Ticagrelor with or without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients after PCI

Characterizing high-risk enrollment criteria and impact on clinical outcomes in a large randomized clinical trial: Insights from the TWILIGHT trial

BACKGROUND

The TWILIGHT trial showed that, among high-risk patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and were event-free at 3 months, ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin reduced bleeding without increasing ischemic events.

METHODS

This posthoc analysis describes the risk profiles and outcomes of patients enrolled in the TWILIGHT trial. The primary outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding, and the key secondary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke within 1 year after randomization.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients (n = 7,119) fulfilling ≤ 3, 4, 5, or ≥ 6 risk factors was 21.5%, 32.7%, 27.4%, and 18.4%, respectively. Troponin-positive acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was the most prevalent clinical criterion (64.9%), and multivessel disease (MVD) was the most prevalent angiographic criterion (66.5%). The most frequent intersection of criteria was the combination of troponin-positive ACS, atherosclerotic vascular disease, MVD, left main or proximal anterior descending lesion, and stent length > 30 mm. A stepwise increase in ischemic but not in bleeding risk was noted with an increasing number of high-risk criteria. Compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced bleeding regardless of the number of risk factors (≤ 3-RF: 3.5% vs 5.8%, HR 0.59, 95% CI [0.38-0.93]; 4-RF: 3.7% vs 6.4%, HR 0.57, 95% CI [0.37-0.86]; 5-RF: 3.8% vs 8.6%, HR 0.44, 95% CI [0.29-0.66]; ≥ 6-RF: 5.3% vs 7.9%, HR 0.65, 95% CI [0.44-0.96]; p-interaction = .56) without significantly increasing the ischemic risk (≤ 3-RF: 1.6% vs 2.1%, HR 0.75, 95% CI [0.38-1.50]; 4-RF: 3.5% vs 2.2%, HR 1.58, 95% CI [0.91-2.75]; 5-RF: 4.1% vs 5.0%, HR 0.80, 95% CI [0.51-1.24]; ≥ 6-RF: 6.7% vs 6.9%, HR 0.98, 95% CI [0.67-1.43]; p-interaction = .22).

CONCLUSIONS

In the TWILIGHT trial, the high-risk features correlated more strongly with ischemic than with bleeding risk. Nonetheless, the benefits of ticagrelor compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin were consistent, irrespective of the number of high-risk features. These findings are only applicable to patients who are event-free at 3 months after PCI.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02270242.

Long-term (12 months) vs. short-term (<12 months) dual antiplatelet therapy post-percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents: a critical appraisal and systematic review

BACKGROUND

A growing body of evidence supports short-term DAPT as safe and efficacious following PCI with DES. However, methodological criticism of RCTs has led to caution when translating results into clinical practice. This study aimed to critically appraise the methodological rigour of included studies and consolidate the evidence on the safety and efficacy of short-term DAPT.

METHODS

Medline, Cochrane Library and Embase were searched from inception until August 2022. The primary outcome was the methodological quality of published primary studies. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and the CASP tool. Evidence was rated for quality using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) score approach. Other endpoints were all-cause mortality and major bleeding.

RESULTS

Eighteen RCTs were included. Based on GRADE score, there was a moderate level of certainty that the reported results for both outcomes are probably close to the true effect. A total of 78% (14/18) of RCTs had a low risk of bias when assessing all-cause mortality and 61% (11/18) when assessing major bleeding. The CASP tool confirmed methodological rigour; however, only 33% (6/18) of studies were applicable beyond the studied populations. Compared with 12 months of DAPT, short-term DAPT was associated with a reduced risk of major bleeding [relative risk (RR): 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54-0.88, P = 0.003, I2 = 45%] and trended towards a reduced risk in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.79-1.01, P = 0.08, I2 = 0%).

CONCLUSION

With moderate certainty evidence, short-term DAPT appears safe and efficacious post-PCI with DES in the studied populations.

Abbreviated dual antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), combining aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, is a standard post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treatment to reduce thrombosis and ischemic events. However, the optimal DAPT duration remains unclear, with concerns about bleeding risks associated with long-term potent P2Y12 inhibitors. This systematic review and meta-analysis investigates the safety and efficacy of shortened DAPT regimens.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing conventional DAPT (≥ 12 months) and abbreviated DAPT (≤ 3 months) post-PCI. Primary outcomes were 1-year all-cause mortality and bleeding, assessed using the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) classification. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool, and meta-analyses used random-effects models.

RESULTS

Forty studies involving 54,233 participants were included. Abbreviated DAPT significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.90, 95%CI: 0.82-0.98) and bleeding (BARC 3 or 5: RR: 0.77, 95%CI: 0.60-0.97). No significant differences were observed in cardiovascular mortality, stroke, non-fatal MI, revascularization, or in-stent thrombosis. Subgroup analyses showed lower mortality with 1-month DAPT and reduced bleeding in patients with high bleeding risk, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and complex PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

Abbreviated DAPT post-PCI is associated with lower all-cause mortality and bleeding without compromising ischemic protection, supporting its use in specific patient populations. Individualized DAPT durations should be considered to balance bleeding and ischemic risks.

Definitions and standardized endpoints for the use of drug-coated balloon in coronary artery disease: consensus document of the Drug Coated Balloon Academic Research Consortium

The Drug Coated Balloon Academic Research Consortium project originated from the lack of standardization and comparability between studies using drug-coated balloons in the treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease. This document is a collaborative effort between academic research organizations and percutaneous coronary intervention societies in Europe, the USA, and Asia. This consensus sought to standardize study designs and endpoints for clinical trials involving drug-coated balloons, including defining angiographic, intravascular, and non-invasive imaging methods for lesion assessment, alongside considerations for post-revascularization pharmaco-therapy. The concept of 'blended therapy', which advocates for combining device strategies, is also discussed. This paper delineates study types, endpoint definitions, follow-up protocols, and analytical approaches, aiming to provide consistency and guidance for interventional cardiologists and trialists.

