Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia, and its frequency will only continue to increase in the future. Despite available drug and electrophysical treatments, death and functional restrictions due to AF are still common. More comprehensive standards of care are therefore needed. Purpose: After a foreword regarding the link between physical activity and AF, this article aims to give to the clinician an overview of the benefits he may expect or not when including patients suffering from AF in a cardiac rehabilitation programme. Method: We selected prospective, randomised controlled trials published during the past 10 years and referenced in the PubMed Database evaluating the safety of rehabilitation and/or its impact on AF incidence or tolerance, and tried to summarise them to propose a narrative review. Conclusion: Cardiac rehabilitation, along with moderate and regular physical activity, has been proven to reduce the time in arrhythmia of patients with paroxysmal and persistent AF. In chronic AF, cardiac rehabilitation may decrease the resting ventricular response rate in patients and therefore improve symptoms linked to arrhythmia. These studies have managed to demonstrate cardiac rehabilitation as a safe and manageable option for AF patients, without serious risk of additional side effects. Its efficiency to limit the occurrence of serious undesirable outcomes, such as mortality and hospitalisation, has not been adequately demonstrated, likely due to the small scale of most studies and lack of long-term follow-up. Large-scale and long-term studies are thus desirable.

At the beginning of 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emerged as a new pandemic, leading to a worldwide health crisis and overwhelming healthcare systems due to high numbers of hospital admissions, insufficient resources, and a lack of standardized therapeutic protocols. Multiple genetic variants of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been detected since its first public declaration in 2020, some of them being considered variants of concern (VOCs) corresponding to several pandemic waves. Nevertheless, a growing number of COVID-19 patients are continuously discharged from hospitals, remaining symptomatic even months after their first episode of COVID-19 infection. Long COVID-19 or ‘post-acute COVID-19 syndrome’ emerged as the new pandemic, being characterized by a high variability of clinical manifestations ranging from cardiorespiratory and neurological symptoms such as chest pain, exertional dyspnoea or cognitive disturbance to psychological disturbances, e.g., depression, anxiety or sleep disturbance with a crucial impact on patients’ quality of life. Moreover, Long COVID is viewed as a new cardiovascular risk factor capable of modifying the trajectory of current and future cardiovascular diseases, altering the patients’ prognosis. Therefore, in this review we address the current definitions of Long COVID and its pathophysiology, with a focus on cardiovascular manifestations. Furthermore, we aim to review the mechanisms of acute and chronic cardiac injury and the variety of cardiovascular sequelae observed in recovered COVID-19 patients, in addition to the potential role of Long COVID clinics in the medical management of this new condition. We will further address the role of future research for a better understanding of the actual impact of Long COVID and future therapeutic directions.

Lung transplantation (LT) constitutes the last therapeutic option for selected patients with end-stage respiratory disease. Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) is a form of severe lung injury, occurring in the first 72 h following LT and constitutes the most common cause of early death after LT. The presence of pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been reported to favor PGD development, with a negative impact on patients’ outcomes while complicating medical management. Although several studies have suggested a potential association between pre-LT left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) and PGD occurrence, the underlying mechanisms of such an association remain elusive. Importantly, the heterogeneity of the study protocols and the various inclusion criteria used to define the diastolic dysfunction in those patients prevents solid conclusions from being drawn. In this review, we aim at summarizing PGD mechanisms, risk factors, and diagnostic criteria, with a further focus on the interplay between LVDD and PGD development. Finally, we explore the predictive value of several diastolic dysfunction diagnostic parameters to predict PGD occurrence and severity.

Background: Recent data from European studies (EUROASPIRE V, DA VINCI, SANTORINI) indicate that achieving the LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) target in patients at very high cardiovascular risk is uncommon. Additionally, using a combination therapy involving statins and ezetimibe remains infrequent. Methods: A single-center assessment of a pre-defined lipid lowering treatment algorithm’s effectiveness at achieving the LDL-C target in patients at very high cardiovascular risk one month and one year after hospitalization. Results: 81 patients were included, all in secondary prevention. The average age of the patient was 66.9 years, and the main cardiovascular risk factors included hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and smoking history. Following the predefined lipid-lowering algorithm specific to our study, which involves initiating high-intensity statin therapy or a combination of statin and ezetimibe depending on initial LDL-C levels and patient history; 30 (37%) patients initiated high-intensity statin therapy (Atorvastatin (40 mg, 80 mg) or Rosuvastatin (20 mg, 40 mg)), while 51 (63%) started combination therapy with high-intensity statin and ezetimibe 10 mg. After one year, 57 (70.4%) remained adherent to their initial treatment, achieving a mean LDL-C of 49.5 ± 16.9 mg/dL, with 36 (63.2%) of them reaching the LDL-C target of <55 mg/dL. A total of 13 patients discontinued treatment, and 9 were lost to follow-up, withdrew from the study, or died. Conclusion: Initiating dual statin and ezetimibe therapy or high-intensity statin therapy early, based on the expected treatment efficacy, holds the potential to more rapidly and effectively achieve LDL-C targets in a larger proportion of very high-risk cardiovascular patients.

Accessory pathway (AP) ablation often remains a challenging procedure, requiring a precise localisation of this pathway along the valvular annulus. Most of these procedures are still performed with...