Cardionerds: A Cardiology Podcast

The following question refers to Section 4.7 and Table 18 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by CardioNerds Academy Intern Student Dr. Shivani Reddy, answered first by Fellow at Johns Hopkins Dr. Rick Ferraro, and then by expert faculty Dr. Roger Blumenthal.Dr. Roger Blumenthal is professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins where he is Director of the Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease. He was instrumental in developing the 2018 ACC/AHA CV Prevention Guidelines. Dr. Blumenthal has also been an incredible mentor to CardioNerds from our earliest days.The CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series for the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines represents a collaboration with the ACC Prevention of CVD Section, the National Lipid Association, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association.Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Question #28 Mr. A. C. is a 78-year-old gentleman with a long-standing history of HTN receiving antihypertensive medications & dietary management for blood pressure control. What is the target diastolic blood pressure recommendation for all treated patients such as Mr. A.C.?A< 80 mmHgB< 90 mmHgC< 70 mmHgD< 95 mmHgE< 100 mmHg Answer #28 Explanation The correct answer is A: DBP < 80 mmHg Blood pressure treatment targets: when drug treatment is used, the aim is to control BP to target within 3 months. Blood pressure treatment targets in the 2021 ESC Prevention guidelines are more aggressive than previously recommended, as evidence now suggests the previously recommended targets were too conservative, especially for older patients. The magnitude of BP lowering is the most important driver of benefit. ·       It is recommended that the first objective of treatment is to lower BP to <140/90 mmHg in all patients, and that subsequent BP targets are tailored to age and specific comorbidities (Class 1). ·       In treated patients aged 18-69 years, it is recommended that SBP should ultimately be lowered to a target range of 120 – 130 mmHg in most patients (Class 1). ·       In treated patients aged ≥70 years, it is recommended that SBP should generally be targeted to <140 and down to 130 mmHg if tolerated (Class 1). ·       In all treated patients, DBP is recommended to be lowered to <80 mmHg (Class I). This change in the BP target range for older people compared with the 2016 ESC prevention guidelines is supported by evidence that these treatment targets are safely achieved in many older patients and are associated with significant reductions in the risk of major stroke, HF, and CV death. It also takes into account that the even lower SBP in the intensively treated group in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) (mean 124 mmHg) probably reflects a conventional office SBP range of 130-139 mmHg. It is recognized, however, that the evidence supporting more strict targets is less strong for very old people (>80 years) and those who are frail. Also, in these older and especially frail patients, it may be difficult to achieve the recommended target BP range due to poor tolerability or adverse effects, and high-quality measurement and monitoring for tolerability and adverse effects is especially important in these groups. Main Takeaway The first step in HTN management in all groups is a reduction to SBP < 140 mmHg and DBP < 80 mmHg, with further targets depending on age and comorbidities as specified by Table 18 of the 2021 ESC Prevention Guidelines. Guideline Loc. 1.     4.7.5.3 page 3285 2.     Table 18 page 3287 CardioNerds Decipher the Guidelines - 2021 ESC Prevention SeriesCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor RollCardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron!