Effectiveness and Safety of Ticagrelor Monotherapy After Short-Duration Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in PCI Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor, is the standard treatment for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). However, the optimal duration of DAPT remains debated due to the need to balance ischemic event reduction with bleeding risks. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy after short-duration DAPT (1 to 3 months) compared to extended DAPT, focusing on major bleeding and cardiovascular outcomes. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ticagrelor monotherapy after short-duration DAPT to extended DAPT were identified from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Data on major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, and mortality were analyzed, and risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model. Five RCTs involving 32,393 patients were included. Ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced MACCE (RR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.77 to 0.99; p = 0.04) and major bleeding (RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.77; p = 0.0008) compared to extended DAPT. It also significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.99; p = 0.04) and cardiovascular death (RR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.94; p = 0.02). The incidence of myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and stroke were similar between the groups. Net adverse clinical events (NACE) were 27% lower with ticagrelor monotherapy (RR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.85; p <0.0001). In conclusion, ticagrelor monotherapy after short-duration DAPT reduces major bleeding complications without compromising cardiovascular protection. This approach offers a promising strategy to optimize outcomes for PCI patients, particularly those at high bleeding risk. Further studies are needed to refine the optimal DAPT duration in various patient populations, especially those with higher ischemic risk.

De-escalating Dual Antiplatelet Therapy to Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome : A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

The role of transitioning from short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to potent P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains inconclusive.

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of de-escalating DAPT to ticagrelor monotherapy versus standard DAPT from randomized clinical trials in patients with ACS.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 12 December 2024.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized clinical trials comparing de-escalating DAPT to ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor-based standard DAPT for 12 months, specifically in patients with ACS undergoing DES implantation.

DATA EXTRACTION

The coprimary end points were an ischemic end point (composite of death, nonprocedural [spontaneous] myocardial infarction, or stroke) and a bleeding end point (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 or 5 bleeding).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Individual patient data were obtained from 3 trials (TICO [Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus-Eluting Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome], T-PASS [Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Patients Treated With New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents for Acute Coronary Syndrome], and ULTIMATE-DAPT [Ticagrelor alone versus ticagrelor plus aspirin from month 1 to month 12 after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes]), including 9130 randomized patients with ACS; 3132 had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), 3023 had non-STEMI (NSTEMI), and 2975 had unstable angina. The rate of the primary ischemic end point was not different between the ticagrelor monotherapy and standard DAPT groups (1.7% vs. 2.1%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.85 [95% CI, 0.63 to 1.16]). The rate of the primary bleeding end point was lower in the ticagrelor monotherapy group (0.8% vs. 2.5%; HR, 0.30 [CI, 0.21 to 0.45]). These findings were consistent in patients with STEMI, NSTEMI, and unstable angina.

LIMITATION

Other de-escalation strategies for modulating antiplatelet therapy were not included.

CONCLUSION

In patients with ACS undergoing DES implantation, de-escalating DAPT to ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk for major bleeding compared with standard DAPT, without an increase in ischemic events, regardless of the type of ACS.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None. (PROSPERO: CRD42024565855).

Outcomes After Noncardiac Surgery Performed Within 2 Years of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND

Limited data exist on noncardiac surgery patients with prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the contemporary era. The objective was to examine rate, characteristics, and outcomes of patients who underwent noncardiac surgery within 2 years of PCI and develop a risk model of factors that predict long-term postoperative outcomes among patients with recent PCI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients in the Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program database who underwent noncardiac surgery between October 1, 2017 and September 30, 2021 were included. Patients with versus without PCI within 2 years were propensity matched to examine major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a 1-year composite of mortality, revascularization, and rehospitalization for myocardial infarction or stroke. Among patients with recent PCI, multivariable logistic regression was used to develop a risk model to predict 1-year postoperative MACE. Among 334 828 patients undergoing surgery, 2297 (0.68%) had PCI within 2 years. Among 9160 propensity-matched veterans, there was no difference in MACE between patients with and without preceding PCI (hazard ratio [HR], 1.04 [95% CI, 0.96-1.17]). Patients with versus without preceding PCI within 2 years had lower risk of all-cause death (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.72-0.96]) but higher risk of revascularization (HR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.50-2.36]) at 1 year. A 13-component MACE prediction model among patients with recent PCI had moderate discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.73 derivation, 0.72 validation).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients who underwent surgery, risk of MACE did not differ, but the risk of revascularization was higher and all-cause death was lower in patients with versus without recent PCI. A risk model can be used to stratify risk of surgery among patients with preceding PCI.

Aspirin vs. clopidogrel monotherapy beyond 1 month after complex percutaneous coronary intervention: a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the STOPDAPT-3 trial

AIMS

There were no previous studies comparing aspirin vs. P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy following short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a pre-specified subgroup analysis based on complex PCI in the 1-year results of the STOPDAPT-3 (ShorT and OPtimal Duration of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy-3) trial, which randomly compared 1-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy (aspirin group) with 1-month prasugrel monotherapy followed by clopidogrel monotherapy (clopidogrel group). The main analysis in the present study was the 30-day landmark analysis. The co-primary endpoints were cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or stroke) and major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5). In the 30-day landmark analysis (N = 5833), there were 1415 patients (24.3%) who underwent complex PCI. There was a significant interaction between complex PCI and the effect of the aspirin group relative to the clopidogrel group for cardiovascular events (complex PCI: 3.3% vs. 5.2%, non-complex PCI: 4.3% vs. 3.6%, interaction P = 0.04) and net adverse clinical events (complex PCI: 4.8% vs. 7.2%, non-complex PCI: 5.3% vs. 4.4%, interaction P = 0.02), but not for bleeding events (complex PCI: 2.1% vs. 2.7%, non-complex PCI: 1.7% vs. 1.4%, interaction P = 0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

There was a significant interaction between complex PCI and the effect of aspirin monotherapy relative to clopidogrel monotherapy beyond 1 month and up to 1 year for cardiovascular events due to numerically lower risk of aspirin monotherapy in patients with complex PCI, while the effect of aspirin monotherapy relative to clopidogrel monotherapy was not different for bleeding regardless of complex PCI.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ShorT and OPtimal duration of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy after everolimus-eluting cobalt-chromium stent-3 [STOPDAPT-3]; NCT04609111.

