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.

Risk Burden of Cancer in Patients Treated With Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: Analysis of Multicenter Controlled High-Bleeding Risk Trials.

BACKGROUND: Oncological patients with coronary artery disease face an elevated risk of hemorrhagic and ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite medical guidelines recommending minimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for patients with cancer, dedicated data on abbreviated DAPT in this population is lacking. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients with cancer compared with other high-bleeding risk individuals. METHODS: Patient-level data from 4 high-bleeding risk coronary drug-eluting stent studies (ONYX One, LEADERS FREE, LEADERS FREE II, and SENIOR trials) treated with short DAPT were analyzed. The comparison focused on patients with high-bleeding risk with and without cancer, assessing 1-year rates of net adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and major adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke). RESULTS: A total of 5232 patients were included, of whom 574 individuals had cancer, and 4658 were at high-bleeding risk without previous cancer. Despite being younger with fewer risk factors, patients with cancer had higher net adverse clinical event (HR, 1.25; P=0.01) and major adverse clinical event (HR, 1.26; P=0.02), primarily driven by all-cause mortality and major bleeding (BARC 3-5), but not myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, or repeat revascularization. Cancer was an independent predictor of net adverse clinical event (P=0.005), major adverse clinical event (P=0.01), and major bleeding (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The present work is the first report on abbreviated DAPT dedicated to patients with cancer. Cancer is a major marker of adverse outcomes and these events had high lethality. Despite short DAPT, patients with cancer experienced higher rates of major bleeding compared with patients without cancer with high-bleeding risk, which occurred mainly after DAPT discontinuation. These findings reinforce the need for a more detailed and individualized stratification of those patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT03344653, NCT01623180, NCT02843633, NCT0284.

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.

European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) expert consensus statement on perioperative myocardial infarction after cardiac surgery.

Cardiac surgery may lead to myocardial damage and release of cardiac biomarkers through various mechanisms such as cardiac manipulation, systemic inflammation, myocardial hypoxia, cardioplegic arrest and ischaemia caused by coronary or graft occlusion. Defining perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI) after cardiac surgery presents challenges, and the association between the current PMI definitions and postoperative outcomes remains uncertain. To address these challenges, the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) facilitated collaboration among a multidisciplinary group to evaluate the existing evidence on the mechanisms, diagnosis and prognostic implications of PMI after cardiac surgery. The review found that the postoperative troponin value thresholds associated with an increased risk of mortality are markedly higher than those proposed by all the current definitions of PMI. Additionally, it was found that large postoperative increases in cardiac biomarkers are prognostically relevant even in absence of additional supportive signs of ischaemia. A new algorithm for PMI detection after cardiac surgery was also proposed, and a consensus was reached within the group that establishing a prognostically relevant definition of PMI is critically needed in the cardiovascular field and that PMI should be included in the primary composite outcome of coronary intervention trials.

Periprocedural myocardial infarction and injury.

Periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) and injury, pertinent to both cardiac and non-cardiac procedures, have gained increasing recognition in clinical practice. Over time, diverse definitions for diagnosing PMI have been developed and validated among patient populations undergoing coronary revascularization. However, this variety in definitions presents considerable challenges in clinical settings and complicates both the design and interpretation of clinical trials. The necessity to accurately diagnose PMI has spurred significant interest in establishing universally accepted and prognostically meaningful thresholds for cardiac biomarkers elevation and supportive ancillary criteria. In fact, elevations in cardiac biomarkers in line with the 4th Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction, have been extensively confirmed to be associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular events. In the context of non-coronary cardiac procedures, such as Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation, there is a growing acknowledgment of both the high incidence rates and the adverse impact of PMI on patient outcomes. Similarly, emerging research underscores the significance of PMI and injury in non-cardiac surgery, highlighting the urgent need for effective prevention and risk management strategies in this domain.

Aspirin-free antiplatelet strategies after percutaneous coronary interventions.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitor is the standard antithrombotic treatment after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Several trials have challenged guideline-recommended DAPT after PCI by testing the relative clinical effect of an aspirin-free antiplatelet approach-consisting of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after a short course (mostly 1-3 months) of DAPT-among patients undergoing PCI without a concomitant indication for oral anticoagulation (OAC). Overall, these studies have shown P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short DAPT to be associated with a significant reduction in the risk of bleeding without an increase in thrombotic or ischaemic events compared with continued DAPT. Moreover, the effects of the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy without prior DAPT or following a very short course of DAPT after PCI are being investigated in emerging studies, of which one has recently reported unfavourable efficacy results associated with the aspirin-free approach compared with conventional DAPT. Finally, P2Y12 inhibitor alone has been compared with aspirin alone as chronic therapy after DAPT discontinuation, thus challenging the historical role of aspirin as a standard of care for secondary prevention following PCI. A thorough understanding of study designs, populations, treatments, results, and limitations of trials testing P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy vs. DAPT or vs. aspirin is required to consider adopting this treatment in clinical practice. This review addresses the use of aspirin-free antiplatelet strategies among patients undergoing PCI without a concomitant indication for OAC, providing an overview of clinical evidence, guideline indications, practical implications, ongoing issues, and future perspectives.

Pharmacological and clinical appraisal of factor XI inhibitor drugs.

The evolution of anticoagulation therapy, from vitamin K antagonists to the advent of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) almost two decades ago, marks significant progress. Despite improved safety demonstrated in pivotal trials and post-marketing observations, persistent concerns exist, particularly regarding bleeding risk and the absence of therapeutic indications in specific subgroups or clinical contexts. Factor XI (FXI) has recently emerged as a pivotal contributor to intraluminal thrombus formation and growth, playing a limited role in sealing vessel wall injuries. Inhibiting FXI presents an opportunity to decouple thrombosis from haemostasis, addressing concerns related to bleeding events while safeguarding against thromboembolic events. Notably, FXI inhibition holds promise for patients with end-stage renal disease or cancer, where clear indications for DOACs are currently lacking. Various compounds have undergone design, testing, and progression to phase 2 clinical trials, demonstrating a generally favourable safety and tolerability profile. However, validation through large-scale phase 3 trials with sufficient power to assess both safety and efficacy outcomes is needed. This review comprehensively examines FXI inhibitors, delving into individual classes, exploring their pharmacological properties, evaluating the latest evidence from randomized trials, and offering insights into future perspectives.

Evaluating the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic impact of different modes of ticagrelor administration.

INTRODUCTION: Alternative administration modes for oral P2Y12 inhibitors, particularly ticagrelor, have emerged as a potential alternative to overcome the limitations associated with the delayed onset of action of these drugs in patients who are unable to swallow or with impaired absorption. AREAS COVERED: This comprehensive literature review aims to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge on the pharmacokinetics and administration modes of ticagrelor, including factors that may affect its action. It also compares the pharmacokinetics of ticagrelor with that of other drugs with similar uses to provide a comprehensive understanding of the potential advantages and limitations of different modalities of P2Y12 administration. For this purpose, Embase, Medline, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from database inception to July 2023. EXPERT OPINION: Among the different alternatives, crushed formulations, especially for ticagrelor, have emerged as the most promising option, showing early and robust platelet inhibition. However, important questions remain unanswered, such as the comparative clinical benefits of crushed ticagrelor versus standard administration, the cost-effectiveness of alternative modes compared to intravenous P2Y12 inhibitors such as cangrelor, and the important limitations associated with the concomitant use of opioids, who have been proven to impair even the action of crushed ticagrelor.

Optimising antithrombotic therapy after ACS and PCI.

Dual antiplatelet therapy, combining aspirin with a platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, is the standard treatment for acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The optimal type and duration of dual antiplatelet therapy depend on the patient's risk for ischemic and hemorrhagic complications. De-escalation strategies, such as switching to a less potent P2Y12 inhibitor, reducing the dose, or discontinuing one of the antiplatelet agents, may be suitable for high-risk bleeding patients with low risk of recurrent ischemic events, and platelet function testing and genetic testing can guide de-escalation. For patients at high ischemic risk, strategies include drug switching, dose escalation, or adding a new drug. Patients at high ischemic and hemorrhagic risk require individualized treatment decisions and trade-off considerations.

2022 Joint ESC/EACTS review of the 2018 guideline recommendations on the revascularization of left main coronary artery disease in patients at low surgical risk and anatomy suitable for PCI or CABG.

In October 2021, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) jointly agreed to establish a Task Force (TF) to review recommendations of the 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization as they apply to patients with left main (LM) disease with low-to-intermediate SYNTAX score (0-32). This followed the withdrawal of support by the EACTS in 2019 for the recommendations about the management of LM disease of the previous guideline. The TF was asked to review all new relevant data since the 2018 guidelines including updated aggregated data from the four randomized trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with LM disease. This document represents a summary of the work of the TF; suggested updated recommendations for the choice of revascularization modality in patients undergoing myocardial revascularization for LM disease are included. In stable patients with an indication for revascularization for LM disease, with coronary anatomy suitable for both procedures and a low predicted surgical mortality, the TF concludes that both treatment options are clinically reasonable based on patient preference, available expertise, and local operator volumes. The suggested recommendations for revascularization with CABG are Class I, Level of Evidence A. The recommendations for PCI are Class IIa, Level of Evidence A. The TF recognized several important gaps in knowledge related to revascularization in patients with LM disease and recognizes that aggregated data from the four randomized trials were still only large enough to exclude large differences in mortality.

2022 Joint ESC/EACTS review of the 2018 guideline recommendations on the revascularization of left main coronary artery disease in patients at low surgical risk and anatomy suitable for PCI or CABG.

Task Force structure and summary of clinical evidence of 2022 ESC/EACTS review of the 2018 guideline recommendations on the revascularization of left main coronary artery disease. CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; LM, left main; SYNTAX, Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery. a'Event' refers to the composite of death, myocardial infarction (according to Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction if available, otherwise protocol defined) or stroke. In October 2021, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) jointly agreed to establish a Task Force (TF) to review recommendations of the 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization as they apply to patients with left main (LM) disease with low-to-intermediate SYNTAX score (0-32). This followed the withdrawal of support by the EACTS in 2019 for the recommendations about the management of LM disease of the previous guideline. The TF was asked to review all new relevant data since the 2018 guidelines including updated aggregated data from the four randomized trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with LM disease. This document represents a summary of the work of the TF; suggested updated recommendations for the choice of revascularization modality in patients undergoing myocardial revascularization for LM disease are included. In stable patients with an indication for revascularization for LM disease, with coronary anatomy suitable for both procedures and a low predicted surgical mortality, the TF concludes that both treatment options are clinically reasonable based on patient preference, available expertise, and local operator volumes. The suggested recommendations for revascularization with CABG are Class I, Level of Evidence A. The recommendations for PCI are Class IIa, Level of Evidence A. The TF recognized several important gaps in knowledge related to revascularization in patients with LM disease and recognizes that aggregated data from the four randomized trials were still only large enough to exclude large differences in mortality.

A review of polypills for the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a prevalent chronic condition managed through pharmacotherapy targeting modifiable risk factors. However, ASCVD patients often face poor medication adherence due to a high pill burden from multiple oral drugs, contributing to cardiovascular events. Recent evidence indicates that polypills combining antihypertensive and statin medications effectively control risk factors and improve adherence in various ASCVD risk patients. Randomized clinical trials demonstrate polypill efficacy in reducing major cardiovascular events, making them a convenient strategy for both established ASCVD patients and those without ASCVD. These positive results encourage the incorporation of polypills into comprehensive cardiovascular prevention programs, particularly for socio-economically vulnerable populations. Nevertheless, barriers remain, such as unclear regulatory approval pathways and physician hesitancy. Despite challenges, the benefits of fixed-dose combinations are evident and should be encouraged for secondary and primary prevention, especially in high-risk categories. Technological advancements could further support the successful integration of polypills in clinical practice. This review discusses the evidence, challenges, and perspectives of polypills, emphasizing their potential impact on cardiovascular disease management.

