Dr. Alexander Sasha Opotowsky, an expert in Eisenmenger Syndrome, discusses the diagnosis and management of this end-stage complication of congenital heart disease. Topics include pathophysiology, cyanosis-related complications, risks of pregnancy, treatment options, and a case study on SVC syndrome and ACHD physiology.

Dr. Cezar Iliescu discusses the spectrum of cardiovascular diseases encountered by interventional onco-cardiologists. Topics include endovascular therapies, special scenarios in critically ill cancer patients, adjustments to standard care for cancer patients with chronic thrombocytopenia, post-PCI care in cancer patients, treating aortic stenosis in cancer patients, and the passion for interventional cardiology.

The following question refers to Section 3.4 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by student Dr. Adriana Mares, answered first by early career preventive cardiologist Dr. Dipika Gopal, and then by expert faculty Dr. Michael Wesley Milks.Dr. Milks is a staff cardiologist and assistant professor of clinical medicine at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, where he serves as the Director of Cardiac Rehabilitation and an associate program director of the cardiovascular fellowship. He specializes in preventive cardiology and is a member of the American College of Cardiology's Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Leadership Council.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 #32 Mr. Daniel Collins is a 58-year-old man with hypertension, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and obesity who presents to your clinic for a routine physical examination. Vitals are as follows: BP 143/79 mmHg, HR 89 bpm, O2 99% on room air, weight 106 kg, BMI 34.5 kg/m2. Recent laboratory testing revealed: creatinine 1.24 mg/dL, total cholesterol 203 mg/dL, HDL 39 mg/dL, LDL 112 mg/dL, TG 262 mg/dL. His current medications include lisinopril and rosuvastatin. You recommend increasing the dose of lisinopril to treat uncontrolled hypertension. What additional step(s) are indicated at this visit? A Order urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio B Ask the patient how often they have been bothered by trouble falling or staying asleep, or sleeping too much C Perform depression screening D All of the above Answer #32 Explanation The correct answer is D – all of the above.Answer A is correct. The ESC gives a Class I (LOE C) indication that all CKD patients, with or without diabetes, should undergo appropriate screening for ASCVD and kidney disease progression, including monitoring for changes in albuminuria. Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and death among patients with CKD. Even after adjusting for risk factors, including diabetes and hypertension, there is a linear increase in CV mortality with decreasing GFR below ~60-75 mm/min/1.73m2. Specific CKD-related risk factors include uremia-mediated inflammation, oxidative stress, and vascular calcification.Answer choice B is also correct. In patients with ASCVD, obesity, and hypertension, the ESC gives a Class I (LOE C) indication to regularly screen for non-restorative sleep by asking the question related to sleep quality as follows: “‘How often have you been bothered by trouble falling or staying asleep or sleeping too much?”. Additionally, if there are significant sleep problems that are not responding within four weeks to improving sleep hygiene, referral to a specialist is recommended (Class I, LOE C). However, despite the strong association of OSA with CVD, including hypertension, stroke, heart failure, CAD, and atrial fibrillation, treatment of OSA with CPAP has failed to improve hard CVD outcomes in patients with established CVD. Interventions that focus on risk factor modification, including reduction of obesity, alcohol intake, stress, and improvement of sleep hygiene, are important.Answer choice C is also correct. The ESC gives a Class I (LOE C) recommendation that mental health disorders with either significant functional impairment or decreased use of healthcare systems be considered as influencing total CVD risk. All mental disorders are associated with the development of CVD and reduced life expectancy. Additionally, the onset of CVD is associated with an approximately 2-3x increased risk of mental health disorders compared to a ...