Discordance and Performance of the ARC-HBR and PRECISE-DAPT High Bleeding Risk Definitions After Coronary Stenting

BACKGROUND

The aim of the ARC-HBR (Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk) and PRECISE-DAPT (Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) score definitions for high bleeding risk is to identify patients who would benefit from shorter or less intensive antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the ARC-HBR and PRECISE-DAPT score definitions for high bleeding risk in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

Using nationwide registers, all patients in Stockholm, Sweden, who were discharged after coronary stenting with dual antiplatelet therapy (January 1, 2013, to July 1, 2018) were included. Patients were categorized as high bleeding risk according to the 2 risk tools, and risk for bleeding (BARC [Bleeding Academic Research Consortium] types 3-5 or TIMI major or minor) and ischemic events (myocardial infarction or ischemic stroke) within 1 year after discharge was assessed.

RESULTS

Of 7,562 patients, the proportions categorized as high bleeding risk were 27% (2,004 of 7,562) using the ARC-HBR definition and 38% (2,894 of 7,562) using the PRECISE-DAPT score; 22% (1,696 of 7,562) had discordant categorization of high bleeding risk comparing the 2 risk tools. Patients with vs without high bleeding risk according to the ARC-HBR definition had higher risk for BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding (1-year risk 7.1% vs 2.3%; HR: 3.21; 95% CI: 2.47-4.17) and ischemic events (7.8% vs 2.8%; HR: 2.96; 95% CI: 2.31-3.79). Patients with vs without high bleeding risk according to the PRECISE-DAPT score had higher risk for TIMI major or minor bleeding (4.4% vs 2.1%; HR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.63-2.89) and ischemic events (6.2% vs 2.7%; HR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.85-3.05). The PRECISE-DAPT score underestimated bleeding risk across almost all score levels (median absolute difference between observed and predicted 1-year risk 1.1%; Q1-Q3: 0.8%-1.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

There was substantial discordance in the categorization of high bleeding risk between the ARC-HBR definition and the PRECISE-DAPT score. Both tools identified patients at increased bleeding risk, but those patients also had increased ischemic risk. The PRECISE-DAPT score underestimated bleeding risk. Guideline-recommended high bleeding risk definitions may not be generalizable across patient populations, and refined scoring systems are needed.

Evolution of coronary stents: innovations, antithrombotic strategies and future directions

Implantation of drug-eluting stents (DESs) remains central to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and chronic coronary syndromes (CCS). DES platforms, polymers and drugs have evolved significantly to improve deliverability and safety, now being typically thin-strut with a compact layer of biocompatible or bioresorbable polymer, or no polymer at all. Ultra-thin-strut DESs push this concept further, and in some studies perform better than conventional DES, but may recoil in challenging settings such as chronic total occlusion PCI. Stent implantation has also progressed, with greater attention to lesion preparation and poststenting optimisation, increased use of intracoronary imaging helping to recognise and remedy issues. In parallel, antithrombotic therapy for patients undergoing PCI has advanced considerably, with reliable P2Y12 inhibition now possible with the newest agents. As well as progress in controlling other thrombotic risk factors such as hyperlipidaemia, hypertension and diabetes, these developments have contributed to reducing thrombotic risk. As well as preventing stent thrombosis, antithrombotic therapy can reduce the risk of non-PCI-related thrombotic events, not only in the coronary tree but also in the cerebral and peripheral circulation, however it increases bleeding risk. Twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after PCI for ACS (and 6 months after PCI for CCS) remains the default recommended strategy, but given reliable P2Y12 inhibition, good control of ischaemic risk factors and a minimally thrombogenic stent design and deployment, it is rational that earlier de-escalation to monotherapy, particularly with ticagrelor, is often appropriate, reserving longer-duration DAPT for those with highest ischaemic risk but where bleeding risk is not high. A body of trial evidence now supports this. As well as earlier de-escalation of DAPT, future developments in PCI might include increased use of 'leave nothing behind' strategies and further pharmacological options for optimisation of ischaemic risk factors.

Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided Complex PCI in Patients With High Bleeding Risk: A Secondary Analysis of the RENOVATE-COMPLEX PCI Trial

BACKGROUND

Although patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) often have complex coronary artery lesions, it is not known whether intravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves their prognosis. We sought to investigate the benefit of intravascular imaging-guided PCI for complex coronary artery lesions in patients with HBR.

METHODS

This was a secondary analysis of the RENOVATE-COMPLEX-PCI trial (Randomized Controlled Trial of Intravascular Imaging Guidance Versus Angiography-Guidance on Clinical Outcomes After Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) in which patients with complex coronary artery lesions undergoing PCI were enrolled at 20 sites in Korea from May 2018 through May 2021. Patients were randomized to receive intravascular imaging-guided PCI or angiography-guided PCI and classified according to the presence of HBR. The primary end point was target vessel failure, which was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization.

