Hesham Elzomor

Tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a clinical syndrome in which integrated multimodality imaging is central to diagnosis, timely referral, procedural selection, and assessment of treatment success. This narrative state-of-the-art review focuses on the imaging information that changes decisions along the surgical pathway while positioning surgery within contemporary transcatheter practice. Transthoracic echocardiography remains the gateway examination; three-dimensional transoesophageal echocardiography refines leaflet and annular anatomy; cardiac magnetic resonance provides the most reproducible assessment of right ventricular volumes and function; and cardiac computed tomography defines annular geometry, adjacent structures, device leads, and access. We distinguish guideline-endorsed thresholds from observational or consensus-derived decision aids and link mechanism, annular dilatation, leaflet tethering, right ventricular reserve, pulmonary haemodynamics, and end-organ risk to the choice of repair, replacement, transcatheter therapy, or surveillance. Particular emphasis is placed on perioperative imaging: the effects of anaesthesia and loading conditions, accurate septolateral annular measurement, the definition of an acceptable post-bypass result, and the significance of central vs. eccentric residual jets. A dedicated section compares imaging requirements for transcatheter edge-to-edge repair and transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement and summarizes post-procedural surveillance. The central message is that imaging does not replace clinical judgement; it provides the shared language through which the Heart Team selects the right intervention before irreversible right-heart and end-organ damage develops.

Percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes rely heavily on accurate lesion assessment and procedural planning. Invasive tools, such as fractional flow reserve, nonhyperemic pressure ratios, intravascular ultrasound, and optical coherence tomography, provide essential physiological and anatomic insights but are resource-intensive, prolong procedures, and increase contrast and radiation exposure. Coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography has emerged as a noninvasive modality with high diagnostic accuracy for coronary artery disease, capable of detailing plaque composition, lesion length, and vessel geometry. With the integration of CT-derived fractional flow reserve and CT myocardial perfusion imaging, coronary CT angiography now offers both anatomic and functional evaluation, bridging diagnostic and interventional decision-making. Despite guideline endorsement for coronary artery disease diagnosis, its role in guiding percutaneous coronary intervention strategies remains underutilized and absent from revascularization recommendations. This review outlines a practical, step-by-step framework for integrating coronary CT angiography into contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention planning, covering acquisition protocols, software platforms, lesion assessment, and stent strategy optimization. It also explores emerging intraprocedural applications, including fusion imaging, augmented and virtual reality, and holographic visualization. By synthesizing current evidence and identifying gaps, this review positions coronary CT angiography as a promising adjunct in precision-based percutaneous coronary intervention.

The classical concept of plaque vulnerability, centred on specific morphological features, has failed to deliver reliable risk prediction in clinical practice. Recent evidence highlights the need to redefine coronary vulnerability as a dynamic, patient-specific phenotype shaped by plaque biology, systemic inflammation, and haemodynamic forces. Advanced imaging modalities, artificial intelligence, and circulating biomarkers now enable a multidimensional assessment of this complex phenotype. This integrative approach may offer a more precise framework for risk stratification and personalised prevention in coronary artery disease.

Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) is a further light-based intravascular imaging modality and provides a high-resolution, cross-sectional view of coronary arteries. It has a useful anatomic and increasingly physiological evaluation in light of coronary artery disease (CAD). This review provides a critical examination of the increased application of the OCT in assessing coronary artery physiology, beyond its initial mainstay application in anatomical imaging. OCT provides precise information on plaque morphology, which can help identify vulnerable plaques, and is most important in informing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs), including implanting a stent and optimizing it. The combination of OCT and functional measurements, such as optical flow ratio and OCT-based fractional flow reserve (OCT-FFR), permits a more complete assessment of coronary stenoses, which may provide increased diagnostic accuracy and better revascularization decision-making. The recent developments in OCT technology have also enhanced the accuracy in the measurement of coronary functions. The innovations may support the optimal treatment of patients as they provide more personalized and individualized treatment options; however, it is critical to recognize the limitations of OCT and distinguish between the hypothetical advantages and empirical outcomes. This review evaluates the existing uses, technological solutions, and future trends in OCT-based physiological imaging and evaluation, and explains how such an advancement will be beneficial in the treatment of CAD and gives a fair representation concerning other imaging applications.

IntroductionTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is becoming the standard of care for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Yet, some patients with AS are not indicated/eligible for TAVI. Several noninvasive, catheter-based or surgical alternatives exist, and other therapeutic options are emerging.Areas coveredThis review provides an overview of non-TAVI options for severe AS. Non-invasive, transcatheter, and alternative surgical strategies are discussed, emphasizing their backgrounds, techniques, and outcomes.Expert opinionAlternative therapies to TAVI, whether device-based or non-device-based, continue to evolve or emerge and provide either alternative treatments or a bridge to TAVI, for patients not meeting indications for, or having contraindications to TAVI.Although TAVI and SAVR are the current dominant therapies, there are still some patients that could benefit in the future from other alternatives.Data on alternative options for such patients are scarce. Many advantages and disadvantages arise when selecting a specific treatment strategy for individual patients.Head-to-head comparison studies could guide physicians toward better patient selection and procedural planning. Awareness of therapeutic options, indications, techniques, and outcomes should enable heart teams to achieve optimized patient selection. Furthermore, it can increase the use of these alternatives to optimize the management of AS among different patient populations.these alternatives to optimize the management of AS among different patient populations.{Graphical abstract}

Background: This paper looks to validate the risk score from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology and the International Cardio-Oncology Society (HFA-ICOS) for predicting potential cardiotoxicity from anticancer therapy for patients positive for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2. Methods: A total of 507 patients with at least five years since index diagnosis of breast cancer were retrospectively divided according to the HFA-ICOS risk proforma. According to level of risk, these groups were assessed for rates of cardiotoxicity via mixed-effect Bayesian logistic regression model. Results: A follow-up of five years observed cardiotoxicity of 3.3% (n = 3) in the low-risk, 3.3% (n = 10) in the medium-risk, 4.4% (n = 6) in the high-risk, and 38% (n = 6) in the very-high-risk groups respectively. For cardiac events related to treatment, the risk was significantly higher for the very-high-risk category of HFA-ICOS compared to other categories (Beta = 3.1, 95% CrI: 1.5, 4.8). For overall cardiotoxicity related to treatment, the area under the curve was 0.643 (CI 95%: 0.51, 0.76), with 26.1% (95% CI: 8%, 44%) sensitivity and 97.9% (95% CI: 96%, 99%) specificity. Conclusions: The HFA-ICOS risk score has moderate power in predicting cancer therapy–related cardiotoxicity in HER2-positive breast cancer patients.