Cardiogenic shock continues to portend poor outcomes, conferring short-term mortality rates of 30% to 50% despite recent scientific advances. Age is a nonmodifiable risk factor for mortality in patients with cardiogenic shock and is often considered in the decision-making process for eligibility for various therapies. Older adults have been largely excluded from analyses of therapeutic options in patients with cardiogenic shock. As a result, despite the association of advanced age with worse outcomes, focused strategies in the assessment and management of cardiogenic shock in this high-risk and growing population are lacking. Individual programs oftentimes develop upper age limits for various interventional strategies for their patients, including heart transplantation and durable left ventricular assist devices. However, age as a lone parameter should not be used to guide individual patient management decisions in cardiogenic shock. In the assessment of risk in older adults with cardiogenic shock, a comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach is central to developing best practices. In this American Heart Association scientific statement, we aim to summarize our contemporary understanding of the epidemiology, risk assessment, and in-hospital approach to management of cardiogenic shock, with a unique focus on older adults.

Over the past decade, new research has advanced scientific knowledge of neurodevelopmental trajectories, factors that increase neurodevelopmental risk, and neuroprotective strategies for individuals with congenital heart disease. In addition, best practices for evaluation and management of developmental delays and disorders in this high-risk patient population have been formulated based on literature review and expert consensus. This American Heart Association scientific statement serves as an update to the 2012 statement on the evaluation and management of neurodevelopmental outcomes in children with congenital heart disease. It includes revised risk categories for developmental delay or disorder and an updated list of factors that increase neurodevelopmental risk in individuals with congenital heart disease according to current evidence, including genetic predisposition, fetal and perinatal factors, surgical and perioperative factors, socioeconomic disadvantage, and parental psychological distress. It also includes an updated algorithm for referral, evaluation, and management of individuals at high risk. Risk stratification of individuals with congenital heart disease with the updated categories and risk factors will identify a large and growing population of survivors at high risk for developmental delay or disorder and associated impacts across the life span. Critical next steps must include efforts to prevent and mitigate developmental delays and disorders. The goal of this scientific statement is to inform health care professionals caring for patients with congenital heart disease and other key stakeholders about the current state of knowledge of neurodevelopmental outcomes for individuals with congenital heart disease and best practices for neuroprotection, risk stratification, evaluation, and management.

Bias in health care has been well documented and results in disparate and worsened outcomes for at-risk groups. Medical imaging plays a critical role in facilitating patient diagnoses but involves multiple sources of bias including factors related to access to imaging modalities, acquisition of images, and assessment (ie, interpretation) of imaging data. Machine learning (ML) applied to diagnostic imaging has demonstrated the potential to improve the quality of imaging-based diagnosis and the precision of measuring imaging-based traits. Algorithms can leverage subtle information not visible to the human eye to detect underdiagnosed conditions or derive new disease phenotypes by linking imaging features with clinical outcomes, all while mitigating cognitive bias in interpretation. Importantly, however, the application of ML to diagnostic imaging has the potential to either reduce or propagate bias. Understanding the potential gain as well as the potential risks requires an understanding of how and what ML models learn. Common risks of propagating bias can arise from unbalanced training, suboptimal architecture design or selection, and uneven application of models. Notwithstanding these risks, ML may yet be applied to improve gain from imaging across all 3A's (access, acquisition, and assessment) for all patients. In this review, we present a framework for understanding the balance of opportunities and challenges for minimizing bias in medical imaging, how ML may improve current approaches to imaging, and what specific design considerations should be made as part of efforts to maximize the quality of health care for all.

Representation of women in interventional vascular fields (interventional cardiology, interventional radiology, and vascular surgery) lags behind that in other specialties. With women representing half of all medical school graduates, encouraging parity of women in these fields needs to start in medical school. Barriers to pursuing careers in vascular intervention include insufficient exposure during core clerkships, early mentorship, visibility of women in the field, length of training, lifestyle considerations, work culture and environment, and concerns about radiation exposure. This scientific statement highlights potential solutions for both the real and perceived barriers that women may face in pursuing careers in vascular intervention, including streamlining of training (as both interventional radiology and vascular surgery have done with a resultant increase in percentage of women trainees), standardization of institutional promotion of women in leadership, and professional and industry partnerships for the retention and advancement of women.

Quasi-experimental methods (QEMs) are a family of techniques used to estimate causal relationships when randomized controlled trials are unfeasible or unethical. They offer a powerful alternative to observational studies by introducing random assignment of individuals or groups into their design, thereby offering stronger means of establishing causation. The use of QEMs in cardiovascular research has not been systematically examined to determine steps toward improving and expanding their use.