RESULTS

Of 1639 trial population, 478 patients met HBR criteria. There was no significant difference in the risk of the primary end point between HBR and non-HBR patients (11.8% versus 8.2%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.05 [95% CI, 0.72-1.54]; P=0.790). However, patients with HBR were at higher risk for cardiac death or spontaneous target vessel-related myocardial infarction (adjusted HR, 2.04 [95% CI, 1.09-3.80]; P=0.025), all-cause death (adjusted HR, 3.30 [95% CI, 1.93-5.62]; P<0.001), and cardiac death (adjusted HR, 2.36 [95% CI, 1.10-5.09]; P=0.028). Intravascular imaging-guided PCI showed a lower risk of the primary end point compared with angiography-guided PCI in both HBR patients (9.7% versus 15.8%; adjusted HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.31-1.02]; P=0.060) and non-HBR patients (6.9% versus 10.8%; adjusted HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.43-0.99]; P=0.045), without significant interaction (P for interaction=0.796).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with HBR were associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events after complex PCI compared with those without HBR. Intravascular imaging-guided PCI showed a lower risk of the target vessel failure without significant interaction between treatment strategy and the presence of HBR in patients undergoing complex PCI.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03381872.

TEG-Guided Anticoagulation Assessment in Deep Vein Arterialization: A Prospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

Deep vein arterialization (DVA) is an innovative surgical technique aimed at enhancing blood flow in compromised limbs facing amputation. Maintenance of flow postrevascularization is crucial to limb salvage. As this is a new technique, no standardized thromboprophylaxis regime is currently established, and postprocedure thromboprophylaxis is at the discretion of the proceduralist. This study aims to evaluate coagulation profiles using viscoelastic studies in peripheral artery disease patients who underwent DVA, assessing the impact of various postprocedure thromboprophylaxis regimens.

METHODS

Patients (aged > 60 years) undergoing DVA were prospectively evaluated using thromboelastography at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months (2020-2024). Postprocedure thromboprophylaxis included mono antiplatelet therapy (MAPT), MAPT + direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), or DAPT + DOAC. Coagulation profiles were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Among 16 patients (mean age 66.6 years, 75% male/Caucasian), hypertension and hyperlipidemia were present in 91%, and diabetes in 88%. The DAPT + DOAC group showed consistently superior platelet inhibition with the lowest adenosine diphosphate maximum amplitude values throughout baseline (35.65 mm vs. 42.2-65.03 mm in other groups), 1 month (26.7 mm vs. 32.14-69.4 mm), 3 months (27.36 mm vs. 32.2-39.97 mm), and 6 months (43.7 mm vs. 50.2-50.5 mm). MAPT demonstrated the slowest clot strengthening (citrated kaolin angle 65.25° vs. 68.7-71.55°).

CONCLUSION

Thromboelastography with platelet mapping demonstrated enhanced platelet inhibition and reduced clot formation in the DAPT + DOAC group, suggesting the importance of coagulation monitoring.

Potent P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy for Acute Coronary Syndrome

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of aspirin and a P2Y12inhibitor, has been the principal antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic coronary disease. Particularly in patients with ACS, which presents a higher ischemic risk than chronic coronary artery disease, DAPT for up to 12 months is the recommended standard treatment. However, to decrease bleeding events related to the potency of P2Y12inhibitors and a prolonged duration of DAPT, recent studies have suggested P2Y12inhibitor monotherapy after short-term DAPT (1-3 months), which decreased the bleeding risk without an increased ischemic risk. In this article, we discuss the evidence related to the efficacy of a P2Y12inhibitor as single-antiplatelet therapy after short-term DAPT compared with standard DAPT, with a focus on patients with ACS treated with DES.

Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR): a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Balancing the risk of thromboembolism and bleeding after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains clinically challenging. Questions regarding the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) after TAVR still need to be definitively answered.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of NOACs after TAVR in individuals with and without indication for anticoagulation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP on 7 October 2023 together with reference checking and citation searching to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared NOACs versus antiplatelet therapy or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) after TAVR in adults with or without an indication for anticoagulation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods and conducted random-effects pair-wise analyses and network meta-analyses (NMAs). Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and major bleeding. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs with 4808 participants in the NMA. Of these, one compared rivaroxaban versus antiplatelet therapy in people without an indication for anticoagulation after TAVR; one compared apixaban versus antiplatelet therapy in people without an indication for anticoagulation or versus VKA in people with an indication for anticoagulation after TAVR; one compared edoxaban versus VKA in people with an indication for anticoagulation after TAVR; and one compared edoxaban with antiplatelet therapy in people without an indication for anticoagulation after TAVR. The mean age of trial participants was 81 years. Follow-up duration ranged from 6 to 18 months. Overall, we judged the risk of bias in the included trials to be low in all domains except for blinding, which was assessed as high in all four studies. No studies evaluated dabigatran. In people without an indication for anticoagulation, rivaroxaban and apixaban may increase all-cause mortality after TAVR as compared to antiplatelet therapy (rivaroxaban: risk ratio (RR) 1.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 2.46; studies = 1, participants = 1644; moderate-certainty evidence; apixaban: RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.97 to 3.02; studies = 1, participants = 1049; low-certainty evidence), while edoxaban may result in little or no difference (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.27 to 9.36; studies = 1, participants = 229; low-certainty evidence). Low-certainty evidence suggests little or no difference between rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban and antiplatelet therapy in cardiovascular mortality (rivaroxaban: RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.10; studies = 1, participants = 1644; apixaban: RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.65; studies = 1, participants = 1049; edoxaban: RR 7.44, 95% CI 0.39 to 142.38; studies = 1, participants = 229) and between rivaroxaban or edoxaban and antiplatelets in stroke (rivaroxaban: RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.00; studies = 1, participants = 1644; edoxaban: RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.42; studies = 1, participants = 229). While rivaroxaban versus antiplatelets probably increases major bleeding after TAVR (RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.65; studies = 1, participants = 1644; moderate-certainty evidence), there may be little or no difference between apixaban and antiplatelet therapy (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.64; studies = 1, participants = 1049; low-certainty evidence). It is unclear if edoxaban has an effect on major bleeding, although the point estimate suggests increased bleeding (versus antiplatelets: RR 2.13, 95% CI 0.54 to 8.30; studies = 1, participants = 229; low-certainty evidence). In people with an indication for anticoagulation, low-certainty evidence suggests apixaban or edoxaban may result in little to no difference in our predefined primary efficacy outcomes after TAVR when compared to VKA (all-cause mortality: apixaban: RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.77; studies = 1, participants = 451; edoxaban: RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.20; studies = 1, participants = 1426; cardiovascular mortality: apixaban: RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.70; studies = 1, participants = 451; edoxaban: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.57; studies = 1, participants = 1426; stroke: apixaban: RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.70; studies = 1, participants = 451; edoxaban: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.34; studies = 1, participants = 1426). While apixaban may result in a similar rate of bleeding as VKA in this population, edoxaban probably increases major bleeding after TAVR in people with an indication for anticoagulation (apixaban: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.54; studies = 1, participants = 451; low-certainty evidence; edoxaban: RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.93; studies = 1, participants = 1426; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In people without an indication for oral anticoagulation, rivaroxaban and apixaban may increase all-cause mortality when compared to antiplatelet therapy, while edoxaban may result in little or no difference. There might be little or no difference between rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban and antiplatelet therapy in cardiovascular mortality, and between rivaroxaban or edoxaban and antiplatelets in stroke. While rivaroxaban probably increases major bleeding following TAVR, there might be little or no difference between apixaban and antiplatelet therapy, and the effect of edoxaban on major bleeding remains unclear. In people with an indication for anticoagulation, apixaban and edoxaban may be as effective as VKA in preventing all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and stroke. Apixaban may lead to a similar rate of major bleeding as VKA in this population. However, edoxaban probably increases major bleeding following TAVR when compared to VKA. Our NMA did not show superiority of one NOAC over another for any of the primary outcomes. Head-to-head trials directly comparing NOACs against each other are required to increase the certainty of the evidence.

Antiplatelet strategy for patients with acute coronary syndrome and chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Patients with both acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) face heightened risks of adverse cardiovascular events and bleeding. An optimal antiplatelet strategy for this patient population is needed.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate comparative advantages of clopidogrel vs. ticagrelor in the choice of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) strategies for patients with ACS combined with CKD, while also exploring the appropriate duration of DAPT in the presence of CKD. Relevant studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and major bleeding. Data were analyzed using RevMan 5.4.1, and STATA 14 was used to assess publication bias. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024593764).

Results

Six studies involving 9,947 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with a reduced risk of MACE (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.99; P = 0.04) and stroke (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45-0.96; P = 0.03) in patients receiving DAPT. No significant differences were observed in all-cause mortality, major bleeding, cardiovascular death, or acute myocardial infarction. Three studies on DAPT duration showed a consistent trend, indicating that shortening DAPT duration did not benefit patients.

Conclusions

In patients with ACS combined with CKD, ticagrelor-based DAPT has advantages over clopidogrel-based DAPT, which is associated with a lower incidence of MACE. And shortening the duration of DAPT does not improve clinical outcomes.

Short Versus One-Year Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: an Updated Meta-Analysis

The present guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 6 to 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), with recent trials assessing the safety and efficacy of shortening DAPT duration to ≤3 months. A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central databases identified studies comparing short DAPT, followed by P2Y12i monotherapy (78% ticagrelor) versus standard 12-month DAPT in patients who underwent PCI with a drug-eluting stent. A total of 9 randomized controlled trials, including 42,770 patients (short DAPT n = 21,370, 49.96%), of whom 28,307 (66.18%) presented with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Short DAPT significantly reduced net adverse clinical events (NACEs) (risk ratio [RR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67 to 0.91, p = 0.001, I2 = 62%), major bleeding (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.73, p <0.001, I2 = 63%), and any bleeding (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.72, p <0.001, I2 = 77%) at 12 months compared with 1-year DAPT. No significant differences were observed in major adverse cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, mortality, or revascularization. Ticagrelor monotherapy after short DAPT further reduced major adverse cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99, p = 0.040, I² = 22%), NACE (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61 to 0.89, p = 0.001, I² = 68%), and major bleeding (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.78, p <0.001, I² = 71%) compared with 1-year DAPT; however, the test for subgroup interaction (Pinteraction >0.05) for clopidogrel subgroup was not significant. P2Y12i monotherapy reduced the risk of NACEs (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.66 to 0.90, p = 0.001, I2 = 52%, Pinteraction = 0.58) and major bleeding (RR 0.44, 95%CI 0.35 to 0.55, p <0.001, I2 = 0%, Pinteraction <0.01) in the ACS cohort but not in the chronic coronary syndrome cohort. In conclusion, short DAPT for ≤3 months followed by P2Y12i monotherapy (particularly, ticagrelor) was associated with decreased NACEs and bleeding without differences in other outcomes and should be considered a favorable option in patients with either ACS or chronic coronary syndrome after PCI with a drug-eluting stent.

