Infection of the heart muscle with cardiotropic viruses is one of the major aetiologies of myocarditis and acute and chronic inflammatory cardiomyopathy (DCMi). However, viral myocarditis and subsequent dilated cardiomyopathy is still a challenging disease to diagnose and to treat and is therefore a significant public health issue globally. Advances in clinical examination and thorough molecular genetic analysis of intramyocardial viruses and their activation status have incrementally improved our understanding of molecular pathogenesis and pathophysiology of viral infections of the heart muscle. To date, several cardiotropic viruses have been implicated as causes of myocarditis and DCMi. These include, among others, classical cardiotropic enteroviruses (Coxsackieviruses B), the most commonly detected parvovirus B19, and human herpes virus 6. A newcomer is the respiratory virus that has triggered the worst pandemic in a century, SARS-CoV-2, whose involvement and impact in viral cardiovascular disease is under scrutiny. Despite extensive research into the pathomechanisms of viral infections of the cardiovascular system, our knowledge regarding their treatment and management is still incomplete. Accordingly, in this review, we aim to explore and summarize the current knowledge and available evidence on viral infections of the heart. We focus on diagnostics, clinical relevance and cardiovascular consequences, pathophysiology, and current and novel treatment strategies.

Human parvovirus B19 (B19V) is the predominant cardiotropic virus associated with dilated inflammatory cardiomyopathy (DCMi). Transcriptionally active cardiotropic B19V infection is clinically relevant and triggers adverse long-term mortality. During the study; we evaluated whether antiviral treatment with the nucleoside analogue telbivudine (LTD) is effective in suppressing transcriptional active B19V in endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs) of B19V positive patients and improving clinical outcomes. Seventeen B19V-positive patients (13 male; mean age 45.7 ± 13.9 years; mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 37.7 ± 13.5%) with positive B19V DNA and transcriptional activity (B19V mRNA) in EMBs were treated with 600 mg/d LTD over a period of six months. Patients underwent EMBs before and after termination of the LTD treatment. B19V RNA copy numbers remained unchanged in 3/17 patients (non-responder) and declined or disappeared completely in the remaining 14/17 patients (responder) (p ≤ 0.0001). Notably; LVEF improvement was more significant in patients who reduced or lost B19V RNA (responder; p = 0.02) in contrast to non-responders (p = 0.7). In parallel; responder patients displayed statistically significant improvement in quality of life (QoL) questionnaires (p = 0.03) and dyspnea on exertion (p = 0.0006), reflecting an improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) Classification (p = 0.001). Our findings demonstrated for the first time that suppression of B19V transcriptional activity by LTD treatment improved hemodynamic and clinical outcome significantly. Thus; the present study substantiates the clinical relevance of detecting B19V transcriptional activity of the myocardium.

Aims: The diagnostic approach to idiopathic giant-cell myocarditis (IGCM) is based on identifying various patterns of inflammatory cell infiltration and multinucleated giant cells (GCs) in histologic sections taken from endomyocardial biopsies (EMBs). The sampling error for detecting focally located GCs by histopathology is high, however. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of gene profiling as a new diagnostic method in clinical practice, namely in a large cohort of patients suffering from acute cardiac decompensation. Methods and Results: In this retrospective multicenter study, EMBs taken from n = 427 patients with clinically acute cardiac decompensation and suspected acute myocarditis were screened (mean age: 47.03 ± 15.69 years). In each patient, the EMBs were analyzed on the basis of histology, immunohistology, molecular virology, and gene-expression profiling. Out of the total of n = 427 patient samples examined, GCs could be detected in 26 cases (6.1%) by histology. An established myocardial gene profile consisting of 27 genes was revealed; this was narrowed down to a specified profile of five genes (CPT1, CCL20, CCR5, CCR6, TLR8) which serve to identify histologically proven IGCM with high specificity in 25 of the 26 patients (96.2%). Once this newly established profiling approach was applied to the remaining patient samples, an additional n = 31 patients (7.3%) could be identified as having IGCM without any histologic proof of myocardial GCs. In a subgroup analysis, patients diagnosed with IGCM using this gene profiling respond in a similar fashion to immunosuppressive therapy as patients diagnosed with IGCM by conventional histology alone. Conclusions: Myocardial gene-expression profiling is a promising new method in clinical practice, one which can predict IGCM even in the absence of any direct histologic proof of GCs in EMB sections. Gene profiling is of great clinical relevance in terms of (a) overcoming the sampling error associated with purely histologic examinations and (b) monitoring the effectiveness of therapy.