Adverse pregnancy outcomes are common among pregnant individuals and are associated with long-term risk of cardiovascular disease. Individuals with adverse pregnancy outcomes also have an increased incidence of cardiovascular disease risk factors after delivery. Despite this, evidence-based approaches to managing these patients after pregnancy to reduce cardiovascular disease risk are lacking. In this scientific statement, we review the current evidence on interpregnancy and postpartum preventive strategies, blood pressure management, and lifestyle interventions for optimizing cardiovascular disease using the American Heart Association Life's Essential 8 framework. Clinical, health system, and community-level interventions can be used to engage postpartum individuals and to reach populations who experience the highest burden of adverse pregnancy outcomes and cardiovascular disease. Future trials are needed to improve screening of subclinical cardiovascular disease in individuals with a history of adverse pregnancy outcomes, before the onset of symptomatic disease. Interventions in the fourth trimester, defined as the 12 weeks after delivery, have great potential to improve cardiovascular health across the life course.

Results from multiple randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes after intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)- and optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with invasive coronary angiography (ICA)-guided PCI as well as a pivotal trial comparing the 2 intravascular imaging (IVI) techniques have provided mixed results.

In 1924, the founders of the American Heart Association (AHA) envisioned an international society focused on the heart and aimed at facilitating research, disseminating information, increasing public awareness, and developing public health policy related to heart disease. This presidential advisory provides a comprehensive review of the past century of cardiovascular and stroke science, with a focus on the AHA's contributions, as well as informed speculation about the future of cardiovascular science into the next century of the organization's history. The AHA is a leader in fundamental, translational, clinical, and population science, and it promotes the concept of the "learning health system," in which a continuous cycle of evidence-based practice leads to practice-based evidence, permitting an iterative refinement in clinical evidence and care. This advisory presents the AHA's journey over the past century from instituting professional membership to establishing extraordinary research funding programs; translating evidence to practice through clinical practice guidelines; affecting systems of care through quality programs, certification, and implementation; leading important advocacy efforts at the federal, state and local levels; and building global coalitions around cardiovascular and stroke science and public health. Recognizing an exciting potential future for science and medicine, the advisory offers a vision for even greater impact for the AHA's second century in its continued mission to be a relentless force for longer, healthier lives.

Disorders of the cardiac rhythm may occur in both the fetus and neonate. Because of the immature myocardium, the hemodynamic consequences of either bradyarrhythmias or tachyarrhythmias may be far more significant than in mature physiological states. Treatment options are limited in the fetus and neonate because of limited vascular access, patient size, and the significant risk/benefit ratio of any intervention. In addition, exposure of the fetus or neonate to either persistent arrhythmias or antiarrhythmic medications may have yet-to-be-determined long-term developmental consequences. This scientific statement discusses the mechanism of arrhythmias, pharmacological treatment options, and distinct aspects of pharmacokinetics for the fetus and neonate. From the available current data, subjects of apparent consistency/consensus are presented, as well as future directions for research in terms of aspects of care for which evidence has not been established.

RBM20 (RNA-binding motif protein 20) is a vertebrate- and muscle-specific RNA-binding protein that belongs to the serine-arginine-rich family of splicing factors. The RBM20 gene was first identified as a dilated cardiomyopathy-linked gene over a decade ago. Early studies in Rbm20 knockout rodents implicated disrupted splicing of RBM20 target genes as a causative mechanism. Clinical studies show that pathogenic variants in RBM20 are linked to aggressive dilated cardiomyopathy with early onset heart failure and high mortality. Subsequent studies employing pathogenic variant knock-in animal models revealed that variants in a specific portion of the arginine-serine-rich domain in RBM20 not only disrupt splicing but also hinder nucleocytoplasmic transport and lead to the formation of RBM20 biomolecular condensates in the sarcoplasm. Conversely, mice harboring a disease-associated variant in the RRM (RNA recognition motif) do not show evidence of adverse remodeling or exhibit sudden death despite disrupted splicing of RBM20 target genes. Thus, whether disrupted splicing, biomolecular condensates, or both contribute to dilated cardiomyopathy is under debate. Beyond this, additional questions remain, such as whether there is sexual dimorphism in the presentation of RBM20 cardiomyopathy. What are the clinical features of RBM20 cardiomyopathy and why do some individuals develop more severe disease than others? In this review, we summarize the reported observations and discuss potential mechanisms of RBM20 cardiomyopathy derived from studies employing in vivo animal models and in vitro human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. Potential therapeutic strategies to treat RBM20 cardiomyopathy are also discussed.