Prolonged antithrombotic treatment after de-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients after acute coronary syndrome - which strategy should be applied? The ELECTRA-SIRIO 2 investigators standpoint

De-escalation of dual antiplatelet (DAPT) intensity may be considered in patients with high risk of bleeding after acute coronary syndrome. Some high risk patients after de-escalation may require antithrombotic therapy prolonged over 12 months. With the current guideline recommended strategies, there are some doubts and uncertainties with respect to the transition period. Herein we discuss these issues more extensively. De-escalation of DAPT, intended to decrease bleeding risk, may be accomplished by switching to a drug with reduced antiplatelet effect (de-escalation by switching), by reducing the dose (de-escalation by dose reduction), or by removing an antiplatelet agent (de-escalation by discontinuation). The dilemma concerns patients who have undergone scheduled, early de-escalation of DAPT to monotherapy with a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor at standard dose, as in the TWILIGHT study. The dilemma is even greater in patients whose de-escalation consisted of both reduction in dose of one and discontinuation of the other antiplatelet agent. This strategy is currently being tested in the ELECTRA-SIRIO 2 study. When making a therapeutic decision in patients who meet the criteria for prolonged dual antithrombotic therapy we suggest considering the previously applied DAPT de-escalation strategy. In general, unless the risk of ischemic events has increased since prior de-escalation, there is no scientific rationale for escalating antithrombotic treatment in a patient previously de-escalated (through reduction or discontinuation). Regardless of the treatment strategy, its effectiveness depends on the patient's adherence to medical recommendations.

Bleeding Risk in Elderly Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Comprehensive Review

The care of elderly patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) presents unique challenges due to age-related physiological and functional changes. With the global population aging rapidly, this demographic change affects a growing proportion of individuals requiring PCI. However, advanced age is associated with increased susceptibility to ischemic and bleeding complications, driven by physiological changes such as altered coagulation, vascular stiffness, and declining organ function. These factors complicate the management of CAD, making the balance between reducing thrombotic events and minimizing bleeding risks particularly challenging. Antiplatelet therapy is central to post-PCI management, but its benefits and risks differ significantly in elderly patients compared to younger populations. Tools like the PRECISE-DAPT and ARC-HBR provide guidance on dual antiplatelet therapy duration and bleeding risk stratification. However, their applicability and predictive accuracy in elderly patients remain areas of active investigation. This underscores the need for improved risk assessment methods tailored to the unique needs of aging individuals. In this review, we explore the epidemiological, pathophysiological, and clinical aspects of CAD in elderly patients, emphasizing the impact of aging on disease presentation and outcomes. Furthermore, we assess current risk stratification tools and discuss their limitations in predicting adverse events in older populations. By synthesizing these insights, we aim to highlight the complexities of managing elderly CAD patients and identify opportunities for optimizing personalized care to achieve better outcomes in this vulnerable group.

Clickable liposomes for on-demand reversal of antiplatelet drugs: Towards a safe management of bleeding risks associated with antithrombotic therapy

Antithrombotic drugs are widely used to prevent thrombotic events in patients with cardiovascular diseases. However, they all carry varying degrees of bleeding risk. Currently, there are no approved reversal agents for antiplatelet medications, which limits their further clinical application and poses challenges in managing bleeding complications. In this proof-of-concept study, we explore the feasibility of a reversal agent system using ticagrelor and a corresponding liposome-based antidote. Specifically, we developed an azide-functionalized ticagrelor derivative (Tic-N3) and a clickable DBCO-modified liposome (Lipo-DBCO) to enable controlled reversal of antiplatelet activity. Our findings demonstrate that the azide modification does not compromise the antiplatelet efficacy and biocompatibility of ticagrelor. The antiplatelet effects of Tic-N3 were successfully reversed by Lipo-DBCO, as validated through platelet aggregation assays and in vivo mouse models of tail bleeding and liver injury. Additionally, we investigated the thiol-maleimide pairing as an alternative system, enhancing the versatility of our approach. This strategy reveals the possibility and clinical application prospects of antiplatelet drug reversal agents, offering a promising solution for the safe management of bleeding risks associated with antiplatelet therapy.

Impact of ticagrelor with or without aspirin on total and recurrent bleeding and ischaemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention: a sub-study of the TWILIGHT trial

AIMS

In standard time-to-first event analysis, early aspirin discontinuation followed by ticagrelor monotherapy has been shown to reduce bleeding without increasing ischaemic complications compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We evaluated whether these treatment effects are preserved when recurrent events are considered.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this TWILIGHT trial post-hoc analysis, we assessed the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy on the total number of events that occurred over the 12-month follow-up among 7119 high-risk patients randomized to aspirin or placebo in addition to ticagrelor at 3 months post-PCI if event-free and adherent to treatment. There were 391 patients with at least one Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding (primary endpoint). Of those, 28 (7.2%) had a recurrent event. The total number of BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding events was 148 in the ticagrelor monotherapy arm compared with 278 with ticagrelor plus aspirin arm (P < 0.001). Among 272 patients with at least one key secondary ischaemic endpoint (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), 37 (13.6%) sustained a recurrent event. Total ischaemic events were similar (155 vs. 159) in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Among selected high-risk patients who underwent PCI and completed 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy followed by ticagrelor with or without aspirin, recurrent bleeding was less common than recurrent ischaemic events over 12 months. Analysis of total events indicates that ticagrelor monotherapy continues to be more effective than ticagrelor plus aspirin in reducing bleeding without a signal of ischaemic harm.

