assessment is performed using the GRACE and CRUSADE risk scores). Conclusion Updated QIs for the management of AMI were developed according to contemporary knowledge and accumulated experience. These QIs may be applied to evaluate and improve the quality of AMI care