The following question refers to Section 8.3 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The question is asked by Western Michigan University medical student & CardioNerds Intern Shivani Reddy, answered first by University of Southern California cardiology fellow and CardioNerds FIT Trialist Dr. Michael Francke, and then by expert faculty Dr. Prateeti Khazanie. Dr. Khazanie is an associate professor and advanced heart failure and transplant Cardiologist at the University of Colorado. Dr. Khazanie is an author on the 2022 ACC/AHA/HFSA HF Guidelines, the 2021 HFSA Universal Definition of Heart Failure, and multiple scientific statements. The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Clinical Trials Talks Question #22 You are taking care of a 34-year-old man with chronic systolic heart failure from NICM with LVEF 20% s/p CRT-D. The patient was admitted 1 week prior with acute decompensated heart failure. Despite intravenous diuretics the patient developed acute kidney injury, and ultimately placed on intravenous inotropes on which he now seems dependent. He has been following up with an advanced heart failure specialist as an outpatient and has been undergoing evaluation for heart transplantation, which was subsequently completed in the hospital.   His exam is notable for an elevated JVP, a III/VI holosystolic murmur, and warm extremities with bilateral 1+ edema. His most recent TTE shows LVEF 20%, moderate MR, moderate-severe TR and estimated RVSP 34 mmHg. His most recent laboratory data shows Na 131 mmol/L, Cr 1.2 mg/dL, and lactate 1.6 mmol/L. Pulmonary artery catheter shows RA 7 mmHg, PA 36/15 mmHg, PCWP 12 mmHg, CI 2.4 L/min/m2 and SVR 1150 dynes*sec/cm5.   The patient was presented at transplant selection committee and approved for listing for orthotopic heart transplant. What is the most appropriate next step in the management of this patient? A Refer patient for transcatheter edge-to-edge repair for MR B Continue IV inotropes as a bridge-to-transplant C Refer patient for tricuspid valve replacement D Initiate 1.5L fluid restriction Answer #22 Explanation The correct answer is B – continue IV inotropes as a bridge-to-transplant. Positive inotropic agents may improve hemodynamic status, but have not been shown to improve survival in patients with HF. These agents may help HF patients who are refractory to other therapies and are suffering consequences from end-organ-hypoperfusion. Our patient is admitted with worsening advanced heart failure requiring intravenous inotropic support. He has been appropriately evaluated and approved for heart transplant. He has demonstrated the requirement of continuous inotropic support to maintain perfusion. In patients such as this with advanced (stage D) HF refractory to GDMT and device therapy who are eligible for and awaiting MCS or cardiac transplantation, continuous intravenous inotropic support is reasonable as “bridge therapy” (Class 2a, LOE B-NR). Continuous IV inotropes also have a Class 2b indication (LOE B-NR) in select patients with stage D HF despite optimal GDMT and device therapy who are ineligible for either MCS or cardiac transplantation, as palliative therapy for symptom control and improvement in functio...

The CardioNerds and Pulm PEEPs have joined forces to co-produce this important episode, delving into the management of decompensated right ventricular failure in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Joining us for this informative discussion are Pulm PEEPs co-founders, Dr. David Furfaro and Dr. Kristina Montemayor, along with Dr. Leonid Mirson (Internal Medicine Resident at Johns Hopkins Osler Medical Residency and Associate Editor of Pulm PEEPs), Dr. Bavya Varma (Internal Medicine Resident at Johns Hopkins, rising Cardiology Fellow at NYU, and CardioNerds Academy graduate), Dr. Mardi Gomberg-Maitland (Medical Director of the Pulmonary Hypertension Program at George Washington Hospital), and Dr. Rachel Damico (Pulmonologist and Associate Professor of Medicine at Johns Hopkins Hospital). Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Adriana Mares. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. CardioNerds Heart Success Series PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Show notes - Decompensated Right Ventricular Failure in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension A 21-year-old woman with a past medical history notable for congenital heart disease (primum ASD and sinus venosus with multiple surgeries) complicated by severe PAH on home oxygen, sildenafil, ambrisentan, and subcutaneous treprostinil is presenting with palpitations, chest pain, and syncope. She presented as a transfer from an outside ED where she arrived in an unknown tachyarrhythmia and had undergone DCCV due to tachycardia into the 200s and hypotension. On arrival at our hospital, she denied SOB but did endorse nausea, leg swelling, and poor medication adherence. Her initial vitals were notable for a BP of 80/50, HR 110, RR 25, and saturating 91% on 5L O2.  On exam, she was uncomfortable appearing but mentating well. She had cool extremities with 1-2+ LE edema. Her JVP was 15cm H2O. She has an RV Heave and 2/6 systolic murmur. Her lungs were clear bilaterally. Her labs were notable for Cr 2.0, an anion gap metabolic acidosis (HCO3 = 11), elevated lactate (4.1), elevated troponin to 14,  and a pro-BNP of ~5000.  