Schaubroeck, Hannah

Abstract Inflammation is a key driver of coronary syndromes across the continuum from chronic coronary syndromes to acute coronary syndromes. It contributes to atherogenesis, plaque destabilization, and ischaemic events and influences myocardial injury, repair, and remodelling. Inflammatory activity is further amplified by metabolic and autoimmune comorbidities such as diabetes, obesity, and connective tissue diseases, with obesity representing a major driver of chronic low-grade inflammation through adipose tissue dysfunction and cytokine activation, while psychosocial stress and environmental exposures including air pollution serve as additional triggers. Genetic variations, including human leucocyte antigen genotypes, modulate individual susceptibility to vascular inflammation and myocardial injury. This expert consensus from the European Society of Cardiology’s Association for Acute CardioVascular Care summarizes the current understanding of inflammation across the full spectrum of coronary syndromes, including underlying mechanisms, relevant biomarkers, and imaging approaches that characterize vascular inflammation, and integrates insights from experimental and clinical studies. Importantly, this document provides explicit consensus-based guidance on when, how, and in whom inflammation should be assessed and treated in routine clinical practice. While the causal association between inflammation and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is well established, pharmacological modification of inflammation has produced conflicting evidence. Some agents, such as low-dose colchicine, have demonstrated modest reductions in cardiovascular events, although results across trials have been inconsistent. Other anti-inflammatory therapies have not shown clinical benefit, whereas selective cytokine inhibition with canakinumab has reduced cardiovascular risk at the cost of increased infection rates. The present manuscript also focuses on the evaluation of inflammatory activity in cardiovascular patients in routine clinical practice. It further discusses criteria for patient selection and clinical decision-making regarding the introduction of anti-inflammatory therapy in individuals with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Abstract Psychological distress, moral injury, and burnout are prevalent among intensive care unit (ICU) professionals, impacting individual well-being, team dynamics, and patient safety. Structured peer support programmes, delivered by trained colleagues rather than mental health professionals, could be implemented as low-threshold, scalable interventions to promote psychological safety and resilience. This review outlines five foundational pillars for implementing peer support in the ICU, including formal programme design, training, inclusivity, confidentiality, and continuous evaluation. It also addresses practical strategies to overcome cultural and institutional barriers, such as stigma, time constraints, and hierarchical norms. Drawing on current evidence and recent unpublished survey data from North American critical care cardiologists, the article provides a practical framework for integrating peer support into ICU culture. Peer support represents a complementary approach to formal mental health services and offers tangible benefits for clinician well-being, retention, and quality of care.

Abstract Acute Myocarditis (AM) encompasses a broad spectrum of clinical presentations and causes. Despite the recent advances in cardiovascular imaging, pathology, virology, and genetics, specific therapies are still lacking. This collaborative review aims to analyse the current evidence to answer practical questions that physicians may face during the early management of patients presenting with an acute form of the disease, complicated or not. This review analyses current evidence to address practical questions posed by acute cardiovascular physicians during the early management of acute, or potentially, myocarditis. Based on the current literature, this review provides a step-by-step approach to treat AM patients from their admission in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) to discharge, by answering 10 clinical questions: Might this patient be suffering from an AM? Should I hospitalize this patient and, if so, where? Which cardiac imaging exam should I perform and what can I learn from it? Is this patient requiring an EMB? What should the non-invasive aetiological work-up be? Is her/his episode of AM of viral, toxic, or other origin? Does this patient need specific treatments or mechanical circulatory support? Is there an indication for guideline-directed medical heart failure treatment? When can the patient be discharged and resume physical activity? Notably, this review highlights the need to build a multidisciplinary response team to address the many diagnostic and therapeutic challenges of AM patients. It also points out the lack of evidence to guide the treatment of these patients.

OBJECTIVES: To review a contemporary approach to the management of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS). DATA SOURCES: We reviewed salient medical literature regarding CS. STUDY SELECTION: We included professional society scientific statements and clinical studies examining outcomes in patients with CS, with a focus on randomized clinical trials. DATA EXTRACTION: We extracted salient study results and scientific statement recommendations regarding the management of CS. DATA SYNTHESIS: Professional society recommendations were integrated with evaluated studies. CONCLUSIONS: CS results in short-term mortality exceeding 30% despite standard therapy. While acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been the focus of most CS research, heart failure-related CS now predominates at many centers. CS can present with a wide spectrum of shock severity, including patients who are normotensive despite ongoing hypoperfusion. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention Shock Classification categorizes patients with or at risk of CS according to shock severity, which predicts mortality. The CS population includes a heterogeneous mix of phenotypes defined by ventricular function, hemodynamic profile, biomarkers, and other clinical variables. Integrating the shock severity and CS phenotype with nonmodifiable risk factors for mortality can guide clinical decision-making and prognostication. Identifying and treating the cause of CS is crucial for success, including early culprit vessel revascularization for AMI. Vasopressors and inotropes titrated to restore arterial pressure and perfusion are the cornerstone of initial medical therapy for CS. Temporary mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is indicated for appropriately selected patients as a bridge to recovery, decision, durable MCS, or heart transplant. Randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated better survival with the routine use of temporary MCS in patients with CS. Accordingly, a multidisciplinary team-based approach should be used to tailor the type of hemodynamic support to each individual CS patient’s needs based on shock severity, phenotype, and exit strategy.