Atherosclerotic Plaque Erosion: Mechanisms, Clinical Implications, and Potential Therapeutic Strategies-A Review.

ABSTRACT: Atherosclerosis is an insidious and progressive inflammatory disease characterized by the formation of lipid-laden plaques within the intima of arterial walls with potentially devastating consequences. While rupture of vulnerable plaques has been extensively studied, a distinct mechanism known as plaque erosion (PE) has gained recognition and attention in recent years. PE, characterized by the loss of endothelial cell lining in the presence of intact fibrous cap, contributes to a significant and growing proportion of acute coronary events. However, despite a heterogeneous substrate underlying coronary thrombosis, treatment remains identical. This article provides an overview of atherosclerotic PE characteristics and its underlying mechanisms, highlights its clinical implications, and discusses potential therapeutic strategies.

Diagnostic Strategies for the Assessment of Suspected Stable Coronary Artery Disease : A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty about which diagnostic strategy for detecting coronary artery disease (CAD) provides better outcomes. PURPOSE: To compare the effect on clinical management and subsequent health effects of alternative diagnostic strategies for the initial assessment of suspected stable CAD. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized clinical trials comparing diagnostic strategies for CAD detection among patients with symptoms suggestive of stable CAD. DATA EXTRACTION: Three investigators independently extracted study data. DATA SYNTHESIS: The strongest available evidence was for 3 of the 6 comparisons: coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) versus invasive coronary angiography (ICA) (4 trials), CCTA versus exercise electrocardiography (ECG) (2 trials), and CCTA versus stress single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) (5 trials). Compared with direct ICA referral, CCTA was associated with no difference in cardiovascular death and myocardial infarction (relative risk [RR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.52 to 1.35]; low certainty) but less index ICA (RR, 0.23 [CI, 0.22 to 0.25]; high certainty) and index revascularization (RR, 0.71 [CI, 0.63 to 0.80]; moderate certainty). Moreover, CCTA was associated with a reduction in cardiovascular death and myocardial infarction compared with exercise ECG (RR, 0.66 [CI, 0.44 to 0.99]; moderate certainty) and SPECT-MPI (RR, 0.64 [CI, 0.45 to 0.90]; high certainty). However, CCTA was associated with more index revascularization (RR, 1.78 [CI, 1.33 to 2.38]; moderate certainty) but less downstream testing (RR, 0.56 [CI, 0.45 to 0.71]; very low certainty) than exercise ECG. Low-certainty evidence compared SPECT-MPI versus exercise ECG (2 trials), SPECT-MPI versus stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (1 trial), and stress echocardiography versus exercise ECG (1 trial). LIMITATION: Most comparisons primarily rely on a single study, many studies were underpowered to detect potential differences in direct health outcomes, and individual patient data were lacking. CONCLUSION: For the initial assessment of patients with suspected stable CAD, CCTA was associated with similar health effects to direct ICA referral, and with a health benefit compared with exercise ECG and SPECT-MPI. Further research is needed to better assess the relative performance of each diagnostic strategy. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None. (PROSPERO: CRD42022329635).

Acetylsalicylic acid challenge or desensitization in sensitive patients with cardiovascular disease.

