To compare the diagnostic accuracy of stress computed tomography myocardial perfusion (CTP) for the detection of significant coronary artery disease with visual approach vs. quantitative analysis with transmural perfusion ratio (TPR) in consecutive symptomatic patients scheduled for invasive coronary angiography (ICA) plus invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR). Eighty-eight consecutive symptomatic patients underwent rest coronary computed tomography angiography (cCTA) followed by static stress-CTP. Diagnostic accuracy of cCTA + stress-CTP with visual evaluation and with TPR measurement was calculated and compared with ICA and invasive FFR. Addition of stress-CTP with qualitative evaluation to rest-cCTA showed sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values, and accuracy at a vessel and patient level of 92%, 92%, 97%, 82%, 92% and 98%, 80%, 97%, 82%, 89%, respectively indicating a significant improvement of specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy values vs. rest-cCTA in both models. Similarly, addition of stress-CTP with TPR evaluation to rest-cCTA showed sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values, and accuracy at a vessel and patient level of 84%, 90%, 93%, 76%, 88% and 91%, 71%, 89%, 75%, 81%, respectively indicating a significant improvement of specificity, positive predictive value values vs. rest-cCTA only in a vessel-based model and of positive predictive value in a patient-based model. When cCTA + stress-CTP with qualitative evaluation was compared with cCTA + stress-CTP with TPR estimation, no differences were found in terms of diagnostic performance. The addition of stress-CTP with visual evaluation to cCTA imaging has similar diagnostic performance when compared with the quantitative analysis of myocardial perfusion based on TPR measurement.

Thanks to the advances in medical therapy and assist devices, the management of patients hospitalized in cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) is becoming increasingly challenging. In fact, Patients in the cardiac intensive care unit are frequently characterized by dynamic and variable diseases, which may evolve into several clinical phenotypes based on underlying etiology and its complexity. Therefore, the use of noninvasive tools in order to provide a personalized approach to these patients, according to their phenotype, may help to optimize the therapeutic strategies towards the underlying etiology. Echocardiography is the most reliable and feasible bedside method to assess cardiac function repeatedly, assisting clinicians not only in characterizing hemodynamic disorders, but also in helping to guide interventions and monitor response to therapies. Beyond basic echocardiographic parameters, its application has been expanded with the introduction of new tools such as lung ultrasound (LUS), the Venous Excess UltraSound (VexUS) grading system, and the assessment of pulmonary hypertension, which is fundamental to guide oxygen therapy. The aim of this review is to provide an overview on the current knowledge about the pathophysiology and echocardiographic evaluation of perfusion and congestion in patients in CICU, and to provide practical indications for the use of echocardiography across clinical phenotypes and new applications in CICU.

This sub-study deriving from a multicentre Italian register [Deformation Imaging by Strain in Chronic Heart Failure Over Sacubitril-Valsartan: A Multicenter Echocardiographic Registry (DISCOVER)-ARNI] investigated whether sacubitril/valsartan in addition to optimal medical therapy (OMT) could reduce the rate of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) indications for primary prevention in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) according to European guidelines indications, and its potential predictors. In this observational study, consecutive patients with HFrEF eligible for sacubitril/valsartan from 13 Italian centres were included. Lack of follow-up or speckle tracking data represented exclusion criteria. Demographic, clinical, biochemical, and echocardiographic data were collected at baseline and after 6 months from sacubitril/valsartan initiation. Of 351 patients, 225 (64%) were ICD carriers and 126 (36%) were not ICD carriers (of whom 13 had no indication) at baseline. After 6 months of sacubitril/valsartan, among 113 non-ICD carriers despite having baseline left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 35% and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class = II–III, 69 (60%) did not show ICD indications; 44 (40%) still fulfilled ICD criteria. Age, atrial fibrillation, mitral regurgitation > moderate, left atrial volume index (LAVi), and LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) significantly varied between the groups. With receiver operating characteristic curves, age ≥ 75 years, LAVi ≥ 42 mL/m² and LV GLS ≥−8.3% were associated with ICD indications persistence (area under the curve = 0.65, 0.68, 0.68, respectively). With univariate and multivariate analysis, only LV GLS emerged as significant predictor of ICD indications at follow-up in different predictive models. Sacubitril/valsartan may provide early improvement of NYHA class and LVEF, reducing the possible number of implanted ICD for primary prevention in HFrEF. Baseline reduced LV GLS was a strong marker of ICD indication despite OMT. Early therapy with sacubitril/valsartan may save infective/haemorrhagic risks and unnecessary costs deriving from ICDs. Sacubitril/valsartan saved 60% of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and without ICD [despite having LVEF ≥ 35% and New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II–III at baseline] from implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) indication after 6 months of therapy.