Eliminate LDL cholesterol after heart attack but only for a while.

There is a clear demonstration of the inverse linear correlation between LDL cholesterol levels and clinical benefit. However, the timing of the action of lipid-lowering drugs is not clear. According to animal studies with recombinant lipoprotein A-1, the composition of atherosclerosis changes within 40 h (with variations in lipid and inflammatory contents). Progression-regression studies of atherosclerosis in humans confirm the data, highlighting a rapid change in the plaque over 5 weeks. The data are also in line with what emerges from the survival curves of the old study comparing atorvastatin 80 mg vs. placebo (Myocardial Ischaemia Reduction with Aggressive Cholesterol Lowering). The spacing of the curves occurs after only 4 weeks, indicating the precociousness of the favourable effects of powerful statins. Finally, a recent Odyssey post hoc analysis compared the risk of cardiac death and coronary revascularization between a group in which alirocumab lowered LDL cholesterol to below 15 mg (Group 1 and in which the drug was therefore stopped) against the subjects in the placebo group (Group 2), applying a propensity score matching. The primary endpoint occurred in a lower percentage of patients in Group 1 (6.4 vs. 8.4%). Furthermore, patients in Group 1 had a significantly lower hazard ratio (HR) for major adverse cardiovascular events [0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.997; P = 0.047] compared with the entire alirocumab group vs. placebo (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.78-0.93; P < 0.001). According to these preliminary observations, aggressive and early treatment of hypercholesterolaemia in subjects with acute coronary syndrome translates into improved clinical results compared with a strategy that provides for more gradual control. These data will need to be confirmed through further prospective clinical studies and ideally with early conducted atherosclerosis regression studies.

Controversy in cardiology: clopidogrel or acetylsalicylic acid in the treatment of chronic coronary syndromes?

Secondary prevention of patients with chronic coronary syndrome is based on the long-term use of a single anti-aggregating drug which is traditionally represented by acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) in light of the results of studies and meta-analyses which have demonstrated a clear anti-ischaemic efficacy against of an acceptable increase in the risk of bleeding, especially intracranial and gastrointestinal bleeding. The availability of drugs such as clopidogrel, which inhibits platelet activity through the P2Y12 receptor pathway, has called into question this paradigm, also in consideration of the fact that the scientific evidence that supports the use of ASA in secondary prevention is based on dated studies with some limitations. Over the last few years, randomized trials have demonstrated how clopidogrel has an efficacy profile comparable to that of ASA and a safety profile that is sometimes even better. In light of the new evidence, it is therefore legitimate to ask whether in this clinical scenario, ASA should still be considered the drug of choice or whether clopidogrel could represent the preferable alternative.

Intracoronary imaging to guide percutaneous coronary intervention: from evidence to guidelines.

Despite notable advances in devices and techniques, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is still affected by a substantial number of complications and failure rates. Over the years, the use of intracoronary imaging (ICI) has dramatically improved the understanding of mechanical and technical factors related to successful and failed PCI, becoming a mainstay in complex trans-catheter interventions. However, ICI modalities are invasive, time-consuming, and costly, and a net clinical benefit needs to be shown in order to recommend their routine use in clinical practice. In the past, the lack of evidence from randomized trials has been reflected in the scepticism shown by international guidelines. The recent publication of large randomized clinical trials conducted worldwide has provided new evidence regarding the clinical usefulness of ICI guidance in PCI. The consistent reduction of adverse events achieved in these trials, also demonstrated in an updated meta-analysis, suggested that the use of ICI in PCI is compelling to achieve optimal technical results and better outcomes, especially in complex high-risk interventions. Also considering the burden of information provided by ICI on coronary artery disease, looking from the inside seems today an opportunity that modern cardiology cannot ignore anymore.

Intracoronary imaging guidance of percutaneous coronary interventions: how and when to apply validated metrics to improve the outcome.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is still burdened by a substantial number of complications despite constant technological advances, including the advent of intracoronary imaging (ICI) techniques. ICI modalities have been instrumental for the understanding the mechanism of PCI failure. Thanks to the ability to detail the pre-intervention coronary anatomy and identify the features indicative of sub-optimal stent deployment, ICI techniques can be utilised to improve coronary interventions in different clinical scenarios. More recently large randomized clinical trials on ICI guidance confirmed the clinical effectiveness of this approach especially in complex high-risk interventions.

[Optimizing the care management pathway of patients with ischemia and non-obstructive coronary arteries]. / Ottimizzazione del percorso clinico-gestionale del paziente con ischemia in assenza di malattia coronarica ostruttiva.

Ischemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) is defined by the coexistence of anginal symptoms and demonstrable ischemia, with no evidence of obstructive coronary arteries. The underlying mechanism of INOCA is coronary microvascular dysfunction with or without associated vasospasm. INOCA patients have recurrent symptoms, functional limitations, repeated access to the emergency department, impaired quality of life and a higher incidence of cardiovascular events than the general population. Although well described in chronic coronary syndrome guidelines, INOCA remains underdiagnosed in clinical practice because of insufficient awareness, lack of accurate diagnostic tools, and poorly standardized and consistent definitions to diagnose, both invasively and non-invasively, coronary microvascular dysfunction.To disseminate current scientific evidence on INOCA as a distinct clinical entity, during 2022 we conducted at 30 cardiology units all over the country a clinical practice improvement initiative, with the aim of developing uniform and shared management pathways for INOCA patients across different operational settings. The present document highlights the outcomes of this multidisciplinary initiative.

OCT-Guided vs Angiography-Guided Coronary Stent Implantation in Complex Lesions: An ILUMIEN IV Substudy.

BACKGROUND: ILUMIEN IV was the first large-scale, multicenter, randomized trial comparing optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided vs angiography-guided stent implantation in patients with high-risk clinical characteristics and/or complex angiographic lesions. OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to specifically examine outcomes in the complex angiographic lesions subgroup. METHODS: From the original trial population (N = 2,487), high-risk patients without complex angiographic lesions were excluded (n = 514). Complex angiographic lesion characteristics included: 1) long or multiple lesions with intended total stent length ≥28 mm; 2) bifurcation lesion with intended 2-stent strategy; 3) severely calcified lesion; 4) chronic total occlusion; or 5) in-stent restenosis. The study endpoints were: 1) final minimal stent area (MSA); 2) 2-year composite of serious major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [MI], or stent thrombosis); and 3) 2-year effectiveness, defined as target-vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel MI, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization. RESULTS: The postpercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) MSA was larger in the OCT-guided (n = 992) vs angiography-guided (n = 981) group (5.56 ± 1.95 mm2 vs 5.26 ± 1.81 mm2; difference, 0.30; 95% CI: 0.14-0.47; P < 0.001). Compared with angiography-guided PCI, OCT-guided PCI resulted in a lower risk of serious MACE (3.1% vs 4.9%; HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.40-0.99; P = 0.04). TVF was not significantly different between groups (7.3% vs 8.8%; HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.59-1.12; P = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: In complex angiographic lesions, OCT-guided PCI led to a larger MSA and reduced the serious MACE, the composite of cardiac death, target-vessel MI, or stent thrombosis, compared with angiography-guided PCI at 2 years, but did not significantly improve TVF. (Optical Coherence Tomography Guided Coronary Stent Implantation Compared to Angiography: A Multicenter Randomized Trial in PCI; NCT03507777).