Her CBC was unremarkable. Her EKG demonstrated 2:1 atrial flutter at a rate of 130. Diagnosing RV failure in patients with PH: RV dysfunction and RV failure are two separate entities. RV dysfunction can be measured on echocardiography, but RV failure can be thought of as a clinical syndrome where there is evidence of RV dysfunction and elevated right sided filling pressures. RV failure is a spectrum and can present with a range of manifestations from evidence of R sided volume overload and markers of organ dysfunction, all the way to frank cardiogenic shock. Most patients with RV failure are not in overt shock. One of the first signs of impending shock in patients with RV failure is the development of new or worsening hypoxemia. Patients with decompensated RV failure approaching shock often do not present with symptoms classic for LV low flow state. Instead, hypoxia 2/2 VQ mismatching may be the first sign and they can be otherwise well appearing. Particularly because patients with PH tend to be younger, they can often appear compensated until they rapidly decompensate. Causes of decompensation for patients with RV dysfunction and PH: Iatrogenesis (inadvertent cessation of pulmonary vasodilators by providers, surgery if providers are not familiar with risks of anesthesia), non-adherence to pulmonary vasodilators (either due to affordability issues or other reasons), infections, arrhythmias (particularly atrial arrhythmias), and progression of underlying disease. Patients with atrial arrhythmias (atrial flutter or atrial fibrillation) and pulmonary hypertension do not tolerate the loss of...

The following question refers to Section 4.3 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by CardioNerds Academy Intern Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian, answered first by medicine resident CardioNerds Academy House Chief Dr. Ahmed Ghoneem, and then by expert faculty Dr. Kim Williams.Dr. Williams is Chief of the Division of Cardiology and is Professor of Medicine and Cardiology at Rush University Medical Center. He has served as President of ASNC, Chairman of the Board of the Association of Black Cardiologists (ABC, 2008-2010), and President of the American College of Cardiology (ACC, 2015-2016). The CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series for the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines represents a collaboration with the ACC Prevention of CVD Section, the National Lipid Association, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Question #27 Mr. O is a 48-year-old man with a past medical history significant for obesity (BMI is 42kg/m2), hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and hypercholesterolemia. His calculated ASCVD risk score today is 18.8%. You counsel him on the importance of weight loss in the context of CVD risk reduction. Which of the following weight loss recommendations is appropriate?AMaintaining a weight loss of at least 25% from baseline is required to influence blood pressure, cholesterol, and glycemic control. BHypocaloric diets lead to short term weight loss, but a healthy diet should be maintained over time to reduce CVD risk.CLiraglutide can be used to induce weight loss, as an alternative to diet and exercise.DBariatric surgery is effective for weight loss but has no ASCVD risk reduction benefit. Answer #27 Explanation The correct answer is B. Energy restriction is the cornerstone of management of obesity. All the different types of hypocaloric diets achieve similar short-term weight loss, but these effects tend to diminish by 12 months. It is a class I recommendation to maintain a healthy diet over time to achieve CVD risk reduction. The Mediterranean diet is an example of a diet that can have persistent CV benefit beyond the 12 months. Choice A is incorrect because maintaining even a moderate weight loss of 5 – 10% from baseline has favorable effects on risk factors including blood pressure, cholesterol, and glycemic control, as well as on premature all-cause mortality. Choice C is incorrect because medications approved as aids to weight loss (such as liraglutide, orlistat and naltrexone/bupropion) may be used in addition to lifestyle measures to achieve weight loss and maintenance; they are not alternatives to a healthy lifestyle. Meta-analysis of medication-assisted weight loss found favorable effects on BP, glycemic control, and ASCVD mortality. Choice D is incorrect because patients undergoing bariatric surgery had over 50% lower risks of total ASCVD and cancer mortality compared with people of similar weight who did not have surgery. Bariatric surgery should be considered for obese high-risk individuals when lifestyle change does not result in maintained weight loss (Class IIa). The ACC/AHA guidelines focused primarily on lifestyle interventions for obesity and had no specific recommendations for bariatric surgery or medication-assisted weight loss. Main Takeaway Weight reduction (even as low as 5-10% from baseline) and long-term maintenance of a healthy diet are recommended to improve the CVD risk profile of overweight and obese people. Medication and/or bariatric surgery may have a useful adjunctive role in some patients. Guideline Loc. Section 4.3.3 CardioNerds Decipher the Guidelines - 2021 ESC Prevention SeriesCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor RollCardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!