The following question refers to Section 4.3 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure.The question is asked by Texas Tech University medical student and CardioNerds Academy Intern Dr. Adriana Mares, answered first by Rochester General Hospital cardiology fellow and Director of CardioNerds Journal Club Dr. Devesh Rai, and then by expert faculty Dr. Eldrin Lewis.Dr. Lewis is an Advanced Heart Failure and Transplant Cardiologist, Professor of Medicine and Chief of the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine at Stanford University. 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 #26 A 45-year-old man presents to cardiology clinic to establish care. He has had several months of progressive dyspnea on exertion while playing basketball. He also reports intermittent palpitations for the last month. Two weeks ago, he passed out while playing and attributed this to exertion and dehydration. He denies smoking and alcohol intake.   Family history is significant for sudden cardiac death in his father at the age of 50 years. Autopsy has shown a thick heart, but he is unaware of the exact diagnosis. He has two children, ages 12 and 15 years old, who are healthy.   Vitals signs are blood pressure of 124/84 mmHg, heart rate of 70 bpm, and normal respiratory rate. On auscultation, a systolic murmur is present at the left lower sternal border. A 12-lead ECG showed normal sinus rhythm with signs of LVH and associated repolarization abnormalities. Echocardiography reveals normal LV chamber volume, preserved LVEF, asymmetric septal hypertrophy with wall thickness up to 16mm, systolic anterior motion of the anterior mitral valve leaflet with 2+ eccentric posteriorly directed MR, and resting LVOT gradient of 30mmHg which increases to 60mmHg on Valsalva.   You discuss your concern for an inherited cardiomyopathy, namely hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. In addition to medical management of his symptoms and referral to electrophysiology for ICD evaluation, which of the following is appropriate at this time? A  Order blood work for genetic testing B  Referral for genetic counseling C  Cardiac MRI D  Coronary angiogram E  All of the above Answer #26 Explanation   The correct answer is B – referral for genetic counseling.  Several factors on clinical evaluation may indicate a possible underlying genetic cardiomyopathy. Clues may be found in: ·       Cardiac morphology – marked LV hypertrophy, LV noncompaction, RV thinning or fatty replacement on imaging or biopsy ·       12-lead ECG – abnormal high or low voltage or conduction, and repolarization, altered RV forces ·       Presence of arrhythmias – frequent NSVT or very frequent PVCs, sustained VT or VF, early onset AF, early onset conduction disease ·       Extracardiac features – skeletal myopathy, neuropathy, cutaneous stigmata, and other possible manifestations of specific syndromes In select patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, referral for genetic counseling and testing is reasonable to identify conditions that could guide treatment for patients and family members (Class 2a, LOE B-NR). In first-degree relatives of selected patients with genetic or inherited cardiomyopathies, genetic screening and counseling are recommended to ...

CardioNerds co-founder Dr. Dan Ambinder joins Dr. Abdelrhman Abumoawad, Dr. Leili Behrooz from the Boston University Vascular Medicine over hot chocolate in Boston. They discuss two interesting cases of lower extremity edema caused by May-Thurner syndrome. Dr. Naomi Hamburg (Professor of Vascular Medicine and Cards at BU/BMC) provides the ECPR for this episode. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Dr. Akiva Rosenzveig. US Cardiology Review is now the official journal of CardioNerds! Submit your manuscript here. 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 Synopses - May-Thurner syndrome Case 1: A 34-year-old woman with HIV on HAART presenting with left leg swelling and non-healing new foot ulcer for 3 months. She works as a cashier. On exam, her BMI is 35 kg/m2 and there are intact pulses bilaterally. Her left leg has varicose veins in the territory of the great saphenous vein, hyperpigmentation, edema, and a foot ulcer. Her right leg appears normal. Venous Duplex ultrasonography showed chronic partially occlusive thrombus in the left common femoral and profunda femoral veins and decreased doppler respiratory variation on the left side. She was treated with debridement and compression therapy for ulcer healing. She was referred to vascular surgery and underwent contrast venography that demonstrated collateral circulation from the left lower extremity (LE) to the right lower extremity, and stenotic lesion at the left common iliac vein (LCIV). She was diagnosed with May-Thurner syndrome, and a venous stent was placed, and the patient was started on aspirin 81 mg daily for 6 months. Case 2: A 71-year-old man presented with left lower extremity pain and edema. He underwent a left lower extremity venous Duplex ultrasound that showed chronic thrombus in the left proximal to distal femoral vein and acute thrombus in the left popliteal vein and was started on anticoagulation (AC). The patient was also having palpitations and was found to have paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. He underwent pulmonary vein isolation during which it was noted that his LCIV was subtotally occluded. He underwent CT venogram which showed lumbosacral osteophytic compression of the LCIV known as bony May-Thurner syndrome. Given minimal symptoms, the decision was made not to pursue interventional options and to manage conservatively with AC which the patient needs regardless. Case Media - May-Thurner syndrome Pearls - May-Thurner syndrome An often under-recognized, but treatable cause of DVT is left common iliac vein compression known as May-Thurner syndrome. Most patients who have May-Thurner anatomy are asymptomatic. Only a minority of patients with the May-Thurner anatomy present with symptoms such as left leg edema/pain and DVT. Young women are at a higher risk of developing May-Thurner syndrome compared to men.  A high degree of suspicion is needed to investigate patients with unilateral left-sided leg symptoms and venous duplex features of May-Thurner syndrome. The diagnosis is made with non-invasive imaging including venous duplex, CT/MR venography, intravascular Ultrasound (IVUS), and catheter-based venography. Although IVUS is the gold standard for diagnosis, due to its invasive nature, it has been replaced by CT/MR imaging. Treatment includes anticoagulation if a thrombus is present. Most patients receive venous stenting at the obstructed site to prevent compression of the left common iliac vein. Some patients need catheter-directed thrombolysis prior to stent placement. Show Notes -May-Thurner syndrome What is May-Thurner syndrome? Classic May-Thurner syndrome is venous outflow obstruction due to external compression of the left common iliac vein by the right common iliac arte...

