With stress echo (SE) 2020 study, a new standard of practice in stress imaging was developed and disseminated: the ABCDE protocol for functional testing within and beyond CAD. ABCDE protocol was the fruit of SE 2020, and is the seed of SE 2030, which is articulated in 12 projects: 1-SE in coronary artery disease (SECAD); 2-SE in diastolic heart failure (SEDIA); 3-SE in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (SEHCA); 4-SE post-chest radiotherapy and chemotherapy (SERA); 5-Artificial intelligence SE evaluation (AI-SEE); 6-Environmental stress echocardiography and air pollution (ESTER); 7-SE in repaired Tetralogy of Fallot (SETOF); 8-SE in post-COVID-19 (SECOV); 9: Recovery by stress echo of conventionally unfit donor good hearts (RESURGE); 10-SE for mitral ischemic regurgitation (SEMIR); 11-SE in valvular heart disease (SEVA); 12-SE for coronary vasospasm (SESPASM). The study aims to recruit in the next 5 years (2021–2025) ≥10,000 patients followed for ≥5 years (up to 2030) from ≥20 quality-controlled laboratories from ≥10 countries. In this COVID-19 era of sustainable health care delivery, SE2030 will provide the evidence to finally recommend SE as the optimal and versatile imaging modality for functional testing anywhere, any time, and in any patient.

Stress echocardiography (SE) is a recommended diagnostic method in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD).¹ Resting global longitudinal strain (GLS), coronary flow velocity reserve in the left-anterior descending coronary artery (CFVR-LAD) and delta wall motion score index (d-WMSI) on SE have proven prognostic value.^2,3 Diagnostic accuracy comparison of these parameters for the detection of CAD and CAD burden is lacking. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of resting left-ventricular (LV) function variables (LVEF and GLS), and the stress-derived d-WMSI and CFVR-LAD in order to estimate the presence and the increasing severity of CAD. All consecutive patients who underwent SE for suspected CAD and coronary anatomy evaluation (invasive or not) within 90 days from SE were enrolled from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2020 at the Parma University Hospital (Parma, Italy). The exclusion criteria were i) known heart disease or ii) poor acoustic window. All patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography at rest and SE with dipyridamole and contrast media for LV border enhancement (SonoVue, Bracco Imaging, Milan, Italy).⁴ Resting GLS measurements were calculated and expressed in absolute values by blinded operators (N.G., D.T.), after the recruitment was complete, using Philips QLAB software (version 10.7). The wall motion score index was calculated at baseline and at peak stress using a 17-segment model of the LV. The CFVR-LAD was calculated as the hyperemic and basal peak diastolic coronary velocity ratio.⁴ Obstructive CAD was defined as the presence of a luminal reduction of ≥50% in the epicardial vessels. The modified Duke Prognostic Index was used to classify CAD burden according to the extension, location, and coronary stenosis severity.⁵ Patients with Duke Prognostic Index class >5 were defined as having severe CAD burden.

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is one of the major causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide, with a high socioeconomic impact. Currently, various guidelines and recommendations have been published about chronic coronary syndromes (CCS). According to the recent European Society of Cardiology guidelines on chronic coronary syndrome, a multimodal imaging approach is strongly recommended in the evaluation of patients with suspected CAD. Today, in the current practice, non-invasive imaging methods can assess coronary anatomy through coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and/or inducible myocardial ischemia through functional stress testing (stress echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, single photon emission computed tomography—SPECT, or positron emission tomography—PET). However, recent trials (ISCHEMIA and REVIVED) have cast doubt on the previous conception of the management of patients with CCS, and nowadays it is essential to understand the limitations and strengths of each imaging method and, specifically, when to choose a functional approach focused on the ischemia versus a coronary anatomy-based one. Finally, the concept of a pathophysiology-driven treatment of these patients emerged as an important goal of multimodal imaging, integrating ‘anatomical’ and ‘functional’ information. The present review aims to provide an overview of non-invasive imaging modalities for the comprehensive management of CCS patients.

Objective. Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) has emerged as a useful alternative intervention to redo-surgical aortic valve replacement (Redo-SVAR) for the treatment of degenerated bioprosthesis valve. However, there is no robust evidence about the long-term outcome of both treatments. The aim of this meta-analysis was to analyze the long-term outcomes of Redo-SVAR versus ViV-TAVI by reconstructing the time-to-event data. Methods. The search strategy consisted of a comprehensive review of relevant studies published between 1 January 2000 and 30 September 2022 in three electronic databases, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and EMBASE. Relevant studies were retrieved for the analysis. The primary endpoint was the long-term mortality for all death. The comparisons were made by the Cox regression model and by landmark analysis and a fully parametric model. A random-effect method was applied to perform the meta-analysis. Results. Twelve studies fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the final analysis. A total of 3547 patients were included. Redo-SAVR group included 1783 patients, and ViV-TAVI included 1764 subjects. Redo-SAVR showed a higher incidence of all-cause mortality within 30-days [Hazard ratio (HR) 2.12; 95% CI = 1.49–3.03; p < 0.0001)], whereas no difference was observed between 30 days and 1 year (HR = 1.03; 95% CI = 0.78–1.33; p = 0.92). From one year, Redo-SAVR showed a longer benefit (HR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.40–0.67; p < 0.0001). These results were confirmed for cardiovascular death (HR = 2.04; 95% CI = 1.29–3.22; p = 0.001 within one month from intervention; HR = 0.35; 95% CI = 0.18–0.71; p = 0.003 at 4-years follow-up). Conclusions. Although the long-term outcomes seem similar between Redo-SAVR and ViV-TAVI at a five-year follow-up, ViV-TAVI shows significative lower mortality within 30 days. This advantage disappeared between 30 days and 1 year and reversed in favor of redo-SAVR 1 year after the intervention.

Background: In patients with Ischemia and non-obstructive coronary artery stenosis (INOCA) wall motion is rarely abnormal during stress echocardiography (SE). Our aim was to determine if patients with INOCA and reduced coronary flow velocity reserve (CVFR) have altered cardiac mechanics using two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (2DSTE) during SE. Methods: In a prospective, multicenter, international study, we recruited 135 patients with INOCA. Overall, we performed high dose (0.84 mg/kg) dipyridamole SE with combined assessment of CVFR and 2DSTE. The population was divided in patients with normal CVFR (>2, group 1, n = 95) and abnormal CVFR (≤2, group 2, n = 35). Clinical and 2DSTE parameters were compared between groups. Results: Feasibility was high for CFVR (98%) and 2DSTE (97%). A total of 130 patients (mean age 63 ± 12 years, 67 women) had complete flow and strain data. The two groups showed similar 2DSTE values at rest. At peak SE, Group 1 patients showed lower global longitudinal strain (p < 0.007), higher mechanical dispersion (p < 0.0005), lower endocardial (p < 0.001), and epicardial (p < 0.0002) layer specific strain. Conclusions: In patients with INOCA, vasodilator SE with simultaneous assessment of CFVR and strain is highly feasible. Coronary microvascular dysfunction is accompanied by an impairment of global and layer-specific deformation indices during stress.