DOI: 10.4244/EIJV10I4A71

Innovations: resetting our thinking to solve problems

Patrick W. Serruys, Editor-in-Chief

As this issue of EuroIntervention is released, the annual European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Congress, with Barcelona as the host city, will be taking place. The main theme this year is “Innovation and The Heart”, concentrating particularly on improving clinical practice. This is a theme that has interested me since the earliest days of my professional life. In last month’s editorial I spoke about the resounding success of the first PCR Innovation Day in Paris, and it will be fascinating to see the planned ESC sessions on this topic from the perspective of the new approach to innovation launched during our May meeting.

There will be numerous sessions in Barcelona dedicated to this theme, which will encompass all aspects of cardiology. Also, in a session entitled “The Master prophecies: what innovations will change the future of cardiology”, Kenneth Dickstein, David Allan Wood, Luigi Paolo Badano and I will attempt to predict what the future will hold through a discussion of innovative concepts to prevent cardiovascular disease as well as innovative ways to detect it early. We will also focus on what are the most promising therapeutic strategies that will change our clinical practice in the near future.

It was clear to us all at the PCR Innovation Day that, to shape the future with innovations, three key elements should be in place: a recognised unmet need of the patient, inspired individuals possessing the ability, knowledge and skill, and finally financial support.

And what is this “innovation” itself? Why, it is quite simply doing something in a novel and original manner.

The term “innovation” has a positive feel to it and is synonymous with modern, cutting-edge technologies. Yet, in the science of economics, “innovation” is often coupled with “disruption”. This concept of disruptive innovation was first described by a Harvard Business School Professor, Clayton Christensen, in his book “The Innovator’s Dilemma”. Eric van de Velde, in his blog on the London School of Economics website1, referred to Christensen’s simple idea “that sticking with established technology can carry an enormous opportunity cost”, meaning that individuals or bodies tend to stick to what they know. Good examples of disruptive innovations can be found in many fields, for instance, the recent taxi disputes that have touched most major European countries with the arrival of the “Uber” taxi app, an app allowing anyone to register as a taxi driver. Another example is the slow death of travel agents as more and more frequently we book our travel arrangements online independently.

What does it mean in healthcare?

Value-based care will become steadily more important in the “innovation” arena as costs come under increasing scrutiny. The creation of electronic medical records was one of the first attempts to innovate with a clear cost-effectiveness principle. Another, lower cost innovation, was the development of highly qualified nurse practitioners replacing physicians in some areas of patient care and management.

In interventional cardiology, the continuing innovation of coronary stents has led to design refinements coupled with significant cost reduction compared to the early days. It is quite amazing to realise that today over 60 stents have received the CE mark. From the bare metal phase, we embarked on the drug-eluting phase, followed by the “bioresorbable” phase and today we are about to enter into the “nano” phase. We interventionalists were also disruptive for surgeons, with the issue of stenting or bypassing complex multivessel lesions. Even more recently this “disruption” has continued following the advent of TAVI.

In conclusion, the future for healthcare and specifically for interventional medicine is certainly bright. However, in order to innovate we must remember Albert Einstein’s wise words: “we cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.”

Reference

Volume 10 Number 4
Aug 19, 2014
Volume 10 Number 4
View full issue


Key metrics

On the same subject

Editorial

10.4244/EIJ-E-23-00052 Mar 18, 2024
Comparative preclinical assessment of drug-coated balloons: a blessing and a curse for clinical translation
Joner M and Wild L
free

Debate

10.4244/EIJ-E-24-00005 Mar 18, 2024
Ischaemic and viability testing for guiding PCI are overrated: pros and cons
McEntegart M et al
free

Original Research

10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00725 Mar 18, 2024
A systematic algorithm for large-bore arterial access closure after TAVI: the TAVI-MultiCLOSE study
Rosseel L et al

Original Research

10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00783 Mar 18, 2024
Redo-TAVI with the ACURATE neo2 and Prime XL for balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve failure
Meier D et al
Trending articles
281.88

State-of-the-Art Review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00695 Nov 19, 2021
Transcatheter treatment for tricuspid valve disease
Praz F et al
free
243.2

State of the art

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01117 Sep 20, 2022
Recanalisation of coronary chronic total occlusions
Di Mario C et al
free
208.35

State-of-the-Art Review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01034 Jun 3, 2022
Management of in-stent restenosis
Alfonso F et al
free
168.7

Translational research

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00824 May 15, 2022
Bench test and in vivo evaluation of longitudinal stent deformation during proximal optimisation
Toth GG et al
free
167.05

Expert review

10.4244/EIJ-D-21-00690 May 15, 2022
Crush techniques for percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions
Moroni F et al
free
151.03

State-of-the-Art

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00776 Apr 3, 2023
Computed tomographic angiography in coronary artery disease
Serruys PW et al
free
118

Translational research

10.4244/EIJ-D-22-00718 Jun 5, 2023
Preclinical evaluation of the degradation kinetics of third-generation resorbable magnesium scaffolds
Seguchi M et al
110.35

Viewpoint

10.4244/EIJ-E-22-00007 May 15, 2022
TAVI at 20: how a crazy idea led to a clinical revolution
Eltchaninoff H et al
free
X

The Official Journal of EuroPCR and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

EuroPCR EAPCI
PCR ESC
Impact factor: 6.2
2022 Journal Citation Reports®
Science Edition (Clarivate Analytics, 2023)
Online ISSN 1969-6213 - Print ISSN 1774-024X
© 2005-2024 Europa Group - All rights reserved