Background In patients who have chronic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, severe secondary mitral-valve regurgitation is associated with a poor prognosis. Whether percutaneous mitral-valve repair improves clinical outcomes in this patient population is unknown. Methods We randomly assigned patients who had severe secondary mitral regurgitation (defined as an effective regurgitant orifice area of >20 mm or a regurgitant volume of >30 ml per beat), a left ventricular ejection fraction between 15 and 40%, and symptomatic heart failure, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo percutaneous mitral-valve repair in addition to receiving medical therapy (intervention group; 152 patients) or to receive medical therapy alone (control group; 152 patients). The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 12 months. Results At 12 months, the rate of the primary outcome was 54.6% (83 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 51.3% (78 of 152 patients) in the control group (odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.84; P=0.53). The rate of death from any cause was 24.3% (37 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 22.4% (34 of 152 patients) in the control group (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.77). The rate of unplanned hospitalization for heart failure was 48.7% (74 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 47.4% (72 of 152 patients) in the control group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.56). Conclusions Among patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation, the rate of death or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year did not differ significantly between patients who underwent percutaneous mitral-valve repair in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and Research National Program and Abbott Vascular; MITRA-FR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01920698 .).

Background Although mortality due to COVID-19 is, for the most part, robustly tracked, its indirect effect at the population level through lockdown, lifestyle changes, and reorganisation of health-care systems has not been evaluated. We aimed to assess the incidence and outcomes of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in an urban region during the pandemic, compared with non-pandemic periods. MethodsWe did a population-based, observational study using data for non-traumatic OHCA (N=30 768), systematically collected since May 15, 2011, in Paris and its suburbs, France, using the Paris Fire Brigade database, together with in-hospital data. We evaluated OHCA incidence and outcomes over a 6-week period during the pandemic in adult inhabitants of the study area. Findings Comparing the 521 OHCAs of the pandemic period (March 16 to April 26, 2020) to the mean of the 3052 total of the same weeks in the non-pandemic period (weeks 12-17, 2012-19), the maximum weekly OHCA incidence increased from 13•42 (95% CI 12•77-14•07) to 26•64 (25•72-27•53) per million inhabitants (p<0•0001), before returning to normal in the final weeks of the pandemic period. Although patient demographics did not change substantially during the pandemic compared with the non-pandemic period (mean age 69•7 years [SD 17] vs 68•5 [18], 334 males [64•4%] vs 1826 [59•9%]), there was a higher rate of OHCA at home (460 [90•2%] vs 2336 [76•8%]; p<0•0001), less bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (239 [47•8%] vs 1165 [63•9%]; p<0•0001) and shockable rhythm (46 [9•2%] vs 472 [19•1%]; p<0•0001), and longer delays to intervention (median 10•4 min [IQR 8•4-13•8] vs 9•4 min [7•9-12•6]; p<0•0001). The proportion of patients who had an OHCA and were admitted alive decreased from 22•8% to 12•8% (p<0•0001) in the pandemic period. After adjustment for potential confounders, the pandemic period remained significantly associated with lower survival rate at hospital admission (odds ratio 0•36, 95% CI 0•24-0•52; p<0•0001). COVID-19 infection, confirmed or suspected, accounted for approximately a third of the increase in OHCA incidence during the pandemic.Interpretation A transient two-times increase in OHCA incidence, coupled with a reduction in survival, was observed during the specified time period of the pandemic when compared with the equivalent time period in previous years with no pandemic. Although this result might be partly related to COVID-19 infections, indirect effects associated with lockdown and adjustment of health-care services to the pandemic are probable. Therefore, these factors should be taken into account when considering mortality data and public health strategies.

Abstract This consensus document, a summary of the views of an expert panel organized by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), appraises the importance of ischaemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA). Angina pectoris affects approximately 112 million people globally. Up to 70% of patients undergoing invasive angiography do not have obstructive coronary artery disease, more common in women than in men, and a large proportion have INOCA as a cause of their symptoms. INOCA patients present with a wide spectrum of symptoms and signs that are often misdiagnosed as non-cardiac leading to under-diagnosis/investigation and under-treatment. INOCA can result from heterogeneous mechanism including coronary vasospasm and microvascular dysfunction and is not a benign condition. Compared to asymptomatic individuals, INOCA is associated with increased incidence of cardiovascular events, repeated hospital admissions, as well as impaired quality of life and associated increased health care costs. This consensus document provides a definition of INOCA and guidance to the community on the diagnostic approach and management of INOCA based on existing evidence from research and best available clinical practice; noting gaps in knowledge and potential areas for further investigation.