The following question refers to Section 7.6 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure.The question is asked by premedical student and CardioNerds Intern Pacey Wetstein, answered first by Mayo Clinic Cardiology Fellow and CardioNerds Academy Chief Dr. Teodora Donisan, and then by expert faculty Dr. Nancy Sweitzer.Dr. Sweitzer is Professor of Medicine, Vice Chair of Clinical Research for the Department of Medicine, and Director of Clinical Research for the Division of Cardiology at Washington University School of Medicine. She is the editor-in-chief of Circulation: Heart Failure. Dr. Sweitzer is a faculty mentor for this Decipher the HF Guidelines series.The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance.Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Clinical Trials Talks Question #21 Ms. Smith is a 56-year-old woman following up in the cardiology clinic for a history of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Two years ago, she was diagnosed with non-ischemic cardiomyopathy with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 30%. Over time, she was initiated and optimized on guideline directed medical therapy. She is currently on Carvedilol 12.5 mg BID, Sacubitril/Valsartan 49/51 mg BID, Spironolactone 25 mg daily, Empagliflozin 10 mg daily, and Furosemide PRN for weight gain.   On today’s visit, her BP is 110/80 mmHg, and her HR is 67 bpm. Labs show a creatinine of 0.9 mg/dL, potassium of 5.1 mEq/L, NT-proBNP of 150 ng/L, and a HbA1c of 5.8%. Follow up transthoracic echocardiogram showed an improvement in LVEF to 55%. What are the most appropriate therapy recommendations for Ms. Smith? A Discontinue spironolactone B Discontinue empagliflozin C Decrease the dose of carvedilol D Continue current therapy Answer #21 The correct answer is D – continue current therapy. The patient described above was initially diagnosed with HFrEF and experienced significant symptomatic improvement with GDMT, so she now has heart failure with improved ejection fraction (HFimpEF). In patients with HFimpEF after treatment, GDMT should be continued to prevent relapse of HF and LV dysfunction, even in patients who may become asymptomatic (Class 1, LOE B-R). Although symptoms, functional capacity, LVEF and reverse remodeling can improve with GDMT, structural abnormalities of the LV and its function do not fully normalize, causing symptoms and biomarker changes to persist or recur if treatment is deescalated. Improvements in EF do not always reflect sustained recovery; rather, they signify remission.   Of note, HF relapse can be defined by at least 1 of the following: o   A drop in the EF by >10% and to < 50% o   An increase in LVEDV by >10% and to higher than the normal range o   A 2-fold rise in NT-proBNP concentration and to > 400 ng/L o   Clinical evidence of HF on examination Choice A is incorrect as it would be incorrect to discontinue spironolactone. A potassium of 5.1 is still within the acceptable limit in a patient who has been on Spironolactone for two years, and this medication is an important part of GDMT for HFrEF.   Despite the improvement in Hb A1c, empagliflozin should be continued for heart failure with improved ejection fraction, as it is part of routine GDMT of HFrEF even in the absence of diabetes.

