Non-invasive physiological assessment of intermediate coronary stenoses from plain angiography through artificial intelligence: the STARFLOW system.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence supporting use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous waves-free ratio (iFR) to improve outcome of patients undergoing coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention, such techniques are still underused in clinical practice due to economic and logistic issues. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI)-based application to compute FFR and iFR from plain CA. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients performing FFR or iFR or both were enrolled. A specific multi-task deep network exploiting 2 projections of the coronary of interest from standard CA was appraised. Accuracy of prediction of FFR/iFR of the AI model was the primary endpoint, along with sensitivity and specificity. Prediction was tested both for continuous values and for dichotomous classification (positive/negative) for FFR or iFR. Subgroup analyses were performed for FFR and iFR.A total of 389 patients from 5 centers were enrolled. Mean age was 67.9 ± 9.6 and 39.2% of patients were admitted for acute coronary syndrome. Overall, the accuracy was 87.3% (81.2-93.4%), with a sensitivity of 82.4% (71.9-96.4%) and a specificity of 92.2% (90.4-93.9%). For FFR, accuracy was 84.8% (77.8-91.8%), with a sensitivity of 81.9% (69.4-94.4%) and a specificity of 87.7% (85.5-89.9%), while for iFR accuracy was 90.2% (86.0-94.6%), with a sensitivity of 87.2% (76.6-97.8%) and a specificity of 93.2% (91.7-94.7%, all confidence intervals 95%). CONCLUSION: The presented machine-learning based tool showed high accuracy in prediction of wire-based FFR and iFR.

Switching from cangrelor to oral P2Y12 inhibitors: a focused review on drug-drug interactions.

INTRODUCTION: . Cangrelor, the only intravenous platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, is characterized by a prompt and potent platelet inhibition, with a rapid offset of action. Large-scale clinical trials have shown that cangrelor reduce peri-procedural thrombotic events among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions and not pre-treated with an oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitor. However, high P2Y12 receptor occupancy provided by cangrelor raises concerns for drug-drug interactions (DDIs) when transitioning to oral P2Y12 inhibitors. AREAS COVERED: An understanding of the pharmacology of cangrelor and oral P2Y12 inhibitors is essential to define the optimal approach to transition to oral P2Y12 inhibitors without incurring the risk of DDIs. This review, based on a thorough literature search in major scientific databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science), synthesizes the pharmacology of cangrelor and the oral P2Y12 receptor inhibitors, providing the rationale for the occurrence of DDIs and strategies to avoid such risk. EXPERT OPINION: The timing of transition from cangrelor to oral P2Y12 inhibitors plays a crucial role in the occurrence of DDIs, especially with clopidogrel and prasugrel. Currently, no evidence suggests a DDI when transitioning to ticagrelor. Adhering to product labels and guideline recommendations is crucial for optimizing safety and efficacy of cangrelor.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndromes.

The antithrombotic management of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) involves a 6-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), followed by chronic aspirin therapy. In patients with a baseline indication for anticoagulation, a variable duration of triple antithrombotic therapy is administered, followed by dual antithrombotic therapy until the sixth month post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and ultimately a transition to chronic anticoagulation. However, advancements in stent technology reducing the risk of stent thrombosis and a growing focus on the impact of bleeding on prognosis have prompted the development of new therapeutic strategies. These strategies aim to enhance protection against ischemic events in the initial stages after PCI while mitigating the risk of bleeding in the long term. This article delineates the therapeutic strategies outlined in European and American guidelines for CCS management, with special attention to investigational strategies.