Within and beyond 12-month efficacy and safety of antithrombotic strategies in patients with established coronary artery disease: two companion network meta-analyses of the 2022 joint clinical consensus statement of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), European Association for Acute CardioVascular Care (ACVC), and European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC).

AIMS: To appraise all available antithrombotic treatments within or after 12 months following coronary revascularization and/or acute coronary syndrome in two network meta-analyses. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-three (N = 189 261 patients) trials within 12 months and 19 (N = 139 086 patients) trials beyond 12 months were included for efficacy/safety endpoints appraisal. Within 12 months, ticagrelor 90 mg bis in die (b.i.d.) [hazard ratio (HR), 0.66; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49-0.88], aspirin and ticagrelor 90 mg (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.95), or aspirin, clopidogrel and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51-0.86) were the only treatments associated with lower cardiovascular mortality, compared with aspirin and clopidogrel, without or with greater bleeding risk for the first and the other treatment options, respectively. Beyond 12 months, no strategy lowered mortality; compared with aspirin; the greatest reductions of myocardial infarction (MI) were found with aspirin and clopidogrel (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.85) or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (HR, 0.76; 95% CI: 0.61-0.95), especially ticagrelor 90 mg (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.32-0.92), and of stroke with VKA (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76) or aspirin and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.76). All treatments increased bleeding except P2Y12 monotherapy, compared with aspirin. CONCLUSION: Within 12 months, ticagrelor 90 mg monotherapy was the only treatment associated with lower mortality, without bleeding risk trade-off compared with aspirin and clopidogrel. Beyond 12 months, P2Y12 monotherapy, especially ticagrelor 90 mg, was associated with lower MI without bleeding trade-off; aspirin and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg most effectively reduced stroke, with a more acceptable bleeding risk than VKA, compared with aspirin.Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/; Unique identifiers: CRD42021243985 and CRD42021252398.

Pharmacology and Clinical Development of Factor XI Inhibitors.

Therapeutic anticoagulation is indicated for a variety of circumstances and conditions in several fields of medicine to prevent or treat venous and arterial thromboembolism. According to the different mechanisms of action, the available parenteral and oral anticoagulant drugs share the common principle of hampering or blocking key steps of the coagulation cascade, which unavoidably comes at the price of an increased propensity to bleed. Hemorrhagic complications affect patient prognosis both directly and indirectly (ie, by preventing the adoption of an effective antithrombotic strategy). Inhibition of factor XI (FXI) has emerged as a strategy with the potential to uncouple the pharmacological effect and the adverse events of anticoagulant therapy. This observation is based on the differential contribution of FXI to thrombus amplification, in which it plays a major role, and hemostasis, in which it plays an ancillary role in final clot consolidation. Several agents were developed to inhibit FXI at different stages (ie, suppressing biosynthesis, preventing zymogen activation, or impeding the biological action of the active form), including antisense oligonucleotides, monoclonal antibodies, small synthetic molecules, natural peptides, and aptamers. Phase 2 studies of different classes of FXI inhibitors in orthopedic surgery suggested that dose-dependent reductions in thrombotic complications are not paralleled by dose-dependent increases in bleeding compared with low-molecular-weight heparin. Likewise, the FXI inhibitor asundexian was associated with lower rates of bleeding compared with the activated factor X inhibitor apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation, although no evidence of a therapeutic effect on stroke prevention is available so far. FXI inhibition could also be appealing for patients with other conditions, including end-stage renal disease, noncardioembolic stroke, or acute myocardial infarction, for which other phase 2 studies have been conducted. The balance between thromboprophylaxis and bleeding achieved by FXI inhibitors needs confirmation in large-scale phase 3 clinical trials powered for clinical end points. Several of such trials are ongoing or planned to define the role of FXI inhibitors in clinical practice and to clarify which FXI inhibitor may be most suited for each clinical indication. This article reviews the rationale, pharmacology, results of medium or small phase 2 studies, and future perspectives of drugs inhibiting FXI.

