Background. The pandemic of Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) is challenging, given the large number of hospitalized patients. Cardiovascular co-morbidities are linked to a higher mortality risk. Thus, patients with Congenital Heart Disease (CHD) might represent a high-risk population. Nevertheless, no data about them are available, yet. Hence, we conducted a nationwide survey to assess clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients with congenital heart disease affected by COVID-19. Methods and Results. This is a multi-centre, observational, nationwide survey, involving high-volume Italian CHD centres. COVID-19 diagnosis was defined as either “clinically suspected” or “confirmed”, where a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV2) test had been performed and was positive. Cardiovascular comorbidities were observed among adult patients—atrial fibrillation (seven; 9%), hypertension (five; 7%), obesity (seven; 9%) and diabetes (one; 1%)—but were absent among children. Cardiovascular complications were mainly observed in the “confirmed” COVID-19⁺ group, consisting of heart failure (9%), palpitations/arrhythmias (3%), stroke/TIA (3%) and pulmonary hypertension (3%). Cardiovascular symptoms such as chest pain (1%), myocardial injury (1%) and pericardial effusion (1%) were also recorded. On the contrary, CHD patients from the clinically suspected COVID-19 group presented no severe symptoms or complications. Conclusions. Despite previous reports pointing to a higher case-fatality rate among patients with cardiovascular co-morbidities, we observed a mild COVID-19 clinical course in our cohort of CHD patients. Although these results should be confirmed in larger cohorts to investigate the underlying mechanisms, the findings of low cardiovascular complications rates and no deaths are reassuring for CHD patients.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective multicentre study was to investigate and compare clinical outcomes of unilateral and bilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion (ACP) strategies on cerebral protection during surgery for type A aortic dissection. METHODS: Data from 646 patients who underwent surgical repair of thoracic type A aortic dissection using unilateral and bilateral ACP with moderate hypothermic circulatory arrest in 3 cardiac surgical institutions between 2008 and 2018 were analysed. Propensity matching was performed to assess which technique ensured better outcomes. RESULTS: Unilateral and bilateral ACP techniques were performed in 250 (39%) and in 396 (61%) patients, respectively. Propensity score analysis identified 189 matched pairs. In the matched cohort, the lowest core temperature was 27.5°C and 28°C in the bilateral and unilateral groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The unilateral technique required significantly shorter aortic cross-clamp and cardiopulmonary bypass times than bilateral technique [82 min vs 100 min (P < 0.001); 170 min vs 195 min (P < 0.001)]. The 30-day mortality was comparable (P = 0.325). The bilateral group reported a significantly higher incidence of permanent neurologic deficits (P < 0.001), left brain hemisphere stroke (P = 0.007) and all-combined complications (P < 0.001). Ten-year survival was comparable (P = 0.45). CONCLUSIONS: Unilateral and bilateral ACP are both valid brain protection strategies in the landscape of aortic arch surgery. While admitting all the study limitations, unilateral technique could offer some clinical advantages. Clinical registration number: 76049

Since its first description in 1971, the Fontan procedure and its modifications have led to a substantial improvement in the survival rates of patients with a variety of types of complex Congenital Heart Disease (CHD) characterised by the presence of a single, dominant ventricle. However, despite the significant improvement of the prognosis over the years, Fontan patients are still exposed to several cardiovascular and systemic complications. It is, therefore, important to fully understand the pitfalls hidden behind a Fontan anatomy and the potential predictors of ventricular failure. Cardiovascular imaging plays a key role in this context, allowing for the early identification of complications with important prognostic implications. Echocardiography remains the first-line imaging modality for serial evaluation of Fontan patients. However, there is a growing role of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and cardiac computed tomography from pre-operative assessment to longitudinal follow-up. The aim of this paper will be to provide a comprehensive overview of the role, strengths, and weaknesses of each imaging modality in the assessment of congenital cardiac conditions palliated with the Fontan procedure.

Background: Management of pregnancy and risk stratification in women with congenital heart diseases (CHD) are challenging, especially due to physiological haemodynamic modifications that inevitably occur during pregnancy.Aims: To compare the accuracy of the existing pregnancy cardiovascular risk scores in prediction of maternal complications during pregnancy in CHD patients.Method and results: From 2007 to 2018, all pregnant women with a CHD who delivered birth after 20 weeks of gestation were identified. The discriminating power and the accuracy of the five existing pregnancy cardiovascular risk scores [CARPREG, CARPREG II, HARRIS, ZAHARA risk scores, and modified WHO (mWHO)] were evaluated.Out of 104 pregnancies in 65 CHD patients, 29% experienced cardiovascular complications during pregnancy or post-partum. For the five scores, the observed rate of cardiovascular events was higher than the expected risk. The values of area under the ROC curve were 0.75 (0.62–0.88) for mWHO, 0.65 (0.53–0.77) for CARPREG II, 0.60 (0.40–0.80) for HARRIS, 0.59 (0.47–0.72) for ZAHARA, and 0.58 (0.43–0.73) for CARPREG.Conclusion: The modified WHO classification appeared to better predict cardiovascular outcome in pregnant women with CHD than the four other existing risk scores.Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04221048.

Women’s participation is steadily growing in medical schools, but they are still not sufficiently represented in cardiology, particularly in cardiology leadership positions. We present the contemporary distribution of women leaders in cardiology departments in the World Health Organization European region. Between August and December 2020, we applied purposive sampling to collect data and analyse gender distribution of heads of cardiology department in university/third level hospitals in 23 countries: Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, North Macedonia, Morocco, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, and the UK. Age, cardiology subspecialty, and number of scientific publications were recorded for a subgroup of cardiology leaders for whom data were available. A total of 849 cardiology departments were analysed. Women leaders were only 30% (254/849) and were younger than their men counterpart (♀ 52.2 ± 7.7 years old vs. ♂ 58.1 ± 7.6 years old, P = 0.00001). Most women leaders were non-interventional experts (♀ 82% vs. ♂ 46%, P < 0.00001) and had significantly fewer scientific publications than men {♀ 16 [interquartile range (IQR) 2–41] publications vs. ♂ 44 (IQR 9–175) publications, P < 0.00001}. Across the World Health Organization European region, there is a significant gender disparity in cardiology leadership positions. Fostering a diverse and inclusive workplace is a priority to achieve the full potential and leverage the full talents of both women and men.