The American Heart Association (AHA), in conjunction with the National Institutes of Health, annually reports the most up-to-date statistics related to heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular risk factors, including core health behaviors (smoking, physical activity, nutrition, sleep, and obesity) and health factors (cholesterol, blood pressure, glucose control, and metabolic syndrome) that contribute to cardiovascular health. The AHA Heart Disease and Stroke Statistical Update presents the latest data on a range of major clinical heart and circulatory disease conditions (including stroke, brain health, complications of pregnancy, kidney disease, congenital heart disease, rhythm disorders, sudden cardiac arrest, subclinical atherosclerosis, coronary heart disease, cardiomyopathy, heart failure, valvular disease, venous thromboembolism, and peripheral artery disease) and the associated outcomes (including quality of care, procedures, and economic costs).

Genetic testing has become standard of care for patients with long QT syndrome (LQTS), providing diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic information for both probands and their family members. However, up to a quarter of patients with LQTS do not have identifiable Mendelian pathogenic variants in the currently known LQTS-associated genes. This absence of genetic confirmation, intriguingly, does not lessen the severity of LQTS, with the prognosis in these gene-elusive patients with unequivocal LQTS mirroring genotype-positive patients in the limited data available. Such a conundrum instigates an exploration into the causes of corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation in these cases, unveiling a broad spectrum of potential scenarios and mechanisms. These include multiple environmental influences on QTc prolongation, exercise-induced repolarization abnormalities, and the profound implications of the constantly evolving nature of genetic testing and variant interpretation. In addition, the rapid advances in genetics have the potential to uncover new causal genes, and polygenic risk factors may aid in the diagnosis of high-risk patients. Navigating this multifaceted landscape requires a systematic approach and expert knowledge, integrating the dynamic nature of genetics and patient-specific influences for accurate diagnosis, management, and counseling of patients. The role of a subspecialized expert cardiogenetic clinic is paramount in evaluation to navigate this complexity. Amid these intricate aspects, this review outlines potential causes of gene-elusive LQTS. It also provides an outline for the evaluation of patients with negative and inconclusive genetic test results and underscores the need for ongoing adaptation and reassessment in our understanding of LQTS, as the complexities of gene-elusive LQTS are increasingly deciphered.

Every 10 years, the American Heart Association (AHA) Emergency Cardiovascular Care Committee establishes goals to improve survival from cardiac arrest. These goals align with broader AHA Impact Goals and support the AHA's advocacy efforts and strategic investments in research, education, clinical care, and quality improvement programs. This scientific statement focuses on 2030 AHA emergency cardiovascular care priorities, with a specific focus on bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, early defibrillation, and neurologically intact survival. This scientific statement also includes aspirational goals, such as establishing cardiac arrest as a reportable disease and mandating reporting of standardized outcomes from different sources; advancing recognition of and knowledge about cardiac arrest; improving dispatch system response, availability, and access to resuscitation training in multiple settings and at multiple time points; improving availability, access, and affordability of defibrillators; providing a focus on early defibrillation, in-hospital programs, and establishing champions for debriefing and review of cardiac arrest events; and expanding measures to track outcomes beyond survival. The ability to track and report data from these broader aspirational targets will potentially require expansion of existing data sets, development of new data sets, and enhanced integration of technology to collect process and outcome data, as well as partnerships of the AHA with national, state, and local organizations. The COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, disparities in COVID-19 outcomes for historically excluded racial and ethnic groups, and the longstanding disparities in cardiac arrest treatment and outcomes for Black and Hispanic or Latino populations also contributed to an explicit focus and target on equity for the AHA Emergency Cardiovascular Care 2030 Impact Goals.

Clinical trials in heart failure (HF) traditionally use time-to-event analyses focusing on death and hospitalization for HF. These time-to-first event analyses may have more limited abilities to assess the probability of benefiting from a therapy, especially if that benefit manifests as improved functional status rather than reduced risk of death or HF hospitalization. Hierarchical end points including clinical outcomes and patient status measures allow for ranked evaluation of outcomes in 1 metric assessing whether patients randomized to intervention or control are more likely to derive an overall benefit while also allowing more patients to contribute to the primary outcome.