Reversal and removal of oral antithrombotic drugs in patients with active or perceived imminent bleeding.

Remarkable progress has been made in the pharmacological management of patients with cardiovascular disease, including the frequent use of antithrombotic agents. Nonetheless, bleeding complications remain frequent and potentially life-threatening. Therapeutic interventions relying on prompt antithrombotic drug reversal or removal have been developed to assist clinicians in treating patients with active bleeding or an imminent threat of major bleeding due to urgent surgery or invasive procedures. Early phase studies on these novel strategies have shown promising results using surrogate pharmacodynamic endpoints. However, the benefit of reversing/removing antiplatelet or anticoagulant drugs should always be weighed against the possible prothrombotic effects associated with withdrawal of antithrombotic protection, bleeding, and surgical trauma. Understanding the ischemic-bleeding risk tradeoff of antithrombotic drug reversal and removal strategies in the context of urgent high-risk settings requires dedicated clinical investigations, but challenges in trial design remain, with relevant practical, financial, and ethical implications.

Timing, Selection, Modulation, and Duration of P2Y12 Inhibitors for Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing PCI.

Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and the oral P2Y12 inhibitor clopidogrel as the cornerstone of treatment for patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was firstly established in 2001. Soon thereafter, the newer-generation P2Y12 inhibitors prasugrel and ticagrelor became commercially available. The clinical management of ACS patients undergoing PCI has evolved significantly in the last 2 decades, with a shift toward more rapid invasive management, broader use of drug-eluting stents, and the increasing recognition that major bleeding due to antiplatelet therapy is detrimental. In this ever-changing scenario, numerous studies have addressed 4 main questions regarding P2Y12 inhibition in ACS patients undergoing PCI: timing, selection, modulation, and duration. This paper reviews the latest evidence surrounding these topical questions, with a focus on efficacy and safety data, practice guidelines, and residual areas of uncertainty.

Revascularization strategies versus optimal medical therapy in chronic coronary syndrome: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The impact of myocardial revascularization on outcomes and prognosis in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) without left main (LM) disease or reduced left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) may be influenced by the revascularization strategy adopted. METHODS: We performed a network meta-analysis including 18 randomized controlled trials comparing different revascularization strategies, including angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), physiology-guided PCI and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), in patients with CCS without LM disease or reduced LVEF. RESULTS: Compared with medical therapy, all revascularization strategies were associated with a reduction of the primary endpoint, as defined in each trial, the extent of which was modest with angiography-guided PCI (IRR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.99) and greater with physiology-guided PCI (IRR 0.60, 95% CI 0.47-0.77) and CABG (IRR 0.58, 95% CI 0.48-0.70). Moreover, angiography-guided PCI was associated with an increase of the primary endpoint compared to physiology-guided PCI (IRR 1.43, 95% CI 1.14-1.79) and CABG (IRR 1.49, 95% CI 1.27-1.74). CABG was the only strategy associated with reduced myocardial infarction (IRR 0.68, 95% CI 0.52-0.90), cardiovascular death (IRR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64-0.89), and all-cause death (IRR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77-0.99), but increased stroke (IRR 1.69, 95% CI 1.04-2.76). CONCLUSIONS: In CCS patients without LM disease or reduced LVEF, physiology-guided PCI and CABG are associated with better outcomes than angiography-guided PCI. Compared with medical therapy, CABG is the only revascularization strategy associated with a reduction of myocardial infarction and death rates, at the cost of higher risk of stroke. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022313612).