This review emphasizes the importance of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) in patients diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). In contrast to standard exercise testing and stress echoes, which are limited due to the ECG changes and wall motion abnormalities that characterize this condition, CPET allows for the assessment of the complex pathophysiology and severity of the disease, its mechanisms of functional limitation, and its risk stratification. It is useful tool to evaluate the risk for sudden cardiac death and select patients for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), cardiac transplantation, or mechanical circulatory support, especially when symptomatology and functional status are uncertain. It may help in differentiating HCM from other forms of cardiac hypertrophy, such as athletes’ heart. Finally, it is used to guide and monitor therapy as well as for exercise prescription. It may be considered every 2 years in clinically stable patients or every year in patients with worsening symptoms. Although performed only in specialized centers, CPET combined with echocardiography (i.e., CPET imaging) and invasive CPET are more informative and provide a better assessment of cardiac functional status, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, and diastolic dysfunction during exercise in patients with HCM.

Multimodal imaging plays a central role in optimizing the evaluation and management of myocardial ischemia by leveraging the complementary strengths of echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET), and invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Noninvasive functional imaging is typically recommended for patients with intermediate to high pre-test probability of coronary artery disease, while coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) is preferred for low to intermediate risk. Stress echocardiography is valuable for detecting wall motion abnormalities and is particularly effective in multivessel or left main disease, where perfusion techniques may miss balanced ischemia. CMR offers high spatial resolution and quantitative assessment of myocardial blood flow (MBF), while SPECT and PET quantify ischemic burden, with PET providing superior accuracy for MBF and microvascular disease. ICA remains the gold standard for defining the presence, location, and severity of epicardial coronary stenosis. It is indicated when noninvasive imaging reveals high-risk features, when symptoms are refractory to medical therapy, or when noninvasive results are inconclusive. While ICA offers high spatial resolution, it alone cannot assess the hemodynamic significance of intermediate lesions, nor the coronary microvasculature. Adjunctive invasive hemodynamic and provocative coronary testing (e.g., Fractional Flow Reserve—FFR, invasive Coronary Flow Reserve—CFR, Index of Microcirculatory Resistance—IMR, acetylcholine test) provide essential insights, especially in ischemia with nonobstructive coronary arteries. Given its procedural risks, ICA should be reserved for cases where it will impact management. Intravascular imaging may be used to further characterize lesions. In summary, modality selection should be individualized based on patient characteristics, comorbidities, contraindications, and the need for anatomical versus physiological data. Integrating noninvasive and invasive modalities provides a comprehensive, patient-centered approach to ischemia evaluation.

Heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a clinical syndrome in which the structure and the function of the heart are damaged, with stiffness of the heart muscle, increased pressures in diastole and in the pulmonary circulation. The latest understanding of HFpEF is that it is a systemic disease of the microcirculation with chronic inflammation and impaired cellular metabolism. The aim of this review was to determine the association between physical activity and HFpEF based on the available research. By summarizing the literature data, it was shown that a sedentary lifestyle represents a risk factor for HFpEF and that continuous physical activity prevents the occurrence of HFpEF, while in patients already suffering from HFpEF it increases functional capacity, as well as the quality of life, mainly due to the improvement of peripheral muscles oxidative metabolism. The impact of physical activity on improving the diastolic function of the heart in people with heart failure is still under research. Patients with HFpEF usually have poor exercise tolerance, thus an individualized prescription of physical activity is indicated in accordance with their capabilities, preferably a combination of aerobic training, strength exercises, balance and an adequate diet. The gold standard for the assessment of aerobic capacity is the cardiopulmonary exercise test, which allows the measurement of oxygen consumption, maximum heart rate, the first and the second anaerobic thresholds, parameters needed for dosing the intensity of physical exercise.