scholarly journals The prognostic impact of the 2015 European Society of Cardiology pericarditis guidelines implementation in clinical practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Lazaros ◽  
Konstantinos Aznaouridis ◽  
Emilia Lazarou ◽  
Constantina Masoura ◽  
Stergios Soulaidopoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
European Society ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
Guidelines Implementation ◽  
European Society Of Cardiology

scholarly journals Digital Health in Cardiology: The Estonian Perspective

Cardiology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 145 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eno-Martin Lotman ◽  
Margus Viigimaa
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
European Society ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Personal Communications ◽  
Current State ◽  
Current Review ◽  
Literature Reviews ◽  
European Society Of Cardiology

Background: Digital health is rapidly entering clinical practice in cardiology. Estonia is one of the leading nations in implementing digital nationwide solutions. Recently, the European Society of Cardiology organized the 1st Summit on Digital Health in Tallinn, which provided the opportunity to discuss various aspects concerning the digitalization of cardiology. Summary: The current review focuses on the advancements of Estonian digital health and digital cardiology as well as possible barriers and solutions for implementing digital innovations in cardiology. Key Messages: The authors have included aspects from the recent summit, personal communications, and literature reviews to express the current state and future possibilities of digital health in ­cardiology from the Estonian perspective.

Fourth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts)

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. S1-S1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Graham ◽  
Dan Atar ◽  
Knut Borch-Johnsen ◽  
Gudrun Boysen ◽  
Gunilla Burell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Disease Prevention ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
European Society ◽  
Task Force ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease Prevention ◽  
Joint Task ◽  
Joint Task Force ◽  
European Society Of Cardiology

Other experts who contributed to parts of the guidelines: Edmond Walma, Tony Fitzgerald, Marie Therese Cooney, Alexandra Dudina European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG): Alec Vahanian (Chairperson), John Camm, Raffaele De Caterina, Veronica Dean, Kenneth Dickstein, Christian Funck-Brentano, Gerasimos Filippatos, Irene Hellemans, Steen Dalby Kristensen, Keith McGregor, Udo Sechtem, Sigmund Silber, Michal Tendera, Petr Widimsky, Jose Luis Zamorano Document reviewers: Irene Hellemans (CPG Review Co-ordinator), Attila Altiner, Enzo Bonora, Paul N. Durrington, Robert Fagard, Simona Giampaoli, Harry Hemingway, Jan Hakansson, Sverre Erik Kjeldsen, Mogens Lytken Larsen, Giuseppe Mancia, Athanasios J. Manolis, Kristina Orth-Gomer, Terje Pedersen, Mike Rayner, Lars Ryden, Mario Sammut, Neil Schneiderman, Anton F. Stalenhoef, Lale Tokgözoglu, Olov Wiklund, Antonis Zampelas

P1659Evolution of level of evidence c recommendations in European Society of Cardiology clinical practice guidelines on heart failure

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Trindade ◽  
D Faria ◽  
J Serodio ◽  
F Batista ◽  
M Beringuilho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Practice Guidelines ◽  
Practice Guidelines ◽  
European Society ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
European Society Of Cardiology ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Background Over the past two decades, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) on Heart Failure has increasingly become a familiar part of Cardiology practice and are used worldwide. By creating objective standards, CPG provides a mechanism to assess decision-making and straightforward references for clinicians. Level of Evidence C recommendations are based on expert consensus and/or small retrospective studies and registries with limited and non-representative populations evaluated. The resulting directives need to be proven with better quality data to assess its true benefits. Purpose The purpose of our study was to describe and evaluate the evolution of Level of Evidence C recommendations of ESC CPG on Heart Failure and to provide a quality assessment of its benefits in the following years. Methods In this retrospective observational Case-Control study, we identified and collected all Level of Evidence C recommendations in five consecutive published documents of ESC CPG in the years 2001, 2005, 2008, 2012 and 2016. Each identified recommendation was classified between two major groups: Diagnostic and Complementary Exams (group 1) and Therapeutics and Interventions (group 2) and was followed up in the following documents. Primary outcomes were classified as: (1) Upgrade to Level of Evidence A or B [Upgrade], (2) Elimination or disproven benefit/harm [Downgrade] and (3) Maintenance or minor reformulation with unchanged benefit/harm [Maintenance]. We applied a Kaplan-Meyer survival analysis to estimate the probability of Upgrade or Downgrade in each group. Results A total of 239 different Level of Evidence C recommendations were submitted to the final analysis, 22.6% (n=54) in group 1 and 77.4% (n=185) in group 2. On follow-up, 35.2% (n=76) of recommendations were upgraded, 29.6% (n=64) were downgraded and 35.2% (n=76) were maintained. Regarding outcomes, the downgrade of recommendations occurred predominantly in group 2 (94.4%). Considering all the eliminated recommendations, 60.9% took place on the next following published ESC CPG document. Likewise, 60.5% of upgraded recommendations also occurred on the next following published ESC CPG document. The probability of upgrade or downgrade in the next following document was 52.8%, predominantly in the Therapeutics and Interventions group (37.5% vs 57.9%, p=0.012). Figure 1 Conclusions Level of Evidence C recommendations constitutes an important asset of ESC CPG on Heart Failure as they are usually updated on new treatment options and are developed by experts in the specific topic. However, the probability of elimination due to disproven benefit or potential harm was high (29.6%), particularly regarding therapeutics and interventions (94%). Since a significant fraction of Level of Evidence C recommendations remains unchanged on the following document (35%), the need for high-quality data, specifically regarding therapeutic interventions, is warranted.

Acute aortic syndrome: emerging role of biomarkers

ESC CardioMed ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 2591-2594
Author(s):  
Toru Suzuki ◽  
Riccardo Gorla ◽  
Eduardo Bossone
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
European Society ◽  
Diagnostic Algorithm ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Acute Aortic Syndrome ◽  
Aortic Diseases ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
European Society Of Cardiology

The 2014 European Society of Cardiology Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases proposed a diagnostic algorithm incorporating biomarkers into the decision-making process of acute aortic syndrome. This chapter discusses the implementation of this algorithm in clinical practice in addition to positioning of the use of biomarkers in the decision-making processes as well as their promise and pitfalls.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document