The use of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) is problematic in subjects with histories of hypersensitivity reactions (HRs) to it or with cross-reactive types of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) hypersensitivity. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose ASA challenge (LDAC) and desensitization to allow ASA therapy at an antiplatelet dose in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) or multiple related risk factors and histories of HRs to ASA or ≥ 2 chemically unrelated NSAIDs. We studied prospectively all patients with such histories and ≥ 3 risk factors for ASCVD (group I), chronic coronary syndrome (CCS, group II), and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) with indication for ASA desensitization (group III). Patients from groups I and II underwent LDACs (cumulative dose of 110 mg), while those from group III were desensitized (cumulative dose of 100.1 mg). We evaluated 103 patients: 62 from group I, 24 from group II, and 17 from group III. Eighty-two of the 86 patients from the first two groups underwent LDACs and 2 reacted. Subsequently, 22 (27.5%) of the 80 patients with negative LDACs were administered dual antiplatelet therapy with ASA after successful percutaneous coronary interventions, thus sparing desensitizations. The remaining 4 patients with CCS and all 17 patients from group III were successfully desensitized. In this pragmatic study, LDAC proved to be a safe and reliable diagnostic tool for identifying patients with histories of HRs to ASA or ≥ 2 different NSAIDs who can tolerate ASA at antiplatelet doses. Routine LDAC is advisable in all patients at high risk for ASCVD or with CCS who report HRs to ASA or ≥ 2 NSAIDs. ASA desensitization remains a safe and effective option in patients with ACS. Study flow-chart. ASCVD atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; CCS chronic coronary syndrome; ACS acute coronary syndrome; ASA acetylsalicylic acid; DAPT dual antiplatelet therapy; PCI percutaneous coronary intervention; NSAIDs nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; NERD NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease; NECD NSAID-exacerbated cutaneous disease; NIUAA NSAID-induced urticaria-angioedema or anaphylaxis; SNIUAA single NSAID-induced urticaria-angioedema or anaphylaxis; SNIDHR single NSAID-induced delayed hypersensitivity reaction.

Comparative effects of guided vs. potent P2Y12 inhibitor therapy in acute coronary syndrome: a network meta-analysis of 61 898 patients from 15 randomized trials.

AIMS: Guidelines recommend the use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors over clopidogrel for the reduction of ischaemic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However, this comes at the expense of increased bleeding. A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy has the potential to overcome this limitation. We aimed at evaluating the comparative safety and efficacy of guided vs. routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different oral P2Y12 inhibitors currently recommended for the treatment of patients with ACS (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor). RCTs including a guided approach (i.e. platelet function or genetic testing) vs. standard selection of P2Y12 inhibitors among patients with ACS were also included. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. P-scores were used to estimate hierarchies of efficacy and safety. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and the primary safety endpoint was all bleeding. A total of 61 898 patients from 15 RCTs were included. Clopidogrel was used as reference treatment. A guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced MACE (IRR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.98) without any significant trade-off in all bleeding (IRR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.96-1.55). A guided approach and prasugrel were associated with reduced myocardial infarction. A guided approach, prasugrel, and ticagrelor were associated with reduced stent thrombosis. Ticagrelor was also associated with reduced total and cardiovascular mortality. Prasugrel was associated with increased major bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with increased minor bleeding. The incidence of stroke did not differ between treatments. CONCLUSION: In patients with an ACS, compared with routine selection of potent P2Y12 inhibiting therapy (prasugrel or ticagrelor), a guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy is associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided approach for the selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with ACS. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021258603). KEY QUESTION: A guided selection of P2Y12 inhibiting therapy using platelet function or genetic testing improves outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Nevertheless, the comparative safety and efficacy of a guided versus routine selection of potent P2Y12-inhibiting therapy in acute coronary syndrome has not been explored. KEY FINDING: In a comprehensive network meta-analysis including the totality of available evidence and using clopidogrel as treatment reference, a guided approach was the only strategy associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events without any significant trade-off in bleeding. Prasugrel and ticagrelor increased bleeding and only ticagrelor reduced mortality. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: A guided selection of P2Y12-inhibiting therapy represents the strategy associated with the most favourable balance between safety and efficacy. These findings support a broader adoption of guided P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Guided versus standard antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Whether guided selection of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is effective in improving outcomes compared with standard antiplatelet therapy remains controversial. We assessed the safety and efficacy of guided versus standard selection of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing PCI. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, from Aug 20 to Oct 25, 2020, we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science databases for randomised controlled trials and observational studies published in any language that compared guided antiplatelet therapy, by means of platelet function testing or genetic testing, versus standard antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing PCI. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility, extracted the data, and assessed risk of bias. Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were used with random-effects or fixed-effect models according to the estimated heterogeneity among studies assessed by the I2 index. Coprimary endpoints were trial-defined primary major adverse cardiovascular events and any bleeding. Key secondary endpoints were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, definite or probable stent thrombosis, and major and minor bleeding. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021215901). FINDINGS: 3656 potentially relevant articles were screened. Our analysis included 11 randomised controlled trials and three observational studies with data for 20 743 patients. Compared with standard therapy, guided selection of antiplatelet therapy was associated with a reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 0·78, 95% CI 0·63-0·95, p=0·015) and reduced bleeding, although not statistically significant (RR 0·88, 0·77-1·01, p=0·069). Cardiovascular death (RR 0·77, 95% CI 0·59-1·00, p=0·049), myocardial infarction (RR 0·76, 0·60-0·96, p=0·021), stent thrombosis (RR 0·64, 0·46-0·89, p=0·011), stroke (RR 0·66, 0·48-0·91, p=0·010), and minor bleeding (RR 0·78, 0·67-0·92, p=0·0030) were reduced with guided therapy compared with standard therapy. Risks of all-cause death and major bleeding did not differ between guided and standard approaches. Outcomes varied according to the strategy used, with an escalation approach associated with a significant reduction in ischaemic events without any trade-off in safety, and a de-escalation approach associated with a significant reduction in bleeding, without any trade-off in efficacy. INTERPRETATION: Guided selection of antiplatelet therapy improved both composite and individual efficacy outcomes with a favourable safety profile, driven by a reduction in minor bleeding, supporting the use of platelet function or genetic testing to optimise the choice of agent in patients undergoing PCI. FUNDING: None.