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty with rescue stenting versus intended stenting for the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions (REC-CAGEFREE I): an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The long-term impact of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty for the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the non-inferiority of DCB angioplasty with rescue stenting to intended drug-eluting stent (DES) deployment for patients with de novo, non-complex coronary artery lesions. METHODS: REC-CAGEFREE I was an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial conducted at 43 sites in China. After successful lesion pre-dilatation, patients aged 18 years or older with de novo, non-complex coronary artery disease (irrespective of target vessel diameter) and an indication for percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly assigned (1:1), via a web-based centralised system with block randomisation (block size of two, four, or six) and stratified by site, to paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty with the option of rescue stenting due to an unsatisfactory result (DCB group) or intended deployment of second-generation thin-strut sirolimus-eluting stents (DES group). The primary outcome was the device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE; including cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically and physiologically indicated target lesion revascularisation) assessed at 24 months in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population (ie, all participants randomly assigned to treatment). Non-inferiority was established if the upper limit of the one-sided 95% CI for the absolute risk difference was smaller than 2·68%. Safety was assessed in the ITT population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04561739. It is closed to accrual and extended follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 5, 2021, and May 1, 2022, 2272 patients were randomly assigned to the DCB group (1133 [50%]) or the DES group (1139 [50%]). Median age at the time of randomisation was 62 years (IQR 54-69), 1574 (69·3%) of 2272 were male, 698 (30·7%) were female, and all patients were of Chinese ethnicity. 106 (9·4%) of 1133 patients in the DCB group received rescue DES after unsatisfactory DCB angioplasty. As of data cutoff (May 1, 2024), median follow-up was 734 days (IQR 731-739). At 24 months, the DoCE occurred in 72 (6·4%) of 1133 patients in the DCB group and 38 (3·4%) of 1139 in the DES group, with a risk difference of 3·04% in the cumulative event rate (upper boundary of the one-sided 95% CI 4·52; pnon-inferiority=0·65; two-sided 95% CI 1·27-4·81; p=0·0008); the criterion for non-inferiority was not met. During intervention, no acute vessel closures occurred in the DCB group and one (0·1%) of 1139 patients in the DES group had acute vessel closure. Periprocedural myocardial infarction occurred in ten (0·9%) of 1133 patients in the DCB group and nine (0·8%) in the DES group. INTERPRETATION: In patients with de novo, non-complex coronary artery disease, irrespective of vessel diameter, a strategy of DCB angioplasty with rescue stenting did not achieve non-inferiority compared with the intended DES implantation in terms of the DoCE at 2 years, which indicates that DES should remain the preferred treatment for this patient population. FUNDING: Xijing Hospital and Shenqi Medical. TRANSLATION: For the Chinese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Characteristics and Impact of Randomized Trials on Drugs or Devices in Cardiovascular Medicine.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical trials, essential for medical advancement, vary significantly in methodology and regulatory pathways depending on the type of therapeutic intervention (i.e., drugs or devices). This study aimed to determine whether the drug or device intervention types influence the impact of randomized trials in cardiovascular medicine. METHODS: We analyzed late-breaking randomized controlled trials presented at major cardiology conferences from 2015 to 2021. The primary endpoint was the total number of citations obtained. Secondary endpoints included the number of citations at 1 and 2 years, number of total and 1-year mentions, and several metrics of study conduct and publication. Statistical analysis included tests for comparisons of continuous or categorical variables, based on their distribution, as appropriate. To adjust the results for potential confounders, univariable and multivariable regression models were utilized. Additionally, sensitivity analyses were conducted to explore both the effect of neutral or positive study outcomes on the comparative impact of drug versus device trials and the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Of 382 eligible randomized trials, 227 (59.4%) were trials of drugs and 155 (40.6%) were trials of devices. Drug trials had a higher median number of total citations compared to device studies (93 [interquartile range {IQR} 48-137] vs. 82 [IQR 39-192]; p = 0.025). This difference was consistent at 1 and 2 years and was also observed in the number of total mentions and mentions at 1 year. All the metrics of study conduct and publication were similar, except for drug studies being more often stopped prematurely (8.8 vs. 1.9%; p = 0.006). After adjusting for multiple potential confounders, the difference in citations and mentions was no longer statistically significant. However, drug trials remained more likely to be stopped prematurely (adjusted odds ratio = 1.15; 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.28; p = 0.009). Positive study outcomes significantly influenced the number of citations and the likelihood of a trial being stopped prematurely. CONCLUSIONS: Drug trials are often stopped early and receive more citations and mentions than device trials. However, these differences are mainly due to factors other than the treatment itself. Studies published simultaneously tend to get more attention, and drug trials with positive results are cited more often than those with neutral results.

