(1) Background: The impact of armed conflicts on public health is undeniable, with psychological stress emerging as a significant risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Nevertheless, contemporary data regarding the influence of war on CVD, and especially on acute coronary syndrome (ACS), are scarce. Hence, the aim of the current study was to assess the repercussions of war on the admission and prognosis of patients admitted to a tertiary care center intensive cardiovascular care unit (ICCU). (2) Methods: All patients admitted to the ICCU during the first three months of the Israel–Hamas war (2023) were included and compared with all patients admitted during the same period in 2022. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. (3) Results: A total of 556 patients (184 females [33.1%]) with a median age of 70 (IQR 59–80) were included. Of them, 295 (53%) were admitted to the ICCU during the first three months of the war. Fewer Arab patients and more patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infraction (STEMI) were admitted during the war period (21.8% vs. 13.2%, p < 0.001, and 31.9% vs. 24.1%, p = 0.04, respectively), whereas non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients were admitted more frequently in the pre-war year (19.3% vs. 25.7%, p = 0.09). In-hospital mortality was similar in both groups (4.4% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.71; HR 1.42; 95% CI 0.6–3.32, p = 0.4). (4) Conclusions: During the first three months of the war, fewer Arab patients and more STEMI patients were admitted to the ICCU. Nevertheless, in-hospital mortality was similar in both groups.

Strict isolation precautions limit formal echocardiography use in the setting of COVID-19 infection. Information on the importance of handheld focused ultrasound for cardiac evaluation in these patients is scarce. This study investigated the utility of a handheld echocardiography device in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 in diagnosing cardiac pathologies and predicting the composite end point of in-hospital death, mechanical ventilation, shock, and acute decompensated heart failure. From April 28 through July 27, 2020, consecutive patients diagnosed with COVID-19 underwent evaluation with the use of handheld ultrasound (Vscan Extend with Dual Probe; GE Healthcare) within 48 hours of admission. The patients were divided into 2 groups: “normal” and “abnormal” echocardiogram, as defined by biventricular systolic dysfunction/enlargement or moderate/severe valvular regurgitation/stenosis. Among 102 patients, 26 (25.5%) had abnormal echocardiograms. They were older with more comorbidities and more severe presenting symptoms compared with the group with normal echocardiograms. The prevalences of the composite outcome among low- and high-risk patients (oxygen saturation < 94%) were 3.1% and 27.1%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that an abnormal echocardiogram at presentation was independently associated with the composite end point (odds ratio 6.19, 95% confidence interval 1.50-25.57; P = 0.012). An abnormal echocardiogram in COVID-19 infection settings is associated with a higher burden of medical comorbidities and independently predicts major adverse end points. Handheld focused echocardiography can be used as an important “rule-out” tool among high-risk patients with COVID-19 and should be integrated into their routine admission evaluation. However, its routine use among low-risk patients is not recommended.

Conduction abnormalities post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are common. Post-TAVI PR prolongation was mainly studied as an adjunct to new-onset bundle branch block. The net effect of isolated PR prolongation (IPRP) without post-TAVI QRS changes is not well known. The aim of this study was to define the incidence and clinical significance of post-TAVI IPRP. A total of 1108 consecutive TAVI patients were reviewed. Patients with IPRP were compared with patients without post-TAVI electrocardiogram (ECG) changes. Clinical outcomes included permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) and overall mortality. A total of 146 patients with IPRP were compared with 290 patients without post-TAVI ECG changes. At 1 year follow-up, 4 (2.7%) and 7 (2.4%) patients underwent PPI (P = 0.838) and 10 (6.8%) and 25 (8.6%) died (P = 0.521), from the study and control groups, respectively. No patient with IPRP and narrow QRS underwent PPI during 1 year post-TAVI, and all death events were non-cardiac except one unknown cause. Permanent pacemaker implantation rates among patients with IPRP and wide QRS were higher (n = 4, 12.1%), compared with patients with wide QRS without post-TAVI ECG change (n = 3, 4%) however not reaching statistical significance (P = 0.126). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated that in patients with narrow QRS, neither PR prolongation nor baseline or maximal PR intervals was associated with the combined endpoint of PPI and mortality. However, in patients with wide QRS, baseline PR intervals and QRS width, but not PR prolongation were associated with the combined outcome. Post-TAVI IPRP in patients with narrow QRS is not associated with adverse outcome. This finding may translate clinically into a more permissive approach to these patients.

We sought to prospectively investigate the accuracy of an artificial intelligence (AI)-based tool for left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) assessment using a hand-held ultrasound device (HUD) in COVID-19 patients and to examine whether reduced LVEF predicts the composite endpoint of in-hospital death, advanced ventilatory support, shock, myocardial injury, and acute decompensated heart failure. COVID-19 patients were evaluated with a real-time LVEF assessment using an HUD equipped with an AI-based tool vs. assessment by a blinded fellowship-trained echocardiographer. Among 42 patients, those with LVEF < 50% were older with more comorbidities and unfavorable exam characteristics. An excellent correlation was demonstrated between the AI and the echocardiographer LVEF assessment (0.774, p < 0.001). Substantial agreement was demonstrated between the two assessments (kappa = 0.797, p < 0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the HUD for this threshold were 72.7% 100%, 100%, and 91.2%, respectively. AI-based LVEF < 50% was associated with worse composite endpoints; unadjusted OR = 11.11 (95% CI 2.25–54.94), p = 0.003; adjusted OR = 6.40 (95% CI 1.07–38.09, p = 0.041). An AI-based algorithm incorporated into an HUD can be utilized reliably as a decision support tool for automatic real-time LVEF assessment among COVID-19 patients and may identify patients at risk for unfavorable outcomes. Future larger cohorts should verify the association with outcomes.