Percutaneous coronary interventions for aneurysmatic right coronary artery in acute coronary syndrome: RIGHTMARE registry outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The optimal strategy during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of aneurysmatic right coronary artery (ARCA) remains uncertain and has never been tested in the acute setting. OBJECTIVES: To compare the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of immediate and staged PCI strategies for ARCA as culprit lesions during acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: Among 102.376 PCIs performed in 18 European centers, a total of 85 patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome undergoing ARCA PCI were finally included in the analysis. PCI strategy (stenting performed during the immediate vs staged procedure) and pharmacological approach adopted were collected. The primary outcome was procedural success (technical success without in-hospital MACE). RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 48.2 % of cases, with no significant differences observed between the immediate and staged PCI groups (50.9 % vs 43.3 %, p = 0.504). Patients in the staged-PCI group had a significantly higher rate of intravenous anticoagulant use (83.3 % vs 48.1 %, p = 0.002), BARC type 3 and 5 bleedings (12.9 % vs 1.9 %, p = 0.037), and longer in-hospital stay (7.40 ± 5.11 vs 9.5 ± 5.25 days, p = 0.049). After multivariate analysis, no independent predictors for procedural success were found in either group. Target lesion failure occurred in 24.1 % of cases without differences between groups at a median follow-up of three years. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing ARCA PCI in the setting of ACS, immediate or staged PCI were associated with similar in-hospital and long-term outcomes. However, staged PCI was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding events and longer length of stay compared to immediate PCI strategy.

Antithrombotic strategies for preventing graft failure in coronary artery bypass graft.

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) procedures face challenges related to graft failure, driven by factors such as acute thrombosis, neointimal hyperplasia, and atherosclerotic plaque formation. Despite extensive efforts over four decades, the optimal antithrombotic strategy to prevent graft occlusion while minimizing bleeding risks remains uncertain, relying heavily on expert opinions rather than definitive guidelines. To address this uncertainty, we conducted a review of randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses of antithrombotic therapy for patients with CABG. These studies examined various antithrombotic regimens in CABG such as single antiplatelet therapy (aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitors), dual antiplatelet therapy, and anticoagulation therapy. We evaluated outcomes including the patency of grafts, major adverse cardiovascular events, and bleeding complications and also explored future perspectives to enhance long-term outcomes for CABG patients. Early studies established aspirin as a key component of antithrombotic pharmacotherapy after CABG. Subsequent randomized controlled trials focused on adding a P2Y12 inhibitor (such as clopidogrel, ticagrelor, or prasugrel) to aspirin, yielding mixed results. This article aims to inform clinical decision-making and guide the selection of antithrombotic strategies after CABG.

Clinical Performance of the Gore Septal Occluder in Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Different Septal Anatomies: 1-Year Results from a Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: PFO (Patent foramen ovale) is a common defect that affects about 25% of the population. Although its presence is asymptomatic in the majority of the cases, the remaining part becomes overt with different symptoms, including cryptogenic stroke. PFO closure is currently a widely available procedure in complex anatomy, with Amplatzer PFO Occluder (APO) being the most commonly used tool. However, the performance of another device, the GORE Septal Occluder (GSO), has not been completely explored with regard to different septal anatomies. METHODS: From March 2012 to June 2020, 118 consecutive patients with an indication of PFO closure were treated using the GSO system, included in a prospective analysis, and followed. After 12 months, every patient underwent transcranial Doppler ultrasound to evaluate the effectiveness of treatment. RESULTS: Of 111 patients evaluated, 107 showed effective PFO closure (96.4%), and 4 showed a residual shunt (3.6%). To better evaluate the device performance, the overall population was sorted into two clusters based on the echocardiographic characteristics. The main difference between groups was for PFO width (4.85 ± 1.8 vs. 2.9 ± 1 mm, p < 0.001) and PFO tunnel length (12.6 ± 3.8 vs. 7.2 ± 2, p < 0.001), allowing complex and simple anatomies to be identified, respectively. Regardless of the aforementioned cluster, the GSO performance required to reach an effective closure was independent of anatomy type and the chosen device size. CONCLUSION: The GSO device showed a high closure rate at 1-year follow-up in patients, with at least one anatomical factor of complexity of PFO irrespective of the level of complexity itself.

Transcatheter treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients with complex coronary artery disease: case series and proposed therapeutic algorithm.

Background: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and complex coronary artery disease with a clinical indication to both transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) pose a clinical dilemma since it is unclear which lesion should be treated first and careful planning is required. Case summary: We report two cases of AS with complex PCI (ASCoP) features. In the first one, easy coronary cannulation with an Acurate Neo2 valve and commissural alignment was predicted; therefore, TAVI was performed first, and subsequently complex high-risk PCI of the left main was performed in the same procedure but without the burden of ongoing severe AS. In the second case, complex coronary cannulation after TAVI with an Evolut PRO valve was predicted; therefore, balloon aortic valvuloplasty and Impella placement were performed first to allow for complex, high-risk multivessel PCI and subsequent TAVI. In both cases, a single-stage approach was preferred to reduce the use of large-bore arterial access with possible consequent adverse events. Discussion: In this case series, we illustrate a possible approach to the treatment of ASCoP patients. In such complex cases, a thorough preprocedural planning is mandatory, and clinical decision-making should be centred upon the predicted chance of cannulation of coronary arteries after TAVI.