An aspirin-free strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes: a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the STOPDAPT-3 trial

AIMS

Safety of aspirin-free strategy immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for cardiovascular events in patients with diabetes was unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted the prespecified subgroup analysis on diabetes in the STOPDAPT-3 trial, which randomly compared prasugrel (3.75 mg/day) monotherapy (2984 patients) to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with prasugrel and aspirin (2982 patients) in patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk. The co-primary endpoints were major bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5) and cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or stroke) at 1 month. Of 5966 study patients, there were 2715 patients (45.5%) with diabetes. Patients with diabetes more often had chronic coronary syndrome, heart failure or cardiogenic shock, and comorbidities than those without. Patients with diabetes compared to those without had higher incidences of major bleeding and cardiovascular events. Regardless of diabetes, the effect of no-aspirin relative to DAPT was not different for the co-primary bleeding (diabetes: 5.05% vs. 5.47%; HR, 0.92; 95%CI, 0.66-1.28 and non-diabetes: 3.99% vs. 4.07%; HR, 0.98; 95%CI, 0.69-1.38; P for interaction = 0.81) and cardiovascular (diabetes: 5.54% vs. 5.15%; HR, 1.08; 95%CI, 0.78-1.49 and non-diabetes: 2.95% vs. 2.47%; HR, 1.20; 95%CI, 0.79-1.82; P for interaction = 0.70) endpoints. The incidences of subacute definite or probable stent thrombosis and any coronary revascularization were higher in the no-aspirin group than in the DAPT group regardless of diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

The effects of an aspirin-free prasugrel monotherapy (3.75 mg/day) relative to DAPT for major bleeding and cardiovascular events were not different regardless of diabetes.

Pharmacotherapeutic options for coronary thrombosis treatment: where are we today?

INTRODUCTION

Advances in pharmacotherapy for coronary thrombosis treatment and prevention have transformed the clinical outcomes of patients with coronary artery disease but increased the complexity of therapeutic decision-making. Improvements in percutaneous coronary intervention techniques and stent design have reduced the incidence of thrombotic complications, which consequently has increased the challenge of adequately powering clinical trials of novel antithrombotic strategies for efficacy outcomes. Knowledge of the pathophysiology of coronary thrombosis and the characteristics of antithrombotic drugs can help with therapeutic decisions.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the pathophysiology of coronary thrombosis and the mechanisms of action of drugs developed for its treatment, provides an overview of the key issues in decision-making, and highlights key areas for further work in order to guide clinicians on how to individualize risk management and address gaps in the evidence base.

EXPERT OPINION

Individualization of antithrombotic therapy regimens has become a vital part of optimizing risk management in people with coronary thrombosis. A critical appraisal of the strengths and limitations of available drugs and the evidence supporting the use of different antithrombotic combinations is intended to provide direction to clinicians and point the way toward further improvements in pharmacotherapy for coronary thrombosis treatment and prevention.

Rationale and design of the STOP-IMH randomised trial: Safety of ticagrelor monotherapy after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction and the effect on intramyocardial haemorrhage

Background

Ticagrelor monotherapy after 1-3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has shown to be effective and safe after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including in patients with an ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Direct omission of aspirin could further reduce bleeding complications and may reduce the incidence and expansion of intramyocardial haemorrhage (IMH), a frequent complication after revascularisation for a STEMI.

Methods

This multicentre open label pilot study randomises 200 STEMI patients within 24 hours after primary PCI and before the first subsequent dose of aspirin to ticagrelor monotherapy or ticagrelor plus aspirin for twelve months. As IMH is more frequently observed after an anterior STEMI, IMH and infarct size will be determined with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in 60 anterior STEMI patients. In this subgroup, blood samples will be analysed for biochemical outcomes.

Results

The primary safety endpoint consists of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events, and the primary efficacy endpoint is infarct size on CMR. Secondary efficacy endpoints consist of the incidence and extent of IMH determined by CMR, and of clinical bleeding events. Other endpoints include all-cause mortality and biochemical outcomes.

Conclusion

The STOP-IMH pilot study compares ticagrelor monotherapy with ticagrelor plus aspirin directly after primary PCI in 200 STEMI patients. We aim to provide a signal of safety regarding ischemic events for the direct omission of aspirin after primary PCI, and to compare the infarct size by CMR between the two treatment strategies in the first week after primary PCI.

[Management of acute coronary syndrome]

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the leading cause of death worldwide. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) encompasses a spectrum of diagnoses ranging from unstable angina pectoris to myocardial infarction with and without ST-segment elevation and frequently presents as the first clinical manifestation. It is crucial in this scenario to perform a timely and comprehensive assessment of patients by evaluating the clinical presentation, electrocardiogram and laboratory diagnostics using highly sensitivity cardiac troponin in order to initiate a timely and risk-adapted continuing treatment with immediate or early invasive coronary angiography. In addition to revascularization, the subsequent antithrombotic and lipid-lowering treatment plays a major role in the further secondary prevention of CAD. The choice and duration of medication over time should be tailored to the individual risk profile of the patient. Furthermore, appropriate patient education regarding risk factor management is of paramount importance.

Optimal management of high bleeding risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: Where do we stand?

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are the mainstay of treating obstructive coronary artery disease. However, procedural planning and individualization of the procedure is necessary for different patient phenotypes to optimize outcomes. Specifically, post-PCI pharmacotherapy with antiplatelets complicates the management of patients at high bleeding risk due to comorbidities, such as atrial fibrillation. Aiming to limit post-procedural adverse events and reduce the procedure-related bleeding risk, several novel technologies and hypotheses have been tested in clinical practice. Such frontiers include limiting the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy or even prescribing single regimens, using drug-coated balloons for performing the intervention and the effect of imaging-guided PCI in optimizing stent expansion. Furthermore, specific instruction in different patient phenotypes, such as atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease, are emerging, as despite both pathologies being considered at high bleeding risk, one size does not fit all. Thus, our review will provide all the recent updates on the field as well as algorithms and expert opinions on how to manage this, particularly common, phenotype of patient.