CardioNerds co-founder Dr. Amit Goyal and episode leads Dr. Jaya Kanduri (FIT Ambassador from Cornell University) and Dr. Jenna Skowronski (FIT Ambassador from UPMC) discuss Complications of acute myocardial infarction with expert faculty Dr. Jeffrey Geske. They discuss various complications of acute MI such as cardiogenic shock, bradyarrythmias, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, ruptures (papillary muscle rupture, VSD, free wall rupture), and more. Show notes were drafted by Dr. Jaya Kanduri. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Tina Reddy. The CardioNerds Beyond the Boards Series was inspired by the Mayo Clinic Cardiovascular Board Review Course and designed in collaboration with the course directors Dr. Amy Pollak, Dr. Jeffrey Geske, and Dr. Michael Cullen. CardioNerds Beyond the Boards SeriesCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls and Quotes - Complications of Acute Myocardial Infarction Sinus tachycardia is a “harbinger of doom”! The triad for RV infarction includes hypotension, elevated JVP, and clear lungs. These patients are preload dependent and may need fluid resuscitation despite having an elevated JVP. Bradyarrythmias in inferior MIs are frequently vagally mediated. The focus should be on medical management before committing to a temporary transvenous pacemaker, such as reperfusion, maintaining RV preload and inotropy, avoiding hypoxia, and considering RV-specific mechanical circulator support (MCS). Worsening hypotension with inotropic agents (e.g., dobutamine, epinephrine, dopamine, norepinephrine) after a large anterior-apical MI should raise suspicion for dynamic left ventricular outflow tract obstruction due to compensatory hyperdynamic basal segments. The myocardium after a late presentation MI is as “mushy as mashed potatoes”! Need to look out for papillary muscle rupture, VSD, and free wall rupture as potential complications. Papillary muscle rupture can occur with non-transmural infarcts, and often presents with flash pulmonary edema. VSDs will have a harsh systolic murmur and are less likely to present with pulmonary congestion. Free wall rupture can present as a PEA arrest. All of these complications require urgent confirmation on imaging and early involvement of surgical teams. Notes - Complications of Acute Myocardial Infarction How should we approach cardiogenic shock (CS) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI)? Only 10% of AMI patients present with CS, but CS accounts for up to 70-80% of mortality associated with AMI, usually due to extensive LV infarction with ensuing pump failure. Physical examSinus tachycardia is considered a “harbinger of doom”, when the body compensates for low cardiac output by ramping up the heart rateThe presence of sinus tachycardia and low pulse and/or blood pressure in a patient with a large anterior MI should raise suspicion for cardiogenic shockBe wary of giving IV beta blockers in this situation as negative inotropes can precipitate cardiogenic shock (Commit Trial) When interpreting a patient’s blood pressure in the acute setting, it is helpful to know their baseline blood pressure and if they have a significant history of hypertension. Patients <75 years of age with CS have improved survival at 6 months and at 1 year with early revascularization (SHOCK trial) Mechanical circulatory supportIntra-aortic balloon pump (IABP)No mortality benefit with IABP use in CS at 30 days and at 1 year (IABP-SHOCK II trial)ACC/AHA guidelines give IABP a class IIa recommendation for medically refractory AMI-CS in the USA, whereas the ESC guidelines give it a class III recommendation.Percutaneous left ventricular assist device (Impella)No difference in mortality between IABP or Impella use after 30 days or 6 months (IMPRESS trial)Howev...

