Loading
Cardiovascular Disease and Adiposity · Review
Journal of Clinical Medicine · August 15, 2026
A consensus or society position rather than new primary data.
This narrative review defines atrial cardiomyopathy as complex structural, functional, and electrophysiological atrial changes with multiple etiologies, and synthesizes diagnostic modalities including ECG, echocardiography, cardiac MRI, CT, electroanatomical mapping, genetic studies, and biomarkers. The review identifies a critical gap: without standardized diagnostics, most ACM diagnostic approaches remain research tools rather than practical clinical methods, and highlights the need for advanced diagnostics to enable individual risk stratification.
Narrative review. Patients with atrial cardiomyopathy or those at risk for atrial structural and functional remodeling.
ACM is caused by diverse factors including age-related changes, valvular disease, genetic diseases, heart failure, metabolic disease, CVD risk factors (hypertension, obesity), obstructive sleep apnea, and chronic inflammation Diagnostic assessment requires evaluation of structural atrial remodeling and fibrosis, LA size and architecture, LA mechanics, contractile and electrical function, biomarkers, genetic predispositions, and arrhythmogenic factors associated with higher AF and stroke risk Current ACM diagnostic methods lack standardization and remain primarily research tools rather than established clinical diagnostic methods
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
Clinicians should recognize that while multiple diagnostic modalities exist for ACM assessment, standardized clinical diagnostic criteria are not yet established; current approaches remain largely investigational. This review highlights the translational gap and emerging role of advanced diagnostics for risk stratification.
A narrative review synthesizing diagnostic approaches and prognostic implications for atrial cardiomyopathy, providing expert recommendations on evaluation methods and their clinical utility.
As stated by the source record.
Clinicians should recognize that while multiple diagnostic modalities exist for ACM assessment, standardized clinical diagnostic criteria are not yet established; current approaches remain largely investigational. This review highlights the translational gap and emerging role of advanced diagnostics for risk stratification.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
What is missing. This record has no reported figures. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Atrial cardiomyopathy (ACM) is defined as any complex of structural, architectural, functional, electrophysiological, and molecular changes affecting the atria that may result in clinically significant health consequences. ACM can be caused by a variety of factors, including age-related changes, valvular or vascular disease, genetic diseases, congestive heart failure, metabolic diseases, cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors such as arterial hypertension (AH) or obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, and other infectious or noninfectious diseases predisposing to chronic inflammation. The diagnosis of ACM relies on several modalities, including electrocardiography, echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), electroanatomical mapping (EAM), genetic studies, and biomarkers, which can detect and characterize structural, mechanical, and electrical atrial dysfunction. These changes often include structural atrial remodeling (fibrosis), abnormal structure of the atrial wall and its components, and contractile and electrical dysfunctions. When assessing aspects of ACM, structural changes in the atria such as left atrium (LA) size and fibrosis; LA architectural changes such as the expression of remodeling; changes in LA mechanics such as echocardiographic stress indices; changes in reservoir function and changes in contraction; biological factors determining changes in biomarkers; possible genetic predispositions and higher expression of certain genes encoding certain proteins; and arrhythmogenic factors associated with a higher risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke and a worse short- and long-term prognosis are very important. When considering the challenges of diagnosing ACM, it should be noted that without standardized diagnostics, most ACM diagnostic situations remain primarily research tools rather than practical clinical diagnostic methods. This review critically evaluates the evidence and translational gaps in the diagnosis of ACM, synthesizing the emerging role of advanced diagnostics and their clinical and prognostic implications as a key future tool for individual risk stratification.
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.