Antiplatelet therapy after noncardioembolic ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.

INTRODUCTION: Antiplatelet therapy is key to prevent recurrences in patients with an acute or prior non-cardioembolic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). The narrow balance between the risks of ischemic recurrence and major bleeding is a relevant clinical dilemma in this population. AREAS COVERED: This review covers the current evidence on antiplatelet therapy for patients with non-cardioembolic stroke or TIA. Randomized controlled trials of antithrombotic strategies for patients with these conditions were searched in Pubmed/Medline from 1970 to 2022. EXPERT OPINION: Numerous randomized controlled trials have defined the current indications to the use of antiplatelet drugs for patients with non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke or TIA. For the management of these subjects, single antiplatelet therapy with aspirin or clopidogrel, or the combination of aspirin and dipyridamole, is usually recommended. After an acute stroke or TIA, a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin in combination with clopidogrel or ticagrelor should be considered. The risk of bleeding might be higher with ticagrelor, but a direct comparison with clopidogrel is not available in this setting. The introduction of newer strategies, such as dual-pathway inhibition with aspirin and a direct oral anticoagulant (including emerging factor XI inhibitors under clinical development) may open a new research avenue in this challenging area.

Short Duration of DAPT Versus De-Escalation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and de-escalation in a network meta-analysis using standard DAPT as common comparator. BACKGROUND: In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), shortening DAPT and de-escalating to a lower potency regimen mitigate bleeding risk. These strategies have never been randomly compared. METHODS: Randomized trials of DAPT modulation strategies in patients with ACS undergoing PCI were identified. All-cause death was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE), major adverse cardiovascular events, and their components. Frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted. Treatments were ranked on the basis of posterior probability. Sensitivity analyses were performed to explore sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Twenty-nine studies encompassing 50,602 patients were included. The transitivity assumption was fulfilled. In the frequentist indirect comparison, the risk ratio (RR) for all-cause death was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.68-1.43). De-escalation reduced the risk for NACE (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.70-0.94) and increased major bleeding (RR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.07-2.21). These results were consistent in the Bayesian meta-analysis. De-escalation displayed a >95% probability to rank first for NACE, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, and minor bleeding, while short DAPT ranked first for major bleeding. These findings were consistent in node-split and multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, there was no difference in all-cause death between short DAPT and de-escalation. De-escalation reduced the risk for NACE, while short DAPT decreased major bleeding. These data characterize 2 contemporary strategies to personalize DAPT on the basis of treatment objectives and risk profile.

Efficacy and Safety of Aspirin for Primary Cardiovascular Risk Prevention in Younger and Older Age: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 173,810 Subjects from 21 Randomized Studies.

AIMS: The efficacy and safety of aspirin for primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention is controversial. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of aspirin in subjects with no overt CVD, with a focus on age as a treatment modifier. METHODS AND RESULTS: Randomized trials comparing aspirin use versus no aspirin use or placebo were included. The primary efficacy outcome was all-cause death. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding. Secondary ischemic and bleeding outcomes were explored. Subgroup analyses were conducted to investigate the consistency of the effect sizes in studies including younger and older individuals, using a cut-off of 65 years. A total of 21 randomized trials including 173,810 individuals at a mean follow-up of 5.3 years were included. Compared with control, aspirin did not reduce significantly the risk of all-cause death (risk ratio: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.92-1.00, p = 0.057). Major adverse cardiovascular events were significantly reduced by 11%, paralleled by significant reductions in myocardial infarction and transient ischemic attack. Major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage, and gastrointestinal bleeding were significantly increased by aspirin. There was a significant age interaction for death (p for interaction = 0.007), with aspirin showing a statistically significant 7% relative benefit on all-cause death in studies including younger patients. CONCLUSION: The use of aspirin in subjects with no overt CVD was associated with a neutral effect on all-cause death and a modest lower risk of major cardiovascular events at the price of an increased risk in major bleeding. The benefit of aspirin might be more pronounced in younger individuals.

Appraising the contemporary role of aspirin for primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events.

INTRODUCTION: Although the role of aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) has been disputed, its use in secondary ASCVD prevention is well established. Recent trials of primary prevention do not suggest a significant net benefit with aspirin, whereas accruing evidence supports adopting aspirin-free strategies in the context of potent P2Y12 inhibition for the secondary prevention of selected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. AREAS COVERED: This updated review aims at summarizing and appraising the pharmacological characteristics and the contemporary role of aspirin for the primary and secondary prevention of ASCVD. EXPERT OPINION: Recent trials and metanalyses in the context of primary prevention highlighted a modest reduction in ischemic events with aspirin use, counterbalanced by a significant increase in bleeding events. However, ongoing studies on cancer prevention could modify the current paradigm of the unfavorable benefit-risk ratio of aspirin in patients with no overt ASCVD. Conversely, aspirin use is crucial for secondary ASCVD prevention, both in chronic and acute coronary syndromes. Nevertheless, after a brief period of dual antiplatelet therapy, patients at high bleeding risk may benefit from discontinuation of aspirin if a P2Y12 inhibitor is used, hence reducing the bleeding risk with no rebound in thrombotic events.