The following question refers to Figures 6-8 from Sections 3.2 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by student Dr. Hirsh Elhence, answered first by Ohio State University Cardiology Fellow Dr. Alli Bigeh, and then by expert faculty Dr. Eugene Yang.Dr. Yang is Professor of Medicine at the University of Washington where he is also the 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 as well as former 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 #31 The 2021 ESC CV Prevention guidelines recommend a stepwise approach to risk stratification and treatment options. What is the first step in risk factor treatment regardless of past medical history, risk factors, or established ASCVD?AInitiate statin for goal LDL <100 mg/dlBAssess family history of premature CVDCCounsel on ketogenic dietDStop smoking and lifestyle recommendations Answer #31 ExplanationThe correct answer is D – stop smoking and lifestyle recommendations. Smoking cessation and lifestyle modifications are recommended for everyone across the spectrum of ASCVD risk including for both primary and secondary prevention (Class 1). It is worth noting that many patients can move themselves towards a lower risk category without taking drugs just by stopping smoking.Option A is incorrect. While initiating statin therapy for goal LDL <100 mg/dL may be an appropriate treatment option for some patients, it is not the first step per the “stepwise approach” recommended in the ESC guidelines. Whether or not to initiate a statin depends on a multitude of factors including estimated 10-year CVD risk, age, comorbidities, established ASCVD, and patient preference. The first step for patients with established ASCVD includes LDL-C reduction to goal <70 mg/dL (class I) with intensification to a goal LDL-C <55mg/dL based on residual 10-year CVD risk, lifetime CVD risk and treatment benefit, comorbidities, frailty, and patient preference.  Primary prevention of ASCVD first targets LDL-C goal <100 (class IIa) in appropriately selected patients.Option B is incorrect. While assessing family history of premature CVD should be part of an initial evaluation and certainly considered a risk enhancing factor, it is not a modifiable risk factor with regards to treatment.Option C is incorrect. A ketogenic diet is not endorsed nor recommended by ACC/AHA or ESC.Studies have shown the benefit of a stepwise approach to treatment intensification. Attainment of treatment goals is similar, side effects are fewer, and patient satisfaction is significantly greater with such an approach. It is not recommended to stop assessment of treatment goals after the first step.Main TakeawayA stepwise approach to treatment intensification is recommended. The first steps for all patients are to stop smoking and institute lifestyle recommendations.Guideline Loc.·       3.2.3 Figures 6-8 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 Sections 6.1 and 7.3 of the 2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. The question is asked by Keck School of Medicine USC medical student & former CardioNerds Intern Hirsh Elhence, answered first by Greater Baltimore Medical Center medicine resident and CardioNerds Academy Fellow Dr. Alaa Diab, and then by expert faculty Dr. Mark Drazner. Dr. Drazner is an advanced heart failure and transplant cardiologist, Professor of Medicine, and Clinical Chief of Cardiology at UT Southwestern. He is the past President of the Heart Failure Society of America.  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 #25 A 50-year-old man with a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus, persistent atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease with prior remote percutaneous coronary intervention, and ischemic cardiomyopathy with HFrEF (LVEF 38%) presents to your outpatient clinic. He denies dyspnea on exertion, orthopnea, bendopnea, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, or peripheral edema. His heart rate is irregularly irregular at 112 beats per minute and blood pressure is 112/67 mmHg. Routine laboratory studies reveal a hemoglobin A1c of 7.7%. Which of the following medications should not be used to control this patient’s comorbidities? A Metoprolol succinate B Verapamil C Dapagliflozin D Pioglitizone E Both B and D Answer #25 Explanation The correct answer is E – both verapamil and pioglitazone should be avoided here. Both verapamil and pioglitizone are associated with harm in patients with LVEF < 50% (Class 3: Harm). Verapamil and diltiazem are non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers. These medications can cause negative inotropic effects through inhibition of calcium influx and may be harmful in this patient population. Pioglitizone belongs to a class of diabetic medications known as the thiazolidinediones. This class of medications may increase the risk of fluid retention, heart failure, and hospitalization in patients with LVEF of less than 50%. Metoprolol succinate, and other evidence-based beta blockers, have a Class 1 recommendation for patients with reduced ejection fraction ≤ 40% to prevent symptomatic heart failure and reduce mortality. It may additionally help with rate control in this patient with atrial fibrillation and rapid ventricular response. SGLT2 inhibitors including dapagliflozin have a Class I recommendation for patients with symptomatic chronic HFrEF to reduce hospitalization for HF and cardiovascular mortality, irrespective of the presence of type 2 diabetes (Class 1, LOE A). They also have a Class I recommendation in patients with type 2 diabetes and either established CVD or at high cardiovascular risk to prevent hospitalization for HF (Class 1, LOE A). Our patient has asymptomatic, or pre-HF (Stage B) heart failure with poorly controlled diabetes, and so use of an SGLT2 inhibitor would be appropriate. Main Takeaway Non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers and thiozolidinediones both have Class 3 recommendations for harm in patients with reduced LV systolic dysfunction. Guideline Loc. Section 6.1 and 7.3   Decipher the Guidelines: 2022 Heart Failure Guidelines PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds Academ...

