Recurrent pericarditis (RP) is a complex inflammatory disorder associated with adverse outcomes and poor quality of life. After the first episode of acute pericarditis, a non‐negligible group of patients will fail to achieve complete remission despite treatment and will be challenged by side effects from the chronic use of medications like corticosteroids. The cause of RP remains unknown in the majority of cases, mainly due to a gap in knowledge of its complex pathophysiology. Over the past 2 decades, the interleukin‐1 (IL‐1) pathway has been uncovered as a key element in the inflammatory cascade, allowing the development of pharmacological targets known as IL‐1 inhibitors. This group of medications has emerged as a treatment option for patients with RP colchicine‐resistance and steroid dependents. Currently, anakinra and rilonacept, have demonstrated beneficial impact in clinical outcomes with a reasonable safety profile in randomized clinical trials. There is still paucity of data regarding the use of canakinumab in the treatment of patients with RP. Although further studies are needed to refine therapeutic protocols and taper of concomitant therapies, IL‐1 inhibitors, continue to consolidate as part of the pharmacological armamentarium to manage this complex condition with potential use as monotherapy. The aim of this review is to highlight the role of IL‐1 pathway in RP and discuss the efficacy, safety, and clinical applicability of IL‐1 inhibitors in the treatment of RP based on current evidence.

Background: Endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) is the gold standard method for surveillance of acute cardiac allograft rejection (ACAR) despite its invasive nature. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)–based myocardial tissue characterization allows detection of myocarditis. The feasibility of CMR-based surveillance for ACAR-induced myocarditis in the first year after heart transplantation is currently undescribed. Methods: CMR-based multiparametric mapping was initially assessed in a prospective cross-sectional fashion to establish agreement between CMR- and EMB-based ACAR and to determine CMR cutoff values between rejection grades. A prospective randomized noninferiority pilot study was then undertaken in adult orthotopic heart transplant recipients who were randomized at 4 weeks after orthotopic heart transplantation to either CMR- or EMB-based rejection surveillance. Clinical end points were assessed at 52 weeks. Results: Four hundred one CMR studies and 354 EMB procedures were performed in 106 participants. Forty heart transplant recipients were randomized. CMR-based multiparametric assessment was highly reproducible and reliable at detecting ACAR (area under the curve, 0.92; sensitivity, 93%; specificity, 92%; negative predictive value, 99%) with greater specificity and negative predictive value than either T1 or T2 parametric CMR mapping alone. High-grade rejection occurred in similar numbers of patients in each randomized group (CMR, n=7; EMB, n=8; P =0.74). Despite similarities in immunosuppression requirements, kidney function, and mortality between groups, the rates of hospitalization (9 of 20 [45%] versus 18 of 20 [90%]; odds ratio, 0.091; P =0.006) and infection (7 of 20 [35%] versus 14 of 20 [70%]; odds ratio, 0.192; P =0,019) were lower in the CMR group. On 15 occasions (6%), patients who were randomized to the CMR arm underwent EMB for clarification or logistic reasons, representing a 94% reduction in the requirement for EMB-based surveillance. Conclusions: A noninvasive CMR-based surveillance strategy for ACAR in the first year after orthotopic heart transplantation is feasible compared with EMB-based surveillance. Registration: HREC/13/SVH/66 and HREC/17/SVH/80. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12618000672257.

No abstract

No abstract

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with either the balloon-expandable Edwards SAPIEN XT valve, or the self-expandable CoreValve prosthesis has become the established therapeutic modality for severe aortic valve stenosis in patients who are not deemed suitable for surgical intervention due to excessively high operative risk. Native aortic valve regurgitation, defined as primary aortic incompetence not associated with aortic stenosis or failed valve replacement, on the other hand, is still considered a relative contraindication for transcatheter aortic valve therapies, because of the absence of annular or leaflet calcification required for secure anchoring of the transcatheter heart valve. In addition, severe aortic regurgitation often coexists with aortic root or ascending aorta dilatation, the treatment of which mandates operative intervention. For these reasons, transcatheter aortic valve replacement has been only sporadically used to treat pure aortic incompetence, typically on a compassionate basis and in surgically inoperable patients. More recently, however, transcatheter aortic valve replacement for native aortic valve regurgitation has been trialled with newer-generation heart valves, with encouraging results, and new ancillary devices have emerged that are designed to stabilize the annulus-root complex. In this paper we review the clinical context, technical characteristics and outcomes associated with transcatheter treatment of native aortic valve regurgitation.