A practical guide to the management of immune thrombocytopenia co-existing with acute coronary syndrome.

Introduction: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) management with co-existing acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains challenging as it requires a clinically relevant balance between the risk and outcomes of thrombosis and the risk of bleeding. However, the literature evaluating the treatment approaches in this high-risk population is scarce. Methods and Results: In this review, we aimed to summarize the available literature on the safety of ITP first- and second-line therapies to provide a practical guide on the management of ITP co-existing with ACS. We recommend holding antithrombotic therapy, including antiplatelet agents and anticoagulation, in severe thrombocytopenia with a platelet count < 30 × 109/L and using a single antiplatelet agent when the platelet count falls between 30 and 50 × 109/L. We provide a stepwise approach according to platelet count and response to initial therapy, starting with corticosteroids, with or without intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) with a dose limit of 35 g, followed by thrombopoietin receptor agonists (TPO-RAs) to a target platelet count of 200 × 109/L and then rituximab. Conclusion: Our review may serve as a practical guide for clinicians in the management of ITP co-existing with ACS.

Percutaneous coronary intervention can be safely performed with left ventricular thrombus without increasing stroke risk: A 5-year retrospective review using real-world data.

INTRODUCTION: Left ventricular thrombus (LVT) increases the risk of ischemic stroke. However, it remains uncertain if the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the confirmed LVT setting further augments the stroke risk. Therefore, in this study, we evaluated the risk of stroke among patients with LVT undergoing CAG +/- PCI. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study included all the patients encountered with LVT from 1st of April 2015, to 31st of March 2020. The study population was divided into two groups: Longobardo et al. (2018) [1] patients with LVT who underwent CAG +/- PCI; Solheim et al. (2010) [2] patients with LVT who did not undergo CAG +/- PCI. The primary outcome evaluated was stroke during the index admission, and the secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, all-cause mortality, and stroke at 12 months post-discharge. Logistic regression was used to determine the risk of stroke associated with PCI among patients with LVT, and a p-value<0.05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: Of the 210 patients included, 119 underwent CAG +/- PCI, while 91 patients did not undergo CAG +/- PCI. Most of the patients were Asian (67%), male (96%), with a mean age of 56 years. Ischemic cardiomyopathy was the primary etiology of LVT in both groups (96% in the CAG +/- PCI group and 80% in non CAG +/- PCI group). During the index admission, stroke among patients with LVT did not differ between the CAG +/- PCI and non CAG +/- PCI groups (5% versus 3.3%; odds ratio (OR) 1.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-6.4, p = 0.539; adjusted OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.09-10.6, p = 0.968). Similarly, in-hospital mortality, all-cause mortality, and stroke at 12 months did not differ between the study groups. CONCLUSION: Performing CAG +/- PCI among patients with LVT was not associated with an increased risk of stroke during admission or within 12 months in comparison to patients who did not undergo CAG +/- PCI, which may reassure cardiologists to perform CAG +/- PCI among patients with LVT safely.