Premature ventricular complexes (PVCs) are frequently encountered in clinical practice. The association of PVCs with adverse cardiovascular outcomes in the context of structural heart disease is well established, yet the association between PVCs and cardiovascular outcomes in the absence of structural heart disease is not fully elucidated. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) seems to contribute prognostically in the latter subgroup. PVC- induced myocardial dysfunction refers to the impairment of ventricular function due to the PVCs and is mainly associated with a PVC burden greater than 10%. The surface 12- lead ECG is used to localize the anatomic site of origin and multiple algorithms have been developed to differentiate right ventricular and left ventricular outflow tract (RVOT and LVOT, respectively) origin. Novel algorithms include alternative ECG configurations and lately, sophisticated artificial intelligence methods have been utilized to distinguish the origins of outflow tract arrhythmias. The decision to therapeutically address PVCs should be taken upon the presence of symptoms or the development of PVC- induced myocardial dysfunction. The therapeutic modalities include pharmacological therapy, namely I-C antiarrhythmic drugs and beta blockers, as well as catheter ablation, which demonstrates superior efficacy and safety.

Arrhythmic sudden cardiac death (SCD) has an annual prevalence of 1 per 1000 while 75% of the victims suffer from ischemic and 10% from non-ischemic or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Altogether, these three entities account for more than 80% of the total SCD victims. Guidelines for implantable cardiac defibrillators are still dominated by LVEF<30% from the MADIT II study. In terms of arrhythmic risk stratification, the PRESERVE-EF study restored in clinical practice the two-step arrhythmic risk stratification approach based on Electrocardiographic non-invasive risk factors (NIRFs) guiding to electrophysiological study. In our times with the multiple cardiac imaging methods and artificial intelligence applications availability, this two-step approach based on integrated arrhythmia mechanisms detection, emerges as an efficient SCD risk stratification paradigm for these three entities but also for the patients with congenital heart disease.

Background and Objectives: Proper use of oral anticoagulants is crucial in the management of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) may be considered for stroke prevention in patients with AF and contraindications for long-term anticoagulant treatment. We aimed to assess the anticoagulation status and LAAC indications in patients with AF from HECMOS (Hellenic Cardiorenal Morbidity Snapshot) survey. Materials and Methods: HECMOS was a nationwide snapshot survey of cardiorenal morbidity in hospitalized cardiology patients. HECMOS used an electronic platform to collect demographic and clinically relevant information from all patients hospitalized on March 3, 2022, in 55 different cardiology departments. In this substudy, we included patients with known AF without mechanical prosthetic valves and moderate to severe mitral valve stenosis. Patients with prior stroke, previous major bleeding, poor adherence to anticoagulants, and end-stage renal disease were considered candidates for LAAC. Results: Two hundred fifty-six patients (mean age 76.6±11.7, 148 males) were included in our analysis. Most of them (n=159; 62%) suffered from persistent AF. Mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.28±1.7, while mean HAS-BLED score was 1.47±0.9. Three out of 3 patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc 0 or 1 (female) received improperly anticoagulants. Sixteen out of 18 patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc 1 or 2 (female) received anticoagulants. Thirty-three out of 235 patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc &gt; 1 or 2 (for female) did not receive improperly anticoagulants. Among 221 under anticoagulant therapy, 191 (86.4%) received non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) and 30 (13.6%) received vitamin K antagonists. Relative indications for LAAC were present in 64 patients with NVAF (60 had only one risk factor and 2 had two concurrent risk factors). In detail, 36 had a prior stroke, 17 patients had a history of major bleeding, 15 patients reported poor or no adherence to the anticoagulant therapy and 5 had eGFR&lt; 15 ml/min/1.73m2. Moreover, 33 had a HAS-BLED score ≥3. No LAAC treatment was recorded. Conclusions: Anticoagulation status was nearly optimal in a high thromboembolic risk population of cardiology patients, mainly treated with NOACs. One out of four AF patients should be screened for LAAC.