An updated drug profile of ticagrelor with considerations on the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus.

INTRODUCTION: Ticagrelor is an antiplatelet agent acting through direct and reversible competitive inhibition of the platelet P2Y12 receptor. While the clinical merits of ticagrelor in patients who experienced an acute coronary syndrome are widely accepted, its role in stable coronary artery disease is less established. Recently, large-scale trials of ticagrelor have been published in this setting, including a trial in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). AREAS COVERED: This review aims to inform about recent findings on ticagrelor, by appraising the current body of evidence on its use in different clinical scenarios, particularly in DM, ranging from pharmacology to clinical outcomes and future directions. EXPERT OPINION: The results of the THEMIS trial, conducted in DM patients with stable coronary artery disease and no prior stroke or myocardial infarction, showed that although ticagrelor in addition to aspirin reduced the risk of ischemic events, this was associated with a parallel increase in bleeding complications. However, patients with history of percutaneous coronary intervention seemed to benefit more from adjunctive ticagrelor therapy. Careful bleeding and ischemic risk stratification remains crucial to define the best antithrombotic strategy for the individual patient.

Mechanisms of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in patients with atrial fibrillation, prior stenting and long-standing chronic coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antithrombotic regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and chronic coronary syndromes beyond 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a matter of debate. For these patients, guidelines recommend oral anticoagulation (OAC) alone, but the risk of thrombotic complications remains a concern. The aim of this study was to characterize the incidence, presentation and use of antithrombotic therapy in patients with AF, prior stenting > 12 months and new ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS: Consecutive patients were selected from an institutional registry over a 3-year period if they matched the following criteria: 1) STEMI undergoing primary PCI; 2) AF; 3) chronic coronary syndrome with prior stenting > 12 months. RESULTS: Among 852 consecutive STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, the prevalence of AF was 4.1%, and 6 (0.9%) patients met all the inclusion criteria. Substantial heterogeneity in antithrombotic treatment for these patients was noted (e.g., OAC alone, OAC plus a single antiplatelet agent, no antithrombotic therapy). In 50% of patients, the STEMI episode was linked to a previously stented lesion or documented plaque. CONCLUSIONS: This case review illustrates the wide heterogeneity in antithrombotic pharmacotherapy among AF patients presenting with STEMI > 12 months after PCI. The underlying reason for STEMI is only partly related to disease progression or stent-related events. This finding suggests that multiple mechanisms of recurrence may be advocated, and are not only limited to antithrombotic therapy but may be explained by the natural history of coronary artery disease in remote vessels.

Acute coronary syndrome with spontaneous coronary artery dissection: which therapeutic option for a different pathophysiology?

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) has been recognized as an emergent cause of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), myocardial infarction, and sudden death. Patients mostly affected by SCAD are individuals without or with few cardiovascular risk factors, particularly young women, thus suggesting a clearly different pathophysiology than the more common atherosclerosis. Present research efforts outlined an improved characterization of the prevalence, natural history, and clinical outcome of SCAD. Intracoronary imaging has been an important asset in this condition, providing an improved diagnostic and therapeutic understanding. Current evidences suggest not only that this condition is more common than previously thought but also that the clinical management could be distinctly different from ACS secondary to atherosclerosis. Both medical and interventional treatment should consider the different cause of ACS, as well as the clinical stability of the patient, taking into account that the risk of recurrence is particularly high, predominantly during the first few days after the acute event. Stemming from new scientific evidences in terms of pathophysiology, clinical approach, therapy strategies, and follow-up of SCAD, it is important to identify spontaneous coronary dissection in the differential diagnosis of ACS.

Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: latest evidence.

Introduction: While the clinical merits of aspirin in secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention remain undisputed, its role in primary prevention is controversial. Recently, three trials of primary prevention reported neutral net benefit results or evidence of harm for aspirin in patients with no overt CVD. Areas covered: This article aims to inform clinical practitioners by appraising the current body of evidence on the use of aspirin for primary CVD prevention, ranging from general pharmacology to clinical outcomes and future directions. Expert opinion: Based on meta-analyses incorporating latest trials in the field of primary prevention, the modest reduction in ischemic events with aspirin, if any, is offset by a modest increase in nonfatal bleeding. Improved control of CVD risk factors and broader use of statins may have reduced the thrombotic complications of atherosclerosis, thus limiting the opportunity for aspirin to prevent clinical CVD events in the contemporary era. As such, decision-making about aspirin for primary prevention is challenging even when selected patients are considered and involves careful weighing of risks and benefits. Ongoing investigations conducted in patients with cancer could rapidly modify the current perception of the unfavorable benefit-risk ratio of aspirin in patients with no overt CVD.