Background: The scope of pericardial involvement in COVID‐19 infection is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence, associates, and clinical impact of pericardial involvement in hospitalized patients with COVID‐19. Methods and Results: Consecutive patients with COVID‐19 underwent clinical and echocardiographic examination, irrespective of clinical indication, within 48 hours as part of a prospective predefined protocol. Protocol included clinical symptoms and signs suggestive of pericarditis, calculation of modified early warning score, ECG and echocardiographic assessment for pericardial effusion, left and right ventricular systolic and diastolic function, and hemodynamics. We identified predictors of mortality and assessed the adjunctive value of pericardial effusion on top of clinical and echocardiographic parameters. The study included 530 patients. Pericardial effusion was found in 75 (14%), but only 17 patients (3.2%) fulfilled the criteria for acute pericarditis. Pericardial effusion was independently associated with modified early warning score, brain natriuretic peptide, and right ventricular function. It was associated with excess mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.44; P =0.0005) in nonadjusted analysis. In multivariate analysis adjusted for modified early warning score and echocardiographic and hemodynamic parameters, it was marginally associated with mortality (HR, 1.86; P =0.06) and improvement in the model fit ( P =0.07). Combined assessment for pericardial effusion with modified early warning score, left ventricular ejection fraction, and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion was an independent predictor of outcome (HR, 1.86; P =0.02) and improved model fit ( P =0.02). Conclusions: In hospitalized patients with COVID‐19, pericardial effusion is prevalent, but rarely attributable to acute pericarditis. It is associated with myocardial dysfunction and mortality. A limited echocardiographic examination, including left ventricular ejection fraction, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, and assessment for pericardial effusion, can contribute to outcome prediction.

Valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is emerging as an effective treatment for patients with symptomatically failing bioprosthetic valves and a high prohibitive surgical risk; a longer life expectancy has led to a higher demand for these valve reinterventions due to the increased possibilities of outliving the bioprosthetic valve’s durability. Coronary obstruction is the most feared complication of valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR; it is a rare but life-threatening complication and occurs most frequently at the left coronary artery ostium. Accurate pre-procedural planning, mainly based on cardiac computed tomography, is crucial to determining the feasibility of a ViV TAVR and to assessing the anticipated risk of a coronary obstruction and the eventual need for coronary protection measures. Intraprocedurally, the aortic root and a selective coronary angiography are useful for evaluating the anatomic relationship between the aortic valve and coronary ostia; transesophageal echocardiographic real-time monitoring of the coronary flow with a color Doppler and pulsed-wave Doppler is a valuable tool that allows for a determination of real-time coronary patency and the detection of asymptomatic coronary obstructions. Because of the risk of developing a delayed coronary obstruction, the close postprocedural monitoring of patients at a high risk of developing coronary obstructions is advisable. CT simulations of ViV TAVR, 3D printing models, and fusion imaging represent the future directions that may help provide a personalized lifetime strategy and tailored approach for each patient, potentially minimizing complications and improving outcomes.

Background: Advanced heart failure (HF) patients usually poorly tolerate guideline‐directed HF medical therapy (GDMT) and suffer high rates of morbidity and mortality. The use of continuous inotropes in the outpatient settings is hampered by previous data showing excess morbidity. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of repetitive, intermittent, short‐term intravenous milrinone therapy in advanced HF patients with an intention to introduce and up‐titrate GDMT and improve functional class.Hypothesis: Repetitive, intermittent milrinone therapy may assist with the stabilization of advanced HF patients.Methods: Advanced HF patients treated with beta‐blockers and implanted with defibrillators were initiated with repetitive, intermittent short‐term intravenous milrinone therapy at our HF outpatient unit. Patients were prospectively followed with defibrillator interrogation, functional class assessment, B‐natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels, and echocardiography parameters.Results: The cohort included 24 patients with a mean 330 ± 240 days of milrinone therapy exposure. Mean age was 73 ± 6 years with male predominance (96%). Following milrinone therapy, median BNP levels decreased significantly (882 [286−3768] to 631 [278−1378] pg/ml, p = .017) with a significant reduction in the number of patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class III and IV (p = .012, 0.013) and an increase in number of patients on GDMT. Importantly, the number of total sustained ventricular tachycardia events and HF hospitalizations did not change.Conclusions: In this small cohort of advanced HF, repetitive, intermittent, short‐term milrinone therapy was found to be safe and potentially efficacious.

Background. High-grade AV block (HGAVB) is a life-threatening condition. Acute kidney injury (AKI) which is usually caused by renal hypo-perfusion is associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to investigate the association between AKI and HGAVB. Methods. This is a retrospective cohort comparing the incidence of AKI among patients with HGAVB requiring pacemaker implantation compared with propensity score matched controls. Primary outcome was the incidence of AKI at admission. Secondary outcomes were change in creatinine levels, AKI during stay, recovery from AKI, mortality and major adverse kidney events (MAKE). Results. In total, 80 HGAVB patients were compared to 400 controls. HGAVB patients had a higher proportion of admission AKI compared to controls (36.2% versus 21.1%, RR = 1.71 [1.21–2.41], p = 0.004). Creatinine changes from baseline to admission and to maximum during hospitalization, were also higher in HGAVB (p = 0.042 and p = 0.033). Recovery from AKI was more frequent among HGAVB patients (55.2% vs. 25.9%, RR = 2.13 [1.31–3.47], p = 0.004) with hospitalization time, MAKE and crude mortality similar (p > 0.158). Conclusions. AKI occurs in about one third of patients admitted with HGAVB, more frequent compared to controls. Patients with AKI accompanying HGAVB were likelier to recover from AKI. Further studies to explore this relationship could aid in clinical decision making for HGAVB patients.