Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Editorial
The manuscript advocates for restoring critical thinking and patient-centered values in cardiology, countering the trend of prioritizing procedural feasibility and commercial influence.
Contemporary cardiology faces a paradox: unprecedented technological capability coincides with declining scientific curiosity and clinical judgement. This manuscript examines the shift from question-driven, physiologic medicine to an approach dominated by procedural feasibility, commercial influence and algorithmic decision-making. Advances such as transcatheter interventions, advanced imaging and artificial intelligence have broadened therapeutic options but also encouraged action to precede reasoning, allowing anatomical suitability to overshadow clinical appropriateness and patient-centred values.The paper describes how industry pressures, guideline structures and training environments normalise interventionist reflexes and weaken the discipline of restraint, while research increasingly prioritises surrogate outcomes and validation of existing technologies. In response, the manuscript advocates for restoring the 'why' in cardiology through renewed critical thinking, meaningful outcomes and ethically grounded decisions. This requires cultural, educational and structural reform so that technology enhances rather than displaces the scientific and humanistic foundations of the field.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Francesco Tona (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: