P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy after coronary stenting: are all P2Y12-inhibitors equal?

INTRODUCTION: P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy following 1-3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) reduces (major) bleeding without an apparent increase in ischemic events and has therefore emerged as an alternative to 6-12 months of DAPT following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there are important differences between the available P2Y12-inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) as agents of choice for P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy. AREAS COVERED: This review critically appraises the evidence for P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy after PCI using either clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor. Furthermore, we discuss ongoing trials and future directions for research. EXPERT OPINION: P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy following 1-3 months of DAPT is an alternative to 6-12 months of DAPT following PCI. Ticagrelor may be considered the current preferred option due to its reliable effect on platelet reactivity and its predominant use in clinical trials. Prasugrel could serve as a useful substitute for those not tolerating ticagrelor, but more research into prasugrel monotherapy is warranted. Alternatively, clopidogrel can be used, although there are concerns of high platelet reactivity, especially when genotyping and/or platelet function testing are not used. Future research will need to address the minimal duration of DAPT before switching to P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy and what the optimal antithrombotic therapy beyond 12 months is.

XIENCE Implantation Followed By Short Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: 'The New Normal'?

The XIENCE family of everolimus-eluting stents ranks among the most used and most widely studied drug-eluting stents worldwide. In patients at high bleeding risk undergoing non-complex percutaneous coronary intervention with these stents, a shortened dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimen of 1-3 months appears to be associated with a reduced rate of major bleeding, a similar rate of ischaemic events and a very low incidence of stent thrombosis after DAPT discontinuation compared with DAPT up to 12 months.

Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction: Impella CP/5.0 versus ECMO.

BACKGROUND: Short-term mechanical circulatory support devices are increasingly used in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. As no randomised evidence is available, the choice between high-output Impella or extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is still a matter of debate. Real-life data are necessary to assess adverse outcomes and to help guide the treatment decision between the different devices. The purpose of this study was to compare characteristics and clinical outcomes of Impella CP/5.0 with ECMO support in patients with cardiogenic shock from myocardial infarction. METHODS: A retrospective, two-centre study was performed on all cardiogenic shock from myocardial infarction patients with Impella CP/5.0 or ECMO support, from 2006 until 2018. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Potential baseline imbalance between the groups was adjusted using inverse probability treatment weighting, and survival analysis was performed with an adjusted log-rank test. Secondarily, the occurrence of device-related complications (limb ischaemia, access site-related bleeding, access site-related infection) was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were included (Impella, N=90; ECMO, N=38). The 30-day mortality was similar for both groups (53% vs. 49%, P=0.30), also after adjustment for potential baseline imbalance between the groups (weighted log-rank P=0.16). Patients with Impella support had significantly fewer device-related complications than patients treated with ECMO (respectively, 17% vs. 40%, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with Impella CP/5.0 or ECMO for cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction did not differ in 30-day mortality. More device-related complications occurred with ECMO compared to Impella support.

Prognostic implications of microcirculatory perfusion versus macrocirculatory perfusion in cardiogenic shock: a CULPRIT-SHOCK substudy.

