Acute myocardial infarction has traditionally been divided into ST elevation or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction; however, therapies are similar between the two, and the overall management of acute myocardial infarction can be reviewed for simplicity. Acute myocardial infarction remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, despite substantial improvements in prognosis over the past decade. The progress is a result of several major trends, including improvements in risk stratification, more widespread use of an invasive strategy, implementation of care delivery systems prioritising immediate revascularisation through percutaneous coronary intervention (or fibrinolysis), advances in antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants, and greater use of secondary prevention strategies such as statins. This seminar discusses the important topics of the pathophysiology, epidemiological trends, and modern management of acute myocardial infarction, focusing on the recent advances in reperfusion strategies and pharmacological treatment approaches.

Key Points Question Is psychological, social, and economic stress associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) associated with the incidence of stress cardiomyopathy? Findings This cohort study included 1914 patients with acute coronary syndrome to compare patients presenting during the COVID-19 pandemic with patients presenting across 4 timelines prior to the pandemic and found a significantly increased incidence of 7.8% of stress cardiomyopathy during the COVID-19 pandemic, compared with prepandemic incidences that ranged from 1.5% to 1.8%. Meaning These findings suggest that psychological, social, and economic stress related to the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with an increased incidence of stress cardiomyopathy.

Background: The conventional method of implanting balloon-expandable SAPIEN-3 (S3) valve results in a final 70:30 or 80:20 ratio of the valve in the aorta:left ventricular outflow tract with published rates of permanent pacemaker around 10%. We sought to evaluate whether higher implantation of S3 reduces conduction abnormalities including the need for permanent pacemaker. Methods: We included consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement using S3 between April 2015 and December 2018 and compared outcomes with typical valve deployment strategy to our more contemporary high deployment technique (HDT). We excluded patients with nontransfemoral access or valve-in-valve. Results: Among 1028 patients, HDT was performed in 406 patients (39.5%). Mean implantation depth under the noncoronary cusp was significantly smaller with HDT compared with conventional technique (1.5±1.6 versus 3.2±1.9 mm; P <0.001). Successful implantation was achieved in 100% of the patients in both groups with no cases of conversion to open heart surgery, second valve implantation within the first transcatheter aortic valve replacement, or coronary occlusion during transcatheter aortic valve replacement. One patient (0.2%) had valve embolization with HDT ( P =0.216). Thirty-day permanent pacemaker rates were lower with HDT (5.5% versus 13.1%; P <0.001), as were rates of complete heart block (3.5% versus 11.2%; P <0.001) and new-onset left bundle branch block (5.3% versus 12.2%; P <0.001). There were no differences in mild (16.5% versus 15.9%; P =0.804), or moderate-to-severe aortic regurgitation (1% versus 2.7%; P =0.081) at 1 year. HDT was associated with slightly higher 1-year mean gradients (13.1±6.2 versus 11.8±4.9 mm Hg; P =0.042) and peak gradients (25±11.9 versus 22.5±9 mm Hg; P =0.026). However, Doppler velocity index was similar (0.47±0.15 versus 0.48±0.13; P =0.772). Conclusions: Our novel technique for balloon-expandable S3 valve positioning consistently achieves higher implantation resulting in substantial reduction in conduction abnormalities and permanent pacemaker requirement after transcatheter aortic valve replacement without compromising procedural safety or valve hemodynamics. Operators should consider this as an important technique to improve patient outcomes.

No abstract

Background-The incidence and predictors of long-term mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for radiation-associated coronary artery disease are unknown.