Aims: This European Association Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) Expert Consensus document aims at defining the main quantitative information on cardiac structure and function that needs to be included in standard echocardiographic report following recent ASE/EACVI chamber quantification, diastolic function, and heart valve disease recommendations. The document focuses on general reporting and specific pathological conditions such as heart failure, coronary artery and valvular heart disease, cardiomyopathies, and systemic diseases. Methods and results: Demographic data (age, body surface area, blood pressure, and heart rhythm and rate), type (vendor and model) of ultrasound system used and image quality need to be reported. In addition, measurements should be normalized for body size. Reference normal values, derived by ASE/EACVI recommendations, shall always be reported to differentiate normal from pathological conditions. This Expert Consensus document suggests avoiding the surveillance of specific variable using different ultrasound techniques (e.g. in echo labs with high expertise in left ventricular ejection fraction by 3D and not by 2D echocardiography). The report should be also tailored in relation with different cardiac pathologies, quality of images, and needs of the caregivers. Conclusion: The conclusion should be concise reflecting the status of left ventricular structure and function, the presence of left atrial and/or aortic dilation, right ventricular dysfunction, and pulmonary hypertension, leading to an objective communication with the patient health caregiver. Variation over time should be considered carefully, taking always into account the consistency of the parameters used for comparison.

Background—: The choice of imaging techniques in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) varies between countries, regions, and hospitals. This prospective, multicenter, comparative effectiveness study was designed to assess the relative accuracy of commonly used imaging techniques for identifying patients with significant CAD. Methods and Results—: A total of 475 patients with stable chest pain and intermediate likelihood of CAD underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography and stress myocardial perfusion imaging by single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and ventricular wall motion imaging by stress echocardiography or cardiac magnetic resonance. If ≥1 test was abnormal, patients underwent invasive coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined by invasive coronary angiography as >50% stenosis of the left main stem, >70% stenosis in a major coronary vessel, or 30% to 70% stenosis with fractional flow reserve ≤0.8. Significant CAD was present in 29% of patients. In a patient-based analysis, coronary computed tomographic angiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve being 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.88–0.94), sensitivity being 91%, and specificity being 92%. Myocardial perfusion imaging had good diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve, 0.74; confidence interval, 0.69–0.78), sensitivity 74%, and specificity 73%. Wall motion imaging had similar accuracy (area under the curve, 0.70; confidence interval, 0.65–0.75) but lower sensitivity (49%, P <0.001) and higher specificity (92%, P <0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging and wall motion imaging were lower than that of coronary computed tomographic angiography ( P <0.001). Conclusions—: In a multicenter European population of patients with stable chest pain and low prevalence of CAD, coronary computed tomographic angiography is more accurate than noninvasive functional testing for detecting significant CAD defined invasively. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00979199.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the commonest cardiac rhythm disorder. Evaluation of patients with AF requires an electrocardiogram, but imaging techniques should be considered for defining management and driving treatment. The present document is an expert consensus from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the European Heart Rhythm Association. The clinical value of echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), computed tomography (CT), and nuclear imaging in AF patients are challenged. Left atrial (LA) volume and strain in echocardiography as well as assessment of LA fibrosis in CMR are discussed. The value of CT, especially in planning interventions, is highlighted. Fourteen consensus statements have been reached. These may serve as a guide for both imagers and electrophysiologists for best selecting the imaging technique and for best interpreting its results in AF patients.

Contrast echocardiography is widely used in cardiology. It is applied to improve image quality, reader confidence and reproducibility both for assessing left ventricular (LV) structure and function at rest and for assessing global and regional function in stress echocardiography. The use of contrast in echocardiography has now extended beyond cardiac structure and function assessment to evaluation of perfusion both of the myocardium and of the intracardiac structures. Safety of contrast agents have now been addressed in large patient population and these studies clearly established its excellent safety profile. This document, based on clinical trials, randomized and multicentre studies and published clinical experience, has established clear recommendations for the use of contrast in various clinical conditions with evidence-based protocols.

Cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of death not only in Europe but also in the rest of the World. Preventive measures, however, often fail and cardiovascular disease may manifest as an acute coronary syndrome, stroke or even sudden death after years of silent progression. Thus, there is a considerable need for innovative diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to improve the quality of care and limit the burden of cardiovascular diseases. During the past 10 years, several retrospective and prospective clinical studies have been published using ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) to quantify inflammation in atherosclerotic plaques. However, the current variety of imaging protocols used for vascular (arterial) imaging with FDG PET considerably limits the ability to compare results between studies and to build large multicentre imaging registries. Based on the existing literature and the experience of the Members of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) Cardiovascular Committee, the objective of this position paper was to propose optimized and standardized protocols for imaging and interpretation of PET scans in atherosclerosis. These recommendations do not, however, replace the individual responsibility of healthcare professionals to make appropriate decisions in the circumstances of the individual study protocols used and the individual patient, in consultation with the patient and, where appropriate and necessary, the patient’s guardian or carer. These recommendations suffer from the absence of conclusive evidence on many of the recommendations. Therefore, they are not intended and should not be used as "strict guidelines" but should, as already mentioned, provide a basis for standardized clinical atherosclerosis PET imaging protocols, which are subject to further and continuing evaluation and improvement. However, this EANM position paper might indeed be a first step towards "official" guidelines on atherosclerosis imaging with PET.