Stroke is a potentially devastating TAVR complication. In this episode, CardioNerds (Drs. Amit Goyal, Nikolaos Spilias, Ahmed Ghoneem, and Chelsea Amo-Tweneboah) discuss TAVR and stroke risk, stroke prevention strategies, and future directions with Dr. Samir Kapadia, Department chair and chief, Cardiovascular Medicine at Cleveland Clinic. They also discuss device innovation and randomized controlled trial implementation for testing device safety and efficacy. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Dr. Chelsea Amo Tweneboah. As an adjunct to this episode and for a deeper review of cerebral embolic protection devices, read “Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices: Current State of the Art” by Agrawal, Kapadia et al., in US Cardiology Review. CardioNerds Aortic Stenosis SeriesCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! References - TAVR and Stroke Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack M, et al. Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery. New England Journal of Medicine. 2010;363(17):1597-1607. Kapadia SR, Makkar R, Leon M, et al. Cerebral Embolic Protection during Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement. New England Journal of Medicine. 2022;387(14):1253-1263. Kapadia SR, Kodali S, Makkar R, et al. Protection Against Cerebral Embolism During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2017;69(4):367-377. Khan MZ, Zahid S, Khan MU, et al. Use and outcomes of cerebral embolic protection for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A US nationwide study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;98(5):959-968.

CardioNerds cofounders Dr. Amit Goyal and Dr. Daniel Ambinder join Dr. Isabel Balachandran, Dr. Diego Celli from the Texas Heart Institute. They discuss the nuances of risk stratification management of intermediate risk pulmonary embolism. The ECPR for this episode was provided by Dr. Alam Mahboob (Associate Professor of Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine and the Department of Medicine and Associate Program Director for the Cardiovascular Disease Fellowship Program at Baylor). Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, Dr. Chelsea Amo Tweneboah. US Cardiology Review is now the official journal of CardioNerds! Submit your manuscript here. 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 Media - Caring for the Middle Child of Pulmonary Embolism – Texas Heart Institute Pearls - Caring for the Middle Child of Pulmonary Embolism – Texas Heart Institute Submassive pulmonary embolism is defined as an intermediate risk group of acute pulmonary embolism, which presents with signs of RV dysfunction and myocardial injury without hemodynamic instability. The AHA, ACCP, and ESC have variable definitions of submassive PE. Non-invasive tools such as EKG, TTE, and CT are critical to defining RV dysfunction. The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) score is a validated tool to help risk stratify patients with PE. Advanced therapies for submassive PE include systemic thrombolysis, catheter-based intervention, surgical embolectomy, and mechanical circulatory support. The decision between these therapies is based on individual patient risk profiles, local expertise, and the risk of major bleeding. There is a spectrum of long-term complications after an acute PE, ranging from post PE syndrome to CTEPH (chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension) caused by a maladaptive vascular remodeling from residual thrombus or arteriopathy. Thrombolytic therapies are still controversial in reducing the risk of post PE complications. PERT is a multidisciplinary group of clinicians who can rapidly assess and triage patients with acute PE, coordinate access to medical and advanced therapies, and provide the necessary follow up care. Show Notes - Caring for the Middle Child of Pulmonary Embolism – Texas Heart Institute How do you define “submassive” pulmonary embolism? Venous thromboembolism, which includes deep vein thrombosis and acute pulmonary emboli (PE) are the third most common cardiovascular disorder in the United States with approximately 900,000 cases occurring each year (1). The morbidity and mortality associated with pulmonary emboli are also great, with approximately 33% of PE cases being fatal (1).Until recently, PE was previously classified into massive or non-massive. Massive PE was defined as those with cardiogenic shock. A newer group, “submassive PE”, was defined as an “intermediate” risk group. According to the American Heart Association (AHA) Scientific Statement on the management of massive and submassive PE, patients in this group presented with signs of RV dysfunction and myocardial necrosis without hemodynamic instability (2). Intermediate-risk PE covers a broad range of risk and management decisions remain challenging. Intermediate-risk PE convers increased risk for mortality and complications compared with low-risk PE.  How do you risk-stratify intermediate-risk pulmonary emboli? The AHA, American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP), and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) have variable definitions of submassive PE and which biomarkers should be used (1,3). The contents are summarized as below (Table 1) Each major guideline highlights the importance of the evaluation of RV dysfunction (RVD) and elevated biomarkers. To summarize,