BACKGROUND: After early revascularisation, restoration of macrocirculatory perfusion parameters is the primary objective in the management of cardiogenic shock complicated acute myocardial infarction. Nevertheless, vital organ perfusion may be compromised at the systemic microcirculatory level, even in patients with preserved macrohaemodynamics. Microvascular perfusion was shown to have independent prognostic value for early mortality. The present study aims to compare the prognostic value of microcirculatory versus macrocirculatory perfusion parameters. METHODS: This substudy of the culprit lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention versus multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in cardiogenic shock (CULPRIT-SHOCK) trial examined the sublingual capillary network using videomicroscopy post-percutaneous coronary intervention to determine the proportion of perfused capillaries (<20 µm) and perfused capillary density. Thirty-day follow-up was performed to obtain the occurrence of a combined clinical endpoint of all-cause death and renal replacement therapy. RESULTS: Videomicroscopy measurements were performed in 66 patients. There was a significant adjusted association between microcirculatory perfusion parameters and the combined clinical endpoint (proportion of perfused capillaries: P=0.020; perfused capillary density: P=0.035), whereas there was no significant adjusted association between macrocirculatory perfusion parameters and the combined clinical endpoint (systolic blood pressure: P=0.205). Normotensive patients with compromised microcirculatory perfusion parameters had a higher risk of the combined clinical endpoint than normotensive patients with preserved microcirculatory perfusion parameters (proportion of perfused capillaries: Breslow P=0.014; perfused capillary density: Breslow P=0.076). CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant and independent association between microcirculatory perfusion parameters perfused capillary density and proportion of perfused capillaries and the combined clinical endpoint of all-cause death and renal replacement therapy at 30 days follow-up. In patients with loss of haemodynamic coherence between microcirculatory and macrocirculatory perfusion parameters, microcirculatory perfusion parameters confer dominant prognostic value.

Real-life use of left ventricular circulatory support with Impella in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction: 12 years AMC experience.

AIMS: Mortality in cardiogenic shock patients remains high. Short-term mechanical circulatory support with Impella can be used to support the circulation in these patients, but data from randomised controlled studies and 'real-world' data are sparse. The aim is to describe real-life data on outcomes and complications of our 12 years of clinical experience with Impella in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction and to identify predictors of 6-month mortality. METHODS: We describe a single-centre registry from October 2004 to December 2016 including all patients treated with Impella for cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. We report outcomes and complications and identify predictors of 6-month mortality. RESULTS: Our overall clinical experience consists of 250 patients treated with Impella 2.5, Impella CP or Impella 5.0. A total of 172 patients received Impella therapy for cardiogenic shock, of which 112 patients had cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. The mean age was 60.1±10.6 years, mean arterial pressure was 67 (56-77) mmHg, lactate was 6.2 (3.6-9.7) mmol/L, 87.5% were mechanically ventilated and 59.6% had a cardiac arrest before Impella placement. Overall 30-day mortality was 56.2% and 6-month mortality was 60.7%. Complications consisted of device-related vascular complications (17.0%), non-device-related bleeding (12.5%), haemolysis (7.1%) and stroke (3.6%). In a multivariate analysis, pH before Impella placement is a predictor of 6-month mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Our registry shows that Impella treatment in cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction is feasible, although mortality rates remain high and complications occur.

The Role of Percutaneous Haemodynamic Support in High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Cardiogenic Shock.

The experience and usage of percutaneous cardiac assist devices in cardiogenic shock as well as high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention have increased over the years. Nonetheless, there is still little evidence of clinical benefit of these devices other than immediate haemodynamic improvement. Despite the fact that these devices are used to treat a rather complex patient population, clinical testing remains important in order to evaluate their true impact on clinical outcome before being adopted into clinical practice. Therefore, this review shows an overview of the current experience and evidence of the available percutaneous cardiac assist devices.

MGuard Embolic Protection Stent - The Importance of Thrombus Management in ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Proceedings of STEMI symposium at EuroPCR on 20-23rd May 2014 in Paris.

Distal embolisation of atherothrombotic material is a frequent consequence of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This causes microvascular occlusions, leading to a further reduction in myocardial reperfusion. The MGuard™ embolic protection stent (EPS) features a unique polymer micronet mesh coating. When used in acute STEMI, the MGuard EPS shows significant improvement in myocardial flow and ST resolution, even in complicated clinical cases vs the standard approach with conventional bare metal or drug-eluting stents. Data from the andomised Safety and Efficacy Study of MGuard Stent After a Heart Attack (MASTER II) trial and from a real-life registry have shown the efficacy and safety of the MGuard in primary PCI. This report of the proceedings of a symposium at EuroPCR, 20-23 May 2014, Paris, France, discussed clinical trial data, as well as a number of clinical cases, illustrating the utility of the MGuard EPS in difficult situations.