CardioNerds Co-Founder, Dr. Amit Goyal, along with Series Co-Chairs, Dr. Yoav Karpenshif and Dr. Eunice Dugan, and episode Lead, Dr. Sean Dikdan, had the opportunity to expand their knowledge on the topic of ventricular tachycardia and electrical storm from esteemed faculty expert, Dr. Janice Chyou. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian. Electrical storm (ES) is a life-threatening arrhythmia syndrome. It is characterized by frequently occurring bouts of unstable cardiac arrythmias. It typically occurs in patients with susceptible substrate, either myocardial scar or a genetic predisposition. The adrenergic input of the sympathetic nervous system can perpetuate arrythmia. In the acute setting, identifying reversible triggers, such as ischemia, electrolyte imbalances, and heart failure, is important. Treatment is complex and varies based on previous treatments received and the presence of intra-cardiac devices. Many options are available to treat ES, including medications, intubation and sedation, procedures and surgeries targeting the autonomic nervous system, and catheter ablation to modulate the myocardial substrate. A multidisciplinary team of cardiologists, intensivists, electrophysiologists, surgeons, and more are necessary to manage this complex disease. The CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care Series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Mark Belkin, Dr. Eunice Dugan, Dr. Karan Desai, and Dr. Yoav Karpenshif. Pearls • Notes • References • Production Team CardioNerds Cardiac Critical Care PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls and Quotes - Management of Ventricular Tachycardia and Electrical Storm Electrical storm is defined as 3 or more episodes of VF, sustained VT, or appropriate ICD shocks within 24 hours. It occurs more commonly in ischemic compared to non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, and it is associated with a poor prognosis and high cardiovascular mortality. The classic triad of electrical storm is a trigger, a myocardial susceptible substrate, and autonomic input perpetuating the storm. Triggers for electrical storm include ischemia, heart failure, electrolyte abnormalities, hypoxia, drug-related arrhythmogenicity, and thyrotoxicosis. A thorough evaluation of possible triggers is necessary for each patient, but it is uncommonly found. The evaluation may include laboratory studies, genetic testing, advanced imaging, or invasive testing. Acute treatment options involve acute resuscitation, pharmacotherapy with antiarrhythmics and beta-blockers, device interrogation and possible reprogramming, and sedation. Subacute treatment involves autonomic modulation and catheter ablation. Surgical treatments include sympathectomies and, ultimately, heart transplant. Catheter ablation is safe and effective for the treatment of electrical storm. In select patients, hemodynamic peri-procedural hemodynamic support should be considered. Show notes - Management of Ventricular Tachycardia and Electrical Storm Simple diagram of the classic “triad” of ES (see reference 10). Treatment algorithm provided by the 2017 AHA/ACC/HRS guidelines (see reference 1). 1. Define electrical storm. Electrical storm (ES), also called “arrhythmic storm” or “VT storm” refers to a state of cardiac instability associated with 3 or more episodes of VF, sustained VT, or appropriate ICD shocks within 24 hours. Sustained VT refers to 30 seconds of VT or hemodynamically unstable VT requiring termination in < 30 seconds. Incessant VT refers to continued, sustained hemodynamically stable VT that lasts longer than one hour. VT is incessant or recurrent when it recurs promptly despi...

The following question refers to Sections 3.3 and 3.4 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by CardioNerds Academy Intern student Dr. Adriana Mares, answered first by Brigham & Women’s medicine resident & Director of CardioNerds Internship Dr. Gurleen Kaur, and then by expert faculty Dr. Allison Bailey. Dr. Bailey is an advanced heart failure and transplant cardiologist at Centennial Heart. She is the editor-in-chief of the American College of Cardiology’s Extended Learning (ACCEL) editorial board and was a member of the writing group for the 2018 American Lipid Guidelines.  The CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series for the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines represents a collaboration with the ACC Prevention of CVD Section, the National Lipid Association, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Question #26 Ms. Priya Clampsia is a 58-year-old never-smoker with a history of hypertension. Her BMI is 29 kg/m2. She also mentions having pre-eclampsia during her pregnancy many years ago. She describes a predominately sedentary lifestyle and works as a receptionist. You see her in the clinic to discuss routine preventive care. Her most recent lipid panel results were LDL of 101 mg/dL, HDL of 45 mg/dL, and triglycerides of 190 mg/dL. What additional step will provide valuable information regarding