Assessment of Noninferiority Margins in Cardiovascular Medicine Trials.

Background: Noninferiority trials are increasingly common in cardiovascular medicine, but their reporting and interpretation are challenging, particularly when an absolute risk difference is used as noninferiority margin. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the effect of using absolute rather than relative noninferiority margins in cardiovascular trials. Methods: We reviewed noninferiority trials presented at major cardiovascular conferences from 2015 to 2022 and published within the same period. Based on the actual versus anticipated event rates in the control group, we recalculated the absolute noninferiority margin and re-assessed the trial results. The primary outcome of interest was the proportion of trials with a different interpretation after recalculation. Additionally, we analyzed the conclusion statements of these trials to determine if cautionary notes for the interpretation of study results were included. Results: We analyzed a total of 768 trials, of which 88 had a noninferiority design and 66 used an absolute noninferiority margin. Of 48 comparisons from 45 trials qualifying for the analysis, 11 (22.9%) had divergent results after recalculation of the absolute noninferiority margin based on the observed rather than anticipated event rate. Ten trials originally claiming noninferiority, did not meet it after the margin recalculation. All of them did not include statements suggesting cautionary interpretation of the study results in the conclusion section. Compared with the other trials, these displayed a larger median difference between anticipated and recalculated noninferiority margins (44.7% [IQR: 38.6%-56.7%] vs 15.3% [IQR: -1.5% to 28.9%]; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Recalculating noninferiority margins based on actual event rates, rather than anticipated ones, led to different outcomes in approximately 1 out of 4 cardiovascular trials, with most divergent trials lacking cautionary interpretation. These findings emphasize the importance of using or supplementing the relative noninferiority margin, particularly in studies with significant deviations between observed and expected event rates. This underscores the critical need for enhanced methodological and reporting standards in noninferiority trials, especially those employing absolute margins.

Optimizing Management of Stable Angina: A Patient-Centered Approach Integrating Revascularization, Medical Therapy, and Lifestyle Interventions.

Angina pectoris may arise from obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) or in the absence of significant CAD (ischemia with nonobstructed coronary arteries [INOCA]). Therapeutic strategies for patients with angina and obstructive CAD focus on reducing cardiovascular events and relieving symptoms, whereas in INOCA the focus shifts toward managing functional alterations of the coronary circulation. In obstructive CAD, coronary revascularization might improve angina status, although a significant percentage of patients present angina persistence or recurrence, suggesting the presence of functional mechanisms along with epicardial CAD. In patients with INOCA, performing a precise endotype diagnosis is crucial to allow a tailored therapy targeted toward the specific pathogenic mechanism. In this expert opinion paper, we review the evidence for the management of angina, highlighting the complementary role of coronary revascularization, optimal medical therapy, and lifestyle interventions and underscoring the importance of a personalized approach that targets the underlying pathobiology.

Therapeutic Potential of FXI Inhibitors: Hype or Hope?

Significant advancements have shaped the landscape of anticoagulant therapy in the past two decades, including the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), characterized by favorable safety and efficacy profiles and reduced drug-to-drug or food interaction resulting in excellent patient compliance. However, residual concerns still exist with standard-of-care anticoagulant therapy, including the inability to use DOACs in several clinical settings and the need to further reduce the risk of bleeding. Recent improvements in the understanding of the mechanisms behind thrombus formation have led to the awareness that the intrinsic pathway of the coagulation cascade may play an important role in pathological thrombosis, but not in hemostasis. This has represented the rationale for targeting this pathway with factor XI (FXI) inhibitors, with the aim of uncoupling hemostasis and thrombosis. Clinical evidence from patients with FXI deficiency further supports this concept. A number of compounds with different mechanisms of action have been developed to target FXI (i.e., asundexian, abelacimab, Ionis-FXIRx, milvexian, osocimab, and Xisomab 3G). To date, the majority of available trials have not gone beyond completion of phase 2 and results are conflictive making it difficult to appraise the clinical benefit of these compounds in the different clinical settings where they have been tested (i.e., atrial fibrillation, acute ischemic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, end-stage renal disease, total knee arthroplasty). Moreover, the largest phase 3 randomized trial designed to test the efficacy of asundexian over apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation, the OCEANIC-AF, has been prematurely stopped as a result of the inferior efficacy of asundexian. In this review we discuss the pharmacological properties and available evidence generated thus far for factor XI inhibitors, providing a perspective on the current state of these drugs.

