The REDUCE-IT [Reduction of Cardiovascular Events With Icosapent Ethyl (IPE)-Intervention Trial] trial showed robust reductions in ischaemic events with IPE vs. placebo, including reduced cardiovascular (CV) death, albeit with increased rates of bleeding, and of atrial fibrillation (AF).¹ These observations were confirmed in patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI).² Patients with recent (<12 months) acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are at very high risk of future CV events (including arrhythmias) for which they usually receive intensive antithrombotic therapy, which might increase bleeding risk with IPE. The benefit and safety of IPE in this specific patient subgroup are largely unknown and were explored in the present post hoc analysis of the original trial database.

Background: Hypertension remains the leading global risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, with suboptimal control rates despite guideline-directed therapies. Digital health and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies offer novel approaches for improving diagnosis, monitoring, and individualized treatment of hypertension. Objectives: To critically review the current landscape of AI-enabled digital tools for hypertension management, including emerging applications, implementation challenges, and future directions. Methods: A narrative review of recent PubMed-indexed studies (2019–2024) was conducted, focusing on clinical applications of AI and digital health technologies in hypertension. Emphasis was placed on real-world deployment, algorithmic explainability, digital biomarkers, and ethical/regulatory frameworks. Priority was given to high-quality randomized trials, systematic reviews, and expert consensus statements. Results: AI-supported platforms—including remote blood pressure monitoring, machine learning titration algorithms, and digital twins—have demonstrated early promise in improving hypertension control. Explainable AI (XAI) is critical for clinician trust and integration into decision-making. Equity-focused design and regulatory oversight are essential to prevent exacerbation of health disparities. Emerging implementation strategies, such as federated learning and co-design frameworks, may enhance scalability and generalizability across diverse care settings. Conclusions: AI-guided titration and digital twin approaches appear most promising for reducing therapeutic inertia, whereas cuffless blood pressure monitoring remains the least mature. Future work should prioritize pragmatic trials with equity and cost-effectiveness endpoints, supported by safeguards against bias, accountability gaps, and privacy risks.

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is a novel and evolving field dedicated to addressing the therapeutic challenges posed by patients at high surgical risk with mitral valve disease. TMVR can be categorized into two distinct fields based on the type of device and its specific indications: TMVR with transcatheter aortic valves (TAV) and TMVR with dedicated devices. Similar to aortic stenosis, TMVR with TAV requires a rigid support structure to secure the valve in place. As a result, it is indicated for patients with failing bioprothesis or surgical rings or mitral valve disease associated with severe mitral annular calcification (MAC), which furnishes the necessary foundation for valve anchoring. While TMVR with TAV has shown promising outcomes in valve-in-valve procedures, its effectiveness remains more contentious in valve-in-ring or valve-in-MAC procedures. Conversely, TMVR with dedicated devices seeks to address native mitral regurgitation, whether accompanied by MAC or not, providing an alternative to Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair (TEER) when TEER is not feasible or expected to yield unsatisfactory results. This emerging field is gradually surmounting technical challenges, including anchoring a valve in a non-calcified annulus and transitioning from the transapical route to the transeptal approach. Numerous devices are presently undergoing clinical trials. This review aims to furnish an overview of the supporting evidence for TMVR using TAV in each specific indication (valve-in-valve, valve-in-ring, valve-in-MAC). Subsequently, we will discuss the anticipated benefits of TMVR with dedicated devices over TEER, summarize the characteristics and clinical results of TMVR systems currently under investigation, and outline future prospects in this field.

With recent guidelines expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to younger patients, indications for redo-TAVR will also likely increase. When compared with TAVR, redo-TAVR is a rare and novel procedure. Current clinical data derived from registries suggest excellent safety, with low rates of 30-day and 1-year mortality following redo-TAVR. Proper understanding of data from bench studies regarding optimal valve configurations, of patient anatomy and of the technical properties of transcatheter heart valves (THV) is essential for patient selection and procedural success. Lifetime management of redo-TAVR should start before the index procedure, as the choice of the index THV has a major impact on the feasibility of redo-TAVR. Procedural optimization by adequate valve sizing, commissural alignment and adequate implant depth of both index and redo-THV are critical determinants of optimal hemodynamics for maximized valve longevity, as well as lifelong coronary access.

Aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) procedures are increasingly performed for the treatment of surgical bioprosthetic valve failure in patients at intermediate to high surgical risk. Although ViV procedures offer indisputable benefits in terms of procedural time, in-hospital length of stay, and avoidance of surgical complications, they also present unique challenges. Growing awareness of the technical difficulties and potential threats associated with ViV procedures mandates careful preprocedural planning. This review article offers an overview of the current state-of-the-art ViV procedures, with focus on patient and device selection, procedural planning, potential complications, and long-term outcomes. Finally, it discusses current research efforts and future directions aimed at improving ViV procedural success and patient outcomes.

Background: Mobile health applications have emerged as a novel tool to support secondary prevention after myocardial infarction (MI) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the impact of app-based interventions on clinically meaningful outcomes such as hospital readmissions remains uncertain. Objective: To systematically evaluate the effectiveness of smartphone app-based interventions in reducing unplanned hospital readmissions among post-MI/PCI patients. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed was conducted for randomized controlled trials published between January 2020 and April 2025. Eligible studies evaluated smartphone apps designed for secondary cardiovascular prevention and reported on unplanned hospital readmissions. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup analyses were performed based on follow-up duration and user adherence. Results: Four trials encompassing 827 patients met inclusion criteria. App-based interventions were associated with a significant reduction in unplanned hospital readmissions compared to standard care (RR 0.45; 95% CI: 0.23–0.89; p = 0.0219). Greater benefits were observed in studies with longer follow-up durations and higher adherence rates. Improvements in patient-reported outcomes, including health-related quality of life, were also documented. Heterogeneity was moderate. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were reported in only two studies and were not analyzed due to inconsistent definitions and low event rates. Conclusions: Smartphone applications for post-MI/PCI care are associated with reduced unplanned hospital readmissions and improved patient-reported outcomes. These tools may play a meaningful role in future cardiovascular care models, especially when sustained engagement and personalized features are prioritized.