Myocardial ischemia–reperfusion injury (MIRI) remains a challenge in the context of reperfusion procedures for myocardial infarction (MI). While early revascularization stands as the gold standard for mitigating myocardial injury, recent insights have illuminated the paradoxical role of reperfusion, giving rise to the phenomenon known as ischemia–reperfusion injury. This comprehensive review delves into the intricate pathophysiological pathways involved in MIRI, placing a particular focus on the pivotal role of endothelium. Beyond elucidating the molecular intricacies, we explore the diverse clinical manifestations associated with MIRI, underscoring its potential to contribute substantially to the final infarct size, up to 50%. We further navigate through current preventive approaches and highlight promising emerging strategies designed to counteract the devastating effects of the phenomenon. By synthesizing current knowledge and offering a perspective on evolving preventive interventions, this review serves as a valuable resource for clinicians and researchers engaged in the dynamic field of MIRI.

This comprehensive review explores the incidence, pathophysiology, and management of atrial fibrillation (AF) following percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO). Although AF is considered a common adverse event post PFO closure, its incidence, estimated at <5%, varies based on monitoring methods. The review delves into the challenging task of precisely estimating AF incidence, given subclinical AF and diverse diagnostic approaches. Notably, a temporal pattern emerges, with peak incidence around the 14th day after closure and a subsequent decline after the 45th day, mimicking general population AF trends. The pathophysiological mechanisms behind post PFO closure AF remain elusive, with proposed factors including local irritation, device‐related interference, tissue stretch, and nickel hypersensitivity. Management considerations encompass rhythm control, with flecainide showing promise, and anticoagulation tailored to individual risk profiles. The authors advocate for a personalized approach, weighing factors like age, comorbidities, and device characteristics. Notably, postclosure AF is generally considered benign, often resolving spontaneously within 45 days, minimizing thromboembolic risks. Further studies are required to refine understanding and provide evidence‐based guidelines.

The Bicuspid Aortic Valve (BAV) is the most common congenital anomaly in adults, with a global incidence of 1.3%. Despite being well documented, BAV presents significant clinical challenges due to its phenotypic heterogeneity, diverse clinical manifestations, and variable outcomes. Pathophysiologically, BAV differs from tricuspid valves in calcification patterns and hemodynamic effects, leading to increased shear stress and aortic root dilatation, while it is influenced by genetic and hemodynamic factors. This is why therapeutically, BAV presents challenges for both surgical and transcatheter interventions, with surgical approaches being traditionally preferred, especially when aortopathy is present. However, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a viable option, with studies showing comparable outcomes to surgery in selected patients, while advancements in TAVI and a better understanding of BAV’s genetic and pathophysiological nuances are expanding treatment options. The choice between mechanical and bioprosthetic valves also presents considerations, particularly regarding long-term durability and the need for anticoagulation. Future research should focus on long-term registries and genetic studies to refine therapeutic strategies and improve patient outcomes. This review aims to evaluate current approaches in the surgical and interventional management of BAV, focusing on its anatomy, pathogenesis, pathophysiology, and therapeutic strategies.

Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AoS) often present with acute heart failure and compensation, frequently leading to cardiogenic shock. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) has been recently performed as a bailout treatment in such patients. The aim of our meta-analysis is to compare urgent TAVR with elective procedures. We systematically screened three databases searching for studies comparing urgent vs elective TAVR. Primary endpoint is the 30-days mortality. Secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality, device success, periprocedural vascular complications, 30-days stroke, 30-days acute kidney injury (AKI), permanent pacemaker implantation (PPM), moderate or severe paravalvular leakage, and 30-days bleeding. Seventeen studies were included, with a total of 84,495 patients. Urgent TAVR was associated with an increased risk for 30-days mortality [Risk Ratio (RR): 2.53, 95% Confidence Intervals (CI): 1.81–3.54)], in-hospital mortality (RR: 2.67, 95% CI: 1.94–3.68), periprocedural vascular complications (RR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.28–2.85) and AKI (RR: 2.83, 95% CI: 1.93–4.14), compared with elective procedure. No differences were observed in the other secondary endpoints. Urgent TAVR was associated with higher in-hospital and 30-days mortality, possibly driven by the increased incidence of AKI and vascular complications in urgent TAVR. The results highlight the importance of early TAVR in stable AoS patients.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a revolutionary therapeutic modality for the management of severe aortic stenosis (AS), particularly in patients who are at high or prohibitive risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Over the past decade, extensive clinical evidence has expanded the indications for TAVI to include intermediate- and low-risk populations, which usually represent a population of younger age, in which the most common complications of TAVI, including paravalvular leak (PVL) and pacemaker implantation, should be avoided. This review focuses on the incidence and predictors of PVL in various types of TAVI implantation, its clinical implication, and the prevention strategies to tackle this complication.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been established as a safe and efficacious treatment for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Despite being initially developed and indicated for high-surgical-risk patients, it is now offered to low-risk populations based on the results of large randomized controlled trials. The most common access sites in the vast majority of patients undergoing TAVI are the common femoral arteries; however, 10–20% of the patients treated with TAVI require an alternative access route, mainly due to peripheral atherosclerotic disease or complex anatomy. Hence, to achieve successful delivery and implantation of the valve, several arterial approaches have been studied, including transcarotid (TCr), axillary/subclavian (A/Sc), transapical (TAp), transaortic (TAo), suprasternal-brachiocephalic (S-B), and transcaval (TCv). This review aims to concisely summarize the most recent literature data and current guidelines as well as evaluate the various access routes for TAVI, focusing on the indications, the various special patient groups, and the advantages and disadvantages of each technique, as well as their adverse events.