her CVD risk profile? A Send additional lab workup including C-reactive protein and lipoprotein (a) B Measure her waist circumference C Assess her work stress D Ask her about history of preterm birth E B, C, and D Answer #26 Explanation The correct answer is E – measuring her waist circumference, assessing her occupational stress, and obtaining history about adverse pregnancy outcomes including preterm birth all add valuable information for CVD risk stratification. BMI is easily measured and can be used to define categories of body weight. However, body fat stores in visceral tissue carry higher risk than subcutaneous fat and therefore, waist circumference can be a simple way to measure global and abdominal fat. When waist circumference is ≥102 cm in men and ≥88 cm in women, weight reduction is advised. While these WHO thresholds are widely accepted in Europe, it is important to note that different cut-offs may be appropriate in different ethnic groups. Work stress is important to ascertain as well because there is preliminary evidence of the detrimental impact of worse stress on ASCVD health, independent of conventional risk factors and their treatment. Work stress is determined by job strain (i.e., the combination of high demands and low control at work) and effort-reward imbalance. Pre-eclampsia is associated with increase in CVD risk by factor of 1.5-2.7 compared with all women. Both preterm (RR 1.6) and still birth (RR 1.5) are also associated with a moderate increase in CVD risk. Taking a thorough pregnancy history is important in determining future cardiovascular risk in women. The ESC guidelines give a Class IIb (LOE B) recommendation that in women with history of premature or stillbirth, periodic screening for hypertension and DM may be considered. Of note, the 2018 ACC/AHA guidelines include preeclampsia and premature menopause (occurring at age <40 years) as risk-enhancing factors for statin therapy but state that the mechanism or cause of preterm birth is often unknown, so it is difficult to include it as a risk-enhancing factor. Choice A (sending additional lab workup including CRP and LPa) is incorrect. The ESC guidelines do not recommend using routine circulating biomarkers as they do not improve risk prediction and publication bias distorts the evidence (Class III, LOE B). While some biomarkers like lipoprotein (a) are promising, further work is still needed. Conversely, the 2019 ACC/AHA guidelines do include, if measured,

The following question refers to Sections 7.3.2, 7.3.8, and 7.6.2 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The question is asked by Palisades Medical Center medicine resident & CardioNerds Intern Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian, answered first by Hopkins Bayview medicine resident & CardioNerds Academy Fellow Dr. Ty Sweeny, and then by expert faculty Dr. Robert Mentz. Dr. Mentz is associate professor of medicine and section chief for Heart Failure at Duke University, a clinical researcher at the Duke Clinical Research Institute, and editor-in-chief of the Journal of Cardiac Failure. Dr. Mentz is a mentor for the CardioNerds Clinical Trials Network as lead principal investigator for PARAGLIDE-HF and is a series mentor for this very Decipher the Guidelines Series. For these reasons and many more, he was awarded the Master CardioNerd Award during ACC22. The Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 AHA / ACC / HFSA Guideline for The Management of Heart Failure series was developed by the CardioNerds and created in collaboration with the American Heart Association and the Heart Failure Society of America. It was created by 30 trainees spanning college through advanced fellowship under the leadership of CardioNerds Cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Dan Ambinder, with mentorship from Dr. Anu Lala, Dr. Robert Mentz, and Dr. Nancy Sweitzer. We thank Dr. Judy Bezanson and Dr. Elliott Antman for tremendous guidance. Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Question #20 Ms. Betty Blocker is a 60-year-old woman with a history of alcohol-related dilated cardiomyopathy who presents for follow up. She has been working hard to improve her health and is glad to report that she has just reached her 5-year sobriety milestone. Her current medications include metoprolol succinate 100mg daily, sacubitril-valsartan 97-103mg BID, spironolactone 25mg daily, and empagliflozin 10mg daily. She is asymptomatic at rest and up to moderate exercise, including chasing her grandchildren around the yard. A recent transthoracic echocardiogram shows recovered LVEF from previously 35% now to 60%. Ms. Blocker does not love taking so many medications and asks about discontinuing her metoprolol. Which of the following is the most appropriate response to Ms. Blocker’s request? A Since the patient is asymptomatic, metoprolol can be stopped without risk B Stopping metoprolol increases this patient’s risk of worsening cardiomyopathy regardless of current LVEF or symptoms C Because the LVEF is now >50%, the patient is now classified