Demystifying the Contemporary Role of 12-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Acute Coronary Syndrome.

For almost two decades, 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been the only class I recommendation on DAPT in American and European guidelines, which has resulted in 12-month durations of DAPT therapy being the most frequently implemented in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) across the globe. Twelve-month DAPT was initially grounded in the results of the CURE (Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events) trial, which, by design, studied DAPT versus no DAPT rather than the optimal DAPT duration. The average DAPT duration in this study was 9 months, not 12 months. Subsequent ACS studies, which were not designed to assess DAPT duration, rather its composition (aspirin with prasugrel or ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel) were further interpreted as supportive evidence for 12-month DAPT duration. In these studies, the median DAPT duration was 9 or 15 months for ticagrelor and prasugrel, respectively. Several subsequent studies questioned the 12-month regimen and suggested that DAPT duration should either be fewer than 12 months in patients at high bleeding risk or more than 12 months in patients at high ischemic risk who can safely tolerate the treatment. Bleeding, rather than ischemic risk assessment, has emerged as a treatment modifier for maximizing the net clinical benefit of DAPT, due to excessive bleeding and no clear benefit of prolonged treatment regimens in high bleeding risk patients. Multiple DAPT de-escalation treatment strategies, including switching from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel, reducing the dose of prasugrel or ticagrelor, and shortening DAPT duration while maintaining monotherapy with ticagrelor, have been consistently shown to reduce bleeding without increasing fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular or cerebral ischemic risks compared with 12-month DAPT. However, 12-month DAPT remains the only class-I DAPT recommendation for patients with ACS despite the lack of prospectively established evidence, leading to unnecessary and potentially harmful overtreatment in many patients. It is time for clinical practice and guideline recommendations to be updated to reflect the totality of the evidence regarding the optimal DAPT duration in ACS.

The pharmacology of antiplatelet agents for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention of ischemic stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Ischemic etiology accounts for two thirds of all strokes in which platelet activation and aggregation play a major role. A variety of antiplatelet therapies have been tested for primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention, with certain patient subtypes benefiting more than others from a specific regimen. AREAS COVERED: This review aims at synthetizing current evidence on pharmacology of antiplatelet agents approved for primary, secondary, and tertiary stroke prevention and their application among possible patient subtypes that may benefit more from their administration. EXPERT OPINION: Management of ischemic stroke has largely evolved over the past decades. A better understanding of stroke pathophysiology has allowed to identify patients who can benefit most from antiplatelet therapies, with varying degrees of benefit depending on whether these agents are being used for primary, secondary, or tertiary prevention. Importantly, the antiplatelet treatment regimens currently available have expanded and no longer limited to aspirin but include other drugs such as P2Y12 and phosphodiesterase inhibitors, also used in combination, as well as precision medicine approaches using genetic testing aiming at optimizing the safety and efficacy in this population.

P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy After Short DAPT in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) may balance ischemic and bleeding risks in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, it remains uncertain how different P2Y12 inhibitors used as monotherapy affect outcomes. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a short course of DAPT (≤3 months) versus 12-month DAPT in ACS were included. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). All analyses included an interaction term for the P2Y12 inhibitor used as monotherapy. Trial sequential analysis were run to explore whether the effect estimate of each outcomes may be affected by further studies. RESULTS: Seven trials encompassing 27,284 ACS patients were included. Compared with 12-month DAPT, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a short course of DAPT was associated with no difference in MACE (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.76-1.12) and a significant reduction in net adverse clinical events (NACE) (OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.60-0.94), any bleeding (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.43-0.66) and major bleeding (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.37-0.60). Significant interactions for subgroup difference between ticagrelor and clopidogrel monotherapy were found for MACE (pint=0.016), all-cause death (pint=0.042), NACE (pint=0.018), and myocardial infarction (pint=0.028). Trial sequential analysis showed conclusive evidence of improved NACE with ticagrelor, but not with clopidogrel monotherapy, compared with standard DAPT. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short DAPT halves bleeding without increasing ischemic events compared with standard DAPT. Ticagrelor, but not clopidogrel monotherapy, reduced MACE, NACE and mortality compared with standard DAPT, supporting its use after aspirin discontinuation. Protocol registration: This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023494797).