Impact of diabetes mellitus on the pharmacodynamic effects of prasugrel and ticagrelor after switching from clopidogrel in patients with coronary artery disease.

Switching P2Y12 inhibitors is common in clinical practice. However, data on the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of switching in clinical settings characterized by high platelet reactivity, such as diabetes mellitus (DM), are limited. This is a post-hoc analysis from a prospective, randomized, open-label study conducted in coronary artery disease patients comparing the PD effects of loading dose (LD) and maintenance dose regimens of prasugrel vs ticagrelor according to DM status. A total of 110 patients were enrolled: 42 (38%) with DM and 68 (62%) without DM. All patients were on maintenance dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. PD assessments were performed using whole blood vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP), with results quantified by the platelet reactivity index (PRI), VerifyNow P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) with results reported as P2Y12 reaction units (PRU), and light transmittance aggregometry (LTA) following 20 and 5 µM adenosine diphosphate stimuli with results reported as maximum platelet aggregation (MPA). PD assessments were performed at baseline (while on clopidogrel), 30 min after LD, 2 h after LD, and 1 week after LD. Overall, platelet reactivity was higher in DM than in non-DM patients while on clopidogrel therapy. After switching to either prasugrel or ticagrelor, platelet reactivity dropped but remained significantly higher among patients with DM at 30 min with all tests (VN-PRU p < 0.01, MPA 20 µM p < 0.01, VASP-PRI p = 0.02) and at 2 h with VN-PRU (p < 0.01) and LTA-MPA 20 µM (p < 0.01) but not with VASP-PRI (p = 0.19). There were no significant differences between prasugrel and ticagrelor both among patients with or without DM, except for lower LTA-MPA 20 at 30 min (p < 0.01) among non-DM patients treated with prasugrel. Patients with DM treated with clopidogrel have higher platelet reactivity compared to patients without DM. Although platelet reactivity markedly reduces to a similar extent after switching to prasugrel or ticagrelor, patients with DM persist with increased platelet reactivity compared to patients without DM.Study registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01852175.

Antiplatelet therapy in percutaneous coronary intervention: latest evidence from randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Antiplatelet therapy is key to reduce systemic and local thrombotic events among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Antiplatelet treatment regimens have been subject to continuous changes over the years, with a dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor representing the cornerstone of treatment in these patients. RECENT FINDINGS: The need for less aggressive antithrombotic drugs to prevent local ischemic events with newer generation drug-eluting stent together with the increased understanding of the prognostic relevance of bleeding events in PCI patients, have prompted investigations aimed at identifying antiplatelet treatment regimens associated with a more favorable balance between ischemic and bleeding risks. Several key randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on antiplatelet regimens in patients undergoing PCI have been recently reported resulting in updates in practice guidelines. SUMMARY: This manuscript provides an overview of the advancements in the field deriving from key RCTs on antiplatelet regimens in patients undergoing PCI.