as having HFpEF and beta-blockade is no longer indicated; metoprolol can be safely discontinued D Metoprolol should be continued, but it is safe to discontinue either ARNi or spironolactone Answer #20 Explanation The correct answer is B – stopping metoprolol would increase her risk of worsening cardiomyopathy. Heart failure tends to be a chronically sympathetic state. The use of beta-blockers (specifically bisoprolol, metoprolol succinate, and carvedilol) targets this excess adrenergic output and has been shown to reduce the risk of death in patients with HFrEF. Beyond their mortality benefit, beta-blockers can improve LVEF, lessen the symptoms of HF, and improve clinical status. Therefore, in patients with HFrEF, with current or previous symptoms, use of 1 of the 3 beta blockers proven to reduce mortality (e.g., bisoprolol, carvedilol, sustained-release metoprolol succinate) is recommended to reduce mortality and hospitalizations (Class 1, LOE A). Beta-blockers in this setting provide a high economic value. Table 14 of the guidelines provides recommendations for target doses for GDMT medications. Specifically for beta blockers, those targets are 25-50mg twice daily for carvedilol (or 80mg once daily for the continuous release formulation), 200mg once daily for metoprolol succinate,

CardioNerds (Drs. Amit Goyal and Dan Ambinder) join Dr. Mina Fares, Dr. Johannes Bergehr, and Dr. Christina Peter from Cambridge University Hospitals in the UK. They discuss a case involving a man man in his 40’s presented with progressive heart failure symptoms. He has extensive background cardiac history including prior episodes of myocarditis and complete heart block status post permanent pacemaker implantation. Ultimately a diagnosis of Danon disease is made. Dr. Sharon Wilson provides the E-CPR for this episode. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Hirsh Elhence. CardioNerds is collaborating with Radcliffe Cardiology and US Cardiology Review journal (USC) for a ‘call for cases’, with the intention to co-publish high impact cardiovascular case reports, subject to double-blind peer review. Case Reports that are accepted in USC journal and published as the version of record (VOR), will also be indexed in Scopus and the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). CardioNerds Case Reports PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Case Summary - A Presentation of Heart Failure and Heart Block with Elusive Genetic Origins - Cambridge University A man in his 40s with a history of cardiac issues, including prior myocarditis and complete heart block, presented with progressive heart failure symptoms. Extensive cardiac investigations were conducted, revealing dilated left ventricle, mild to moderate left ventricular systolic dysfunction, normal coronaries, infero-lateral late gadolinium enhancement on cardiac MRI, and low-level uptake on PET-CT. Differential diagnosis included worsening underlying cardiomyopathy, recurrent myocarditis, tachycardia-related cardiomyopathy, pacemaker-induced LV dysfunction, and sarcoidosis. The patient's condition improved with heart failure medications, and cardiac MRI showed a mildly dilated left ventricle with moderate systolic dysfunction and active inflammation in the anterior wall. Further evaluation indicated a family history of hereditary cardiomyopathy, and the patient exhibited phenotypic features such as early-onset heart disease, arrhythmias, family history of cardiomyopathy, learning problems, intellectual disability, and mild proximal myopathy. Genetic testing confirmed a LAMP2 mutation, leading to the diagnosis of Danon disease. Case Media - A Presentation of Heart Failure and Heart Block with Elusive Genetic Origins - Cambridge University Show Notes -A Presentation of Heart Failure and Heart Block with Elusive Genetic Origins - Cambridge University References - Danon, M. J., Oh, S. J., DiMauro, S., Miranda, A., De Vivo, D. C., & Rowland, L. P. (1981). Lysosomal glycogen storage disease with normal acid maltase. Neurology, 31(1), 51-7. Nishino, I., Fu, J., Tanji, K., Nonaka, I., & Ozawa, T. (2000). Mutations in the gene encoding LAMP2 cause Danon disease. Nature, 406(6798), 906-10. Tanaka, K., Nishino, I., Nonaka, I., Fu, J., & Ozawa, T. (2000). Danon disease is caused by mutations in the gene encoding LAMP2, a lysosomal membrane protein. Nature, 406(6798), 902-6. Maron, B. J., Haas, T. S., Ackerman, M. J., Ahluwalia, A., Spirito, P., Nishino, I., ... & Seidman, C. E. (2009). Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and sudden death in a family with Danon disease. JAMA, 301(12), 1253-9. Hashem, S., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Wang, H., Zhang, H., Liu, L., ... & Wang, J. (2015). AAV-mediated gene transfer of LAMP2 improves cardiac function in Danon disease mice. Stem cells, 33(11), 2343-2350. Chi, L., Wang, H., Zhang, J., Zhang, Y., Liu, L., Wang, J., ... & Hashem, S. (2019). CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing of LAMP2 in patient-derived iPSCs ameliorates Danon disease phenotypes.