Factor XI inhibition in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

A hypercoagulable condition is typical of patients with acute coronary syndrome and is a determining factor in the genesis of recurrent ischaemic events. Modern pharmacological therapies consisting of antiplatelets and anticoagulants derive their rationale for use on the pathophysiological mechanisms most commonly associated with myocardial infarction (MI); they have contributed to reducing the ischaemic risk of these patients, but left ample room for improvement. In particular, trials that have studied the association of an anticoagulant with antiplatelet drugs have provided promising results in terms of efficacy, but highlighted a significant bleeding risk. Evidence derived from experimental animal and epidemiological studies has shown how factor XI (FXI) deficiency is associated with a reduction in thrombotic events but with modest bleeding. These data added to the role that FXI plays in the coagulation cascade constituted an incipit for the pharmacological attempt to decouple thrombosis from haemostasis by means of the inhibition of this factor. The theoretical assumption that FXI inhibitor drugs may be able to reduce the ischaemic risk without significantly increasing the haemorrhagic risk makes these compounds a potential therapeutic aid for patients in secondary prevention after acute MI. To date, on these patients, we only have data from a Phase 2 trial, PACIFIC-AMI (Study to Gather Information About the Proper Dosing and Safety of the Oral FXIa Inhibitor BAY 2 433 334 in Patients Following an Acute Heart Attack). In this study, the primary endpoint-represented by the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) composite of Type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding-showed no significant differences between the various doses of asundexian tested (10, 20, and 50 mg quoque die), and between these and placebo (asundexian all doses vs. placebo: hazard ratio, 0.98; 90% confidence interval, 0.71-1.35). The data on efficacy, however, showed neutral results, but it should be noted that the study did not have the adequate statistical power to evaluate this outcome. Valuable information could, therefore, derive in the future from the ongoing Phase 3 trial with milvexian, LIBREXIA-ACS (A Study of Milvexian in Participants After a Recent Acute Coronary Syndrome) and from any future studies that could be started by testing different molecules.

Gender equality in medical research: A cardiology-informed examination.

Despite a perceived increase in attention to gender differences in medicine, a comprehensive assessment of gender equality research, particularly in cardiology, remains underexplored. This observational retrospective study, focusing on documents related to "Gender Equality" according to the Sustainable Development Goals, reveals cardiology as a significant area for gender equality research, albeit with a decline in publications post-2018. The analysis highlighted a concentrated effort in the United States and a considerable impact gap between gender-focused and general cardiology research. The global academic community must intensify research into gender disparities, which is essential for achieving professional gender equality and addressing the burden of cardiovascular diseases.

Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a VARC-HBR consensus document.

The identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are of major importance, but the lack of standardised definitions is challenging for trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Valve Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (VARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organisations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from Europe, the USA, and Asia, with a major focus on TAVI-related bleeding. VARC-HBR is an initiative of the CERC (Cardiovascular European Research Center), aiming to develop a consensus definition of TAVI patients at HBR, based on a systematic review of the available evidence, to provide consistency for future clinical trials, clinical decision-making, and regulatory review. This document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of HBR evaluating the safety and effectiveness of procedures, devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing TAVI..

Future of factor XI inhibitors in cardiovascular practice.

