Disclaimer. The ESC Guidelines represent the views of the ESC and were produced after careful consideration of the scientific and medical knowledge, and the evidence available at the time of their publication. The ESC is not responsible in the event of any contradiction, discrepancy, and/or ambiguity between the ESC Guidelines and any other official recommendations or guidelines issued by the relevant public health authorities, in particular in relation to good use of healthcare or therapeutic strategies. Health professionals are encouraged to take the ESC Guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgment, as well as in the determination and the implementation of preventive, diagnostic, or therapeutic medical strategies; however, the ESC Guidelines do not override, in any way whatsoever, the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient's health condition and in consultation with that patient and, where appropriate and/or necessary, the patient's caregiver. Nor do the ESC Guidelines exempt health professionals from taking into full and careful consideration the relevant official updated recommendations or guidelines issued by the competent public health authorities, in order to manage each patient's case in light of the scientifically accepted data pursuant to their respective ethical and professional obligations. It is also the health professional's responsibility to verify the applicable rules and regulations relating to drugs and medical devices at the time of prescription.

Dysglycemia, in this survey defined as impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or type 2 diabetes, is common in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and associated with an unfavorable prognosis. This European survey investigated dysglycemia screening and risk factor management of patients with CAD in relation to standards of European guidelines for cardiovascular subjects. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The European Society of Cardiology's European Observational Research Programme (ESC EORP) European Action on Secondary and Primary Prevention by Intervention to Reduce Events (EUROASPIRE) V (2016-2017) included 8,261 CAD patients, aged 18-80 years, from 27 countries. If the glycemic state was unknown, patients underwent an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and measurement of glycated hemoglobin A 1c. Lifestyle, risk factors, and pharmacological management were investigated. RESULTS A total of 2,452 patients (29.7%) had known diabetes. OGTT was performed in 4,440 patients with unknown glycemic state, of whom 41.1% were dysglycemic. Without the OGTT, 30% of patients with type 2 diabetes and 70% of those with IGT would not have been detected. The presence of dysglycemia almost doubled from that selfreported to the true proportion after screening. Only approximately one-third of all coronary patients had completely normal glucose metabolism. Of patients with known diabetes, 31% had been advised to attend a diabetes clinic, and only 24% attended. Only 58% of dysglycemic patients were prescribed all cardioprotective drugs, and use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (3%) or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (1%) was small. CONCLUSIONS Urgent action is required for both screening and management of patients with CAD and dysglycemia, in the expectation of a substantial reduction in risk of further cardiovascular events and in complications of diabetes, as well as longer life expectancy.

COVID-19 pandemic poses an enormous challenge to healthcare system in Egypt. This document is a position statement from the Egyptian Society of Cardiology. It aims to provide information to cardiovascular healthcare providers in Egypt to guarantee delivery of quality patient care and ensure adequate levels of protection against infection during the COVID-19 pandemic. Older patients and those with cardiovascular disease are at higher risk of mortality. The current situation requires unusual allocation of resources which may negatively impact the care of patients with cardiovascular disease. Cardiologists should be prepared in the COVID-19 pandemic. The challenge is in providing the best quality of care despite limited resources while keeping all medical staff as safe as possible. Consider deferring elective procedures whenever possible. All medical staff should undergo rigorous training on infection control and the use of high-quality personal protection equipment. Cardiologists should promote telemedicine in the outpatient setting, prioritize outpatient contacts, and avoid nosocomial dissemination of the virus to patients and healthcare providers. A much conservative approach for emergent cardiac patients is recommended, and invasive interventions are reserved for high risk hemodynamically unstable patients. During the pandemic, the most important principles of treatment should be controlling the spread of infection as the first priority, prompt assessment of patient risk, recommending conservative medical therapy rather than invasive interventions, and strict infection control measures to limit infection spread within the hospital and to healthcare workers.

No abstract

Background.Eptifibatide achieves high local concentration via direct intracoronary (I/V) injection as it promotes clot disaggregation, but it remains unclear if it is of superior benefit than the routine intravenous (I/V) administration. Aim. The current study aimed to examine the safety and efficacy of I/C vs I/V bolus regimen dose of eptifibatide during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).Material and methods. Prospective, controlled, randomized study enrolled 100 patients with acute anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) eligible for PPCI equally divided into 2 groups (group A received bolus I/C eptifibatide and group B received it I/V) followed by 12-hour continuous I/V infusion. Features related to of myocardial salvage in the form of TIMI flow grade 3, myocardial blush grade 3, ST segment resolution and left ventricular systolic function were evaluated with short-term follow up for 1 month.Results. Mean age of the study population was 50.95±8.45years, there was statistically insignificant difference between both groups regarding baseline characteristics in age (p=0.062), gender (p=0.488), coronary artery disease risk factors (p>0.05), time from onset of pain to admission (p=0.86) or door to balloon (p=0.12). Group A achieved statistically significant better myocardial blush grade 3 (42% vs 10%, p=0.005), ejection faction 30 days after PPCI (46.11±7.81% vs 40.88±6.26%, p=0.005) but statistically insignificant TIMI flow grade 3 (p=0.29) and ST resolution (p=0.34). Incidence of complications in the hospital and 30 days after discharge was statistically insignificant (p>0.05).Conclusion. Both regimens were safe and effective in STEMI patients undergoing PPCI and regimen of I/C bolus eptifibatide achieved better myocardial blush grade and systolic function.