Coronary artery calcification (CAC) accompanies the development of advanced atherosclerosis. Its role in atherosclerosis holds great interest because the presence and burden of coronary calcification provide direct evidence of the presence and extent of coronary artery disease; furthermore, CAC predicts future events independently of concomitant conventional cardiovascular risk factors and to a greater extent than any other noninvasive biomarker of this disease. Nevertheless, the relationship between CAC and the susceptibility of a plaque to provoke a thrombotic event remains incompletely understood. This review summarizes the current understanding and literature on CAC. It outlines the pathophysiology of CAC and reviews laboratory, histopathological, and genetic studies, as well as imaging findings, to characterize different types of calcification and to elucidate their implications. Some patterns of calcification such as microcalcification portend increased risk of rupture and cardiovascular events and may improve prognosis assessment noninvasively. However, contemporary computed tomography cannot assess early microcalcification. Limited spatial resolution and blooming artifacts may hinder estimation of degree of coronary artery stenosis. Technical advances such as photon counting detectors and combination with nuclear approaches (eg, NaF imaging) promise to improve the performance of cardiac computed tomography. These innovations may speed achieving the ultimate goal of providing noninvasively specific and clinically actionable information.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Heart Association created a new 2024 Impact Goal with health equity at its core, in recognition of the increasing health disparities in our country and the overwhelming evidence of the damaging effect of structural racism on cardiovascular and stroke health. Concurrent with the announcement of the new Impact Goal was the release of an American Heart Association presidential advisory on structural racism, recognizing racism as a fundamental driver of health disparities and directing the American Heart Association to advance antiracist strategies regarding science, business operations, leadership, quality improvement, and advocacy. This policy statement builds on the call to action put forth in our presidential advisory, discussing specific opportunities to leverage public policy in promoting overall well-being and rectifying those long-standing structural barriers that impede the progress that we need and seek for the health of all communities. Although this policy statement discusses difficult aspects of our past, it is meant to provide a forward-looking blueprint that can be embraced by a broad spectrum of stakeholders who share the association's commitment to addressing structural racism and realizing true health equity.

Multiple applications for machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) in cardiovascular imaging are being proposed and developed. However, the processes involved in implementing AI in cardiovascular imaging are highly diverse, varying by imaging modality, patient subtype, features to be extracted and analyzed, and clinical application. This article establishes a framework that defines value from an organizational perspective, followed by value chain analysis to identify the activities in which AI might produce the greatest incremental value creation. The various perspectives that should be considered are highlighted, including clinicians, imagers, hospitals, patients, and payers. Integrating the perspectives of all health care stakeholders is critical for creating value and ensuring the successful deployment of AI tools in a real-world setting. Different AI tools are summarized, along with the unique aspects of AI applications to various cardiac imaging modalities, including cardiac computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography. AI is applicable and has the potential to add value to cardiovascular imaging at every step along the patient journey, from selecting the more appropriate test to optimizing image acquisition and analysis, interpreting the results for classification and diagnosis, and predicting the risk for major adverse cardiac events.

Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death, accounting for ≈50% of all cardiovascular deaths. The prognosis of such individuals is poor, with <10% surviving to hospital discharge. Survival with a favorable neurologic outcome is highest among individuals who present with a witnessed shockable rhythm, received bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation, achieve return of spontaneous circulation within 15 minutes of arrest, and have evidence of ST-segment elevation on initial ECG after return of spontaneous circulation. The cardiac catheterization laboratory plays an important role in the coordinated Chain of Survival for patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The catheterization laboratory can be used to provide diagnostic, therapeutic, and resuscitative support after sudden cardiac arrest from many different cardiac causes, but it has a unique importance in the treatment of cardiac arrest resulting from underlying coronary artery disease. Over the past few years, numerous trials have clarified the role of the cardiac catheterization laboratory in the management of resuscitated patients or those with ongoing cardiac arrest. This scientific statement provides an update on the contemporary approach to managing resuscitated patients or those with ongoing cardiac arrest.

Cardiac arrest is common and deadly, affecting up to 700 000 people in the United States annually. Advanced cardiac life support measures are commonly used to improve outcomes. This "2023 American Heart Association Focused Update on Adult Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support" summarizes the most recent published evidence for and recommendations on the use of medications, temperature management, percutaneous coronary angiography, extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and seizure management in this population. We discuss the lack of data in recent cardiac arrest literature that limits our ability to evaluate diversity, equity, and inclusion in this population. Last, we consider how the cardiac arrest population may make up an important pool of organ donors for those awaiting organ transplantation.

Although there is consensus on the management of patients with Brugada Syndrome with high risk for sudden cardiac arrest, asymptomatic or intermediate-risk patients present clinical management challenges. This document explores the management opinions of experts throughout the world for patients with Brugada Syndrome who do not fit guideline recommendations. Four real-world clinical scenarios were presented with commentary from small expert groups for each case. All authors voted on case-specific questions to evaluate the level of consensus among the entire group in nuanced diagnostic and management decisions relevant to each case. Points of agreement, points of controversy, and gaps in knowledge are highlighted.