This consensus document, a summary of the views of an expert panel organized by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), appraises the importance of Ischaemia with Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries (INOCA). Angina pectoris affects approximately 112 million people globally. Up to 70% of patients undergoing invasive angiography do not have obstructive CAD, more common in women than in men, and a large proportion have INOCA as a cause of their symptoms. INOCA patients present with a wide spectrum of symptoms and signs that are often misdiagnosed as non-cardiac leading to under-diagnosis/investigation and under-treatment. INOCA can result from heterogeneous mechanism including coronary vasospasm and microvascular dysfunction and is not a benign condition. Compared to asymptomatic individuals, INOCA is associated with increased incidence of cardiovascular events, repeated hospital admissions, as well as impaired quality of life and associated increased health care costs. This consensus document provides a definition of INOCA and guidance to the community on the diagnostic approach and management of INOCA based on existing evidence from research and best available clinical practice; noting gaps in knowledge and potential areas for further investigation.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to healthcare worldwide. The infection can be life threatening and require intensive care treatment. The transmission of the disease poses a risk to both patients and healthcare workers. The number of patients requiring hospital admission and intensive care may overwhelm health systems and negatively affect standard care for patients presenting with conditions needing emergency interventions. This position statements aims to assist cardiologists in the invasive management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. To that end, we assembled a panel of interventional cardiologists and acute cardiac care specialists appointed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and from the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACVC) and included the experience from the first and worst affected areas in Europe. Modified diagnostic and treatment algorithms are proposed to adapt evidence-based protocols for this unprecedented challenge. Various clinical scenarios, as well as management algorithms for patients with a diagnosed or suspected COVID-19 infection, presenting with ST-and non-ST-segment elevation ACS are described. In addition, we address the need for re-organization of ACS networks, with redistribution of hub and spoke hospitals, as well as for in-hospital reorganization of emergency rooms and cardiac units, with examples coming from multiple European countries. Furthermore, we provide a guidance to reorganization of catheterization laboratories and, importantly, measures for protection of healthcare providers involved with invasive procedures. Abbreviations ACS= acute coronary syndrome ED = emergency department HCWs = healthcare workers NSTEMI = non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention PPE = personal protective equipment STEMI = ST-elevation myocardial infarction Myocardial injury: the role of cardiac biomarkersAcute myocardial injury is defined as a rise and fall in cardiac troponin (cTn) with at least one value above the 99 th percentile 1840 A. Chieffo et al.

Aims Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) without return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) despite conventional resuscitation is common and has poor outcomes. Adding extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) to cardiopulmonary resuscitation (extracorporeal-CPR) is increasingly used in an attempt to improve outcomes. Methods and results We analysed a prospective registry of 13 191 OHCAs in the Paris region from May 2011 to January 2018. We compared survival at hospital discharge with and without extracorporeal-CPR and identified factors associated with survival in patients given extracorporeal-CPR. Survival was 8% in 525 patients given extracorporeal-CPR and 9% in 12 666 patients given conventional-CPR (P = 0.91). By adjusted multivariate analysis, extracorporeal-CPR was not associated with hospital survival [odds ratio (OR), 1.3; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.8–2.1; P = 0.24]. By conditional logistic regression with matching on a propensity score (including age, sex, occurrence at home, bystander CPR, initial rhythm, collapse-to-CPR time, duration of resuscitation, and ROSC), similar results were found (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.5–1.3; P = 0.41). In the extracorporeal-CPR group, factors associated with hospital survival were initial shockable rhythm (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.5–10.3; P = 0.005), transient ROSC before ECMO (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1–4.7; P = 0.03), and prehospital ECMO implantation (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.5–5.9; P = 0.002). Conclusions In a population-based registry, 4% of OHCAs were treated with extracorporeal-CPR, which was not associated with increased hospital survival. Early ECMO implantation may improve outcomes. The initial rhythm and ROSC may help select patients for extracorporeal-CPR.

Background Survival after sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) remains low and tools for improved prediction of individuals at long-term risk for SCA are still awaited. Alternative short-term approaches aimed at pre-emptive risk stratification and prevention are needed. Objective To assess characteristics of symptoms in the four weeks prior to SCA, and whether the response to these symptoms may be associated with a better outcome. Design Ongoing prospective population-based study. Setting Population of approximately one million in the Northwestern US (2002–2012). Patients Middle-aged residents (35–65 years) suffering from SCA. Measurement Multiple sources assessment of symptoms in the four weeks preceding SCA and association with survival to hospital discharge. Results Of 839 SCA patients with comprehensive assessment of symptoms (51±12 years, 75% male), 430 patients (51%; 50% male vs. 53% female, P=0.59) experienced warning symptoms, mainly chest pain and dyspnea. In the majority of symptomatic patients (93%), symptoms recurred during the 24 hours preceding SCA. Only 81 patients (19%) called emergency medical services (911) to report symptoms prior to SCA; these were more likely to be patients with a history of heart disease (P<0.001) and/or continuous chest pain (P<0.001). Survival when 911 was called in response to symptoms was 32.1% (95%CI 21.8–42.4), compared to 6.0% (95%CI 3.5–8.5) in those who did not call (P<0.001). This association remained after considering potential confounders. Limitations Potential for recall and response bias; symptom assessment not available in 24% patients; missing data for some patients and SCA characteristics. Conclusions Warning symptoms are frequent prior to SCA but the vast majority of these are not acted upon. Emergent medical care was associated with survival in patients with symptoms, emphasizing a potential role for future approaches that enable short-term prevention of SCA. Primary Funding Source NHLBI.

No abstract