Intracranial haemorrhages vs. stent thromboses with direct oral anticoagulant plus single antiplatelet agent or triple antithrombotic therapy: a meta-analysis of randomized trials in atrial fibrillation and percutaneous coronary intervention/acute coronary syndrome patients.

AIMS: To assess the efficacy-safety profile of dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) including direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) vs. triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Randomized trials of AF patients with ACS/PCI, comparing DAT using DOACs against TAT, were selected. Overall, 11 161 studies were screened, 458 trials assessed, and four included, comprising 10 234 patients followed for a mean of 11 months. DAT compared to TAT resulted in significant reductions of trial-defined primary safety outcome [odds ratio (OR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.79, number needed to treat (NNT) 17] and of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.41-0.70, NNT 76) and in a numerical reduction of intracranial haemorrhage (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.21-1.19, NNT 314), which became significant after exclusion of DOACs from TAT and vitamin K antagonist from DAT arms (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.15-0.64). There were no significant differences in the risks of cardiovascular or any deaths or stroke, but with DAT, there was a numerical increase in myocardial infarctions (MIs) (OR 1.23, 95% CI 0.99-1.54, estimated NNT for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 151), which became significant in the ACS/PCI subgroup (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.02-2.00), and a 60% significant increase in stent thrombosis risk (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.02-2.52; NNTH 274). CONCLUSION: Dual antithrombotic therapy, compared to TAT, conferred a significantly reduced risk of overall bleeding but with a significant increase of stent thrombosis risk in the overall population and a significant 43% increase of MI in the ACS/PCI subgroup.

Sex-Related Differences in Dilated Cardiomyopathy with a Focus on Cardiac Dysfunction in Oncology.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The aim of this report is to describe the main aspects of sex-related differences in non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathies (DCM), focusing on chemotherapy-induced heart failure (HF) and investigating the possible therapeutic implications and clinical management applications in the era of personalized medicine. RECENT FINDINGS: In cardio-oncology, molecular and multimodality imaging studies confirm that sex differences do exist, affecting the therapeutic cardioprotective strategies and, therefore, the long-term outcomes. Interestingly, compelling evidences suggest that sex-specific characteristics in drug toxicity might predict differences in the therapeutic response, most likely due to the tangled interplay between cancer and HF, which probably share common underlying mechanisms. Cardiovascular diseases show many sex-related differences in prevalence, etiology, phenotype expression, and outcomes. Complex molecular mechanisms underlie this diverse pathological manifestations, from sex-determined differential gene expression to sex hormone interaction with their receptors in the heart. Non-ischemic DCM is an umbrella definition that incorporates several etiologies, including chemotherapy-induced cardiomyopathies. The role of sex as a risk factor for cardiotoxicity is poorly explored. However, understanding the various features of disease manifestation and outcomes is of paramount importance for a prompt and tailored evaluation.

Where Does Inflammation Fit?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review focuses on the complex relationship between inflammation and the onset of acute coronary syndrome and heart failure. RECENT FINDINGS: In the last few years, two important lines of research brought new and essential information to light in the pathogenesis of acute coronary syndrome: a) the understanding of the immune mediate mechanisms of inflammation in Ischemic Heart Disease (IHD) and b) evidence that the inflammatory mechanisms associated with atherosclerosis and its complications can be modulated by anti-inflammatory molecules. A large amount of data also suggests that inflammation is a major component in the development and exacerbation of heart failure (HF), in a symbiotic relationship. In particular, recent evidence underlies peculiar aspects of the phenomenon: oxidative stress and autophagy; DAMPS and TLR-4 signaling activation; different macrophages lineage and the contribution of NLRP-3 inflammasome; adaptive immune system. A possible explanation that could unify the pathogenic mechanism of these different conditions is the rising evidence that increased bowel permeability may allow translation of gut microbioma product into the circulation. These findings clearly establish the role of inflammation as the great trigger for two of the major cardiovascular causes of death and morbidity. Further studies are needed, to better clarify the issue and to define more targeted approaches to reduce pathological inflammation while preserving the physiological one.