Anticoagulation is indicated for treatment and prevention of arterial and venous thrombosis. Targeting different steps of the coagulation process, currently available anticoagulants entail an increased risk of bleeding, which detrimentally impacts on prognosis and hinders the administration of an effective antithrombotic regimen. Factor XI (FXI) inhibition has emerged as a strategy to uncouple prevention of thrombosis from bleeding. Indeed, while FXI is crucial for the amplification phase in pathological thrombosis, it is ancillary in physiological hemostasis. A comprehensive search in several scientific databases has been performed to identify relevant studies in the field. In addition, ongoing trials have been searched for in proper datasets to provide an updated and comprehensive assessment of the current state of investigations on FXI inhibition. Many compounds have been tested to inhibit FXI at different stages (i.e., synthesis, activation, or interactions with target molecules and coagulation factors). These include antisense oligonucleotides, monoclonal antibodies, small molecules, natural peptides and aptamers. In phase 2 studies, FXI inhibitors reduced thrombotic complications without any corresponding increase in bleeding. FXI inhibitors were noninferior and potentially superior to low-molecular-weight heparin in orthopedic surgery and reduced bleeding compared to apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation. FXI inhibition is also under testing in other conditions, including end-stage renal disease, cancer, or noncardioembolic stroke. FXI inhibition represents a promising and rapidly emerging approach for a number of clinical indications. This article reviews the rationale, evidence, pharmacology, and future applications of FXI inhibition.

Percutaneous interventions for pulmonary embolism.

Pulmonary embolism (PE) ranks as a leading cause of in-hospital mortality and the third most common cause of cardiovascular death. The spectrum of PE manifestations varies widely, making it difficult to determine the best treatment approach for specific patients. Conventional treatment options include anticoagulation, thrombolysis, or surgery, but emerging percutaneous interventional procedures are being investigated for their potential benefits in heterogeneous PE populations. These novel interventional techniques encompass catheter-directed thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy, and hybrid approaches combining different mechanisms. Furthermore, inferior vena cava filters are also available as an option for PE prevention. Such interventions may offer faster improvements in right ventricular function, as well as in pulmonary and systemic haemodynamics, in individual patients. Moreover, percutaneous treatment may be a valid alternative to traditional therapies in high bleeding risk patients and could potentially reduce the burden of mortality related to major bleeds, such as that of haemorrhagic strokes. Nevertheless, the safety and efficacy of these techniques compared to conservative therapies have not been conclusively established. This review offers a comprehensive evaluation of the current evidence for percutaneous interventions in PE and provides guidance for selecting appropriate patients and treatments. It serves as a valuable resource for future researchers and clinicians seeking to advance this field. Additionally, we explore future perspectives, proposing "percutaneous primary pulmonary intervention" as a potential paradigm shift in the field.

Current Management of In-Stent Restenosis.

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the primary cause of target lesion failure following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), resulting in 10-year incidences of target lesion revascularization at a rate of approximately 20%. The treatment of ISR is challenging due to its inherent propensity for recurrence and varying susceptibility to available strategies, influenced by a complex interplay between clinical and lesion-specific conditions. Given the multiple mechanisms contributing to the development of ISR, proper identification of the underlying substrate, especially by using intravascular imaging, becomes pivotal as it can indicate distinct therapeutic requirements. Among standalone treatments, drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have been the most effective. The main advantage of a DCB-based approach is the avoidance of an additional metallic layer, which may otherwise enhance neointimal hyperplasia, provide the substratum for developing neoatherosclerosis, and expose the patient to a persistently higher risk of coronary ischemic events. On the other hand, target vessel scaffolding by DES implantation confers relevant mechanical advantages over DCB angioplasty, generally resulting in larger luminal gain, while drug elution from the stent surface ensures the inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia. Nevertheless, repeat stenting with DES also implies an additional permanent metallic layer that may reiterate and promote the mechanisms leading to ISR. Against this background, the selection of either DCB or DES on a patient- and lesion-specific basis as well as the implementation of adjuvant treatments, including cutting/scoring balloons, intravascular lithotripsy, and rotational atherectomy, hold the potential to improve the effectiveness of ISR treatment over time. In this review, we comprehensively assessed the available evidence from randomized trials to define contemporary interventional treatment of ISR and provide insights for future directions.