The following question refers to Section 3.2 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by student Dr. Hirsh Elhence, answered first by Mayo Clinic Fellow Dr. Teodora Donisan, and then by expert faculty Dr. Eugene Yang.Dr. Yang is professor of medicine of the University of Washington where he is medical director of the Eastside Specialty Center and the co-Director of the Cardiovascular Wellness and Prevention Program. Dr. Yang is former Governor of the ACC Washington Chapter and chair of the ACC Prevention of CVD Section.The CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series for the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines represents a collaboration with the ACC Prevention of CVD Section, the National Lipid Association, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association.Enjoy this Circulation 2022 Paths to Discovery article to learn about the CardioNerds story, mission, and values. Question #25 Please choose the CORRECT statement from the ones below.ACAC scoring can be considered to improve ASCVD risk classification around treatment decision thresholds.BPatients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes are considered very high CV risk, regardless of comorbidities and other risk factors.CCKD does not increase the cardiovascular risk in the absence of other risk factors.DMen and women older than 65 years old are at high cardiovascular risk. Answer #25 ExplanationOption A is correct. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring can reclassify CVD risk upwards and downwards in addition to conventional risk factors and may thus be considered in men and women with calculated risks around decision thresholds (Class IIb, Level B). If CAC is detected, its extent should be compared with what would be expected for a patient of the same sex and age. CAC scoring does not provide direct information on total plaque burden or stenosis severity and can be low or even zero in middle-aged patients with soft non-calcified plaque.Option B is false. Not all patients with diabetes are very high risk by default.·       Moderate risk: well controlled diabetes, <10 years duration, without evidence of target organ damage and no additional ASCVD risk factors.·       High risk: patients not fulfilling the criteria above, without ASCVD and/or severe target organ damage.·       Very high risk: diabetic patients with established ASCVD and/or severe target organ damage.Severe target organ damage is defined by:·       eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2·       eGFR 45-59 mL/min/1.73 m2 and microalbuminuria (albumin-to-creatinine ratio, ACR 30 -300 mg/g)·       Proteinuria (ACR >300 mg/g)·       Presence of microvascular disease in at least 3 different sites (e.g., microalbuminuria + retinopathy + neuropathyOption C is false. CKD carries at least a high CVD risk even in the absence of diabetes or ASCVD.·       Moderate CKD carries a high CVD risk: o   eGFR 30−44 mL/min/1.73 m2 and ACR <30o   eGFR 45−59 mL/min/1.73 m2 and ACR 30−300o   eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and ACR >300·       Severe CKD carries a very high CVD risk:o   eGFR<30 mL/min/1.73 m2o   eGFR 30−44 mL/min/1.73 m2 and ACR >30 Option D is false. There is an age difference between men and women with regards to cardiovascular risk. Age is a major CVD risk driver, but age cutoffs should be used with flexibility.·       Women < 50 years-old and men < 40 years old are usually at low 10-year CVD risk. It is still important to be aware of unfavorable modifiable risk factors that can sharply increase their lifetime CVD risk.·       Women > 75 years-old and men > 65 years-old are usually at high 10-year CVD risk.·       Only between the ages of 55 – 75 years in women and 40 – 65 years in men does the 10-year CVD risk vary around commonly used thresholds for intervention. Of note:·       In younger, apparently healthy patients, we also discuss lifetime CVD risk estimates since 10-year risk assessments often underestimate risk.