Relevance of High Bleeding Risk and Postdischarge Bleeding in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Bleeding avoidance strategies are critical in the modern era of percutaneous coronary intervention; however, most efforts are geared toward reducing access-related complications. Improvements in procedural techniques (radial access, improved procedural anticoagulation regimens, etc) and modifications in postdischarge pharmacotherapy (shortened dual antiplatelet therapy, genotype-guided P2Y12 inhibition, etc) that led to a decline in bleeding related to percutaneous procedures were largely offset by increases in complexity and performance of percutaneous coronary intervention in high-risk patients. Among patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome, aggressive antiplatelet regimens with potent P2Y12 inhibitors are typically prescribed for a longer duration, prioritizing reduction in ischemic events over bleeding risk. Because postdischarge bleeding connotes an adverse prognosis similar to an ischemic event, postprocedure freedom from adverse outcomes can be best tailored by individualizing and recognizing the patient's bleeding and ischemic risks. This review of the contemporary and historical literature (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library) summarizes the available data, provides strategies to navigate these complex decisions, and helps individualize antithrombotic therapy.

Sex Differences in the Safety and Efficacy of Different Durations of DAPT After PCI

Background

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined the clinical impact of abbreviating the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and have reported outcomes in men and women.

Objectives

The authors examined the safety and efficacy of different durations of DAPT following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in men and women.

Methods

We searched Cochrane, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases for RCTs that compared any 2 of 1, 3, 6, or 12 months of DAPT after PCI and reported outcomes in men and women. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to examine sex-based differences in net adverse clinical events (NACE), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and bleeding.

Results

Fifteen RCTs were included, comprising 44,610 men (74.7%) and 15,132 women (25.3%). No difference in NACE or MACE was observed between 1, 3, 6, or 12 months of DAPT in both sexes. In both men and women, 1 and 3 months of DAPT were each associated with lower risk of bleeding compared with 12 months of DAPT. In women, 3 months of DAPT was associated with a lower risk of bleeding compared with 6 months. Similar results were found in sensitivity analysis of acute coronary syndrome-only trials.

Conclusions

No significant sex-based differences in NACE or MACE were observed with different durations of DAPT after PCI, while a lower bleeding risk was observed with shorter DAPT (1-3 months) among both sexes. This suggests that shorter DAPT may be preferred in both sexes following PCI, especially in those with high bleeding risk.

Short-Term Outcomes of Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy Following Popliteal and Infrapopliteal Endovascular Therapy: Data From Dutch Chronic Lower Limb-Threatening Ischemia Registry (THRILLER)

OBJECTIVE

There is a lack of consensus regarding the optimal antithrombotic therapy (ATT) after popliteal and infrapopliteal (PIP) endovascular therapy (EVT). Currently, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 3 months and single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) are the most prescribed regimens in the Netherlands. Thus far, no randomized comparison has been performed on the optimal ATT approach. Therefore, this study compared the efficacy and safety of 3-month DAPT with SAPT following PIP EVT.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a multicenter registry.

METHODS

The Dutch chronic lower limb-threatening ischemia registry (THRILLER) collected prospective data on patients enrolled between January 2021 and October 2023. As for ATT, only patients prescribed antiplatelet therapy (APT), were included in this analysis. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of 3-month major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs, ie, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular event, cardiovascular death), major adverse limb events (MALEs, ie, major amputation, reintervention), and non-cardiovascular death. Secondary efficacy outcomes were 3-month MACE, MALE, and all-cause mortality. The primary safety outcome was major bleeding according to the 'Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction' (TIMI) classification. Descriptive statistics and Cox proportional hazard models were applied.

RESULTS

In total, 460 of 840 THRILLER patients used DAPT or SAPT as ATT and were therefore included in the analysis. Of these, 322 (70%) received DAPT and 138 (30%) received SAPT. In total, 73 (15.9%) primary efficacy outcomes were observed of which 21 (15.2%) events in the SAPT group and 52 (16.1%) events in the DAPT group. No significant differences were observed between SAPT and DAPT for the primary efficacy outcomes or any of the secondary efficacy outcomes. In both groups, one case of major bleeding was observed.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that 3 months of DAPT is not superior to SAPT. A well-powered randomized trial is warranted to assess the efficacy and safety of post-procedural DAPT in chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI) patients undergoing PIP EVT.

CLINICAL IMPACT

This manuscript reports on the efficacy and safety outcomes of 3 months of DAPT versus SAPT, which are commonly chosen therapies following popliteal and infrapopliteal endovascular therapy. No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause death, major amputation, or major bleeding. Therefore, 3 months of DAPT does not seem superior to SAPT. These results suggest that SAPT appears to be a sufficient alternative when considering 3 months of DAPT. Further research should verify these outcomes and focus on the efficacy and safety of prolonged DAPT suppletion after endovascular therapy.

Safety of combined drug use in patients with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases: an analysis based on the spontaneous reporting database of adverse drug reactions in Hubei Province

Objective

There is a lack of studies investigating the safety of combination regimens specifically for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of combination drugs for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases using real-world data.

Methods

We analyzed adverse drug reaction data received by the Hubei Adverse Drug Reaction Center from the first quarter of 2014 to the fourth quarter of 2022. The safety of combined drugs for cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases in different people was assessed using the association rule method and Ω shrinkage measurement.

Results

A total of 53,038 reports were included in this study, revealing 9 signals of adverse reactions caused by combination drugs. The strongest signal found in this study was jaundice caused by the combination of amlodipine and atorvastatin (Ω 0.025:3.08, lift: 1116.69, conviction: 1.75). Additionally, the combination of aspirin with other drugs was associated with hemorrhaging in various organs. Female patients showed a cold signal when taking vitamin C and vitamin B6 together compared to male patients (Ω 0.025:0.89, lift: 7.15, conviction: 1.12). Patients under 60 years old had a palpitations signal when combining eritrea bei sha Tanzania and felodipine (Ω 0.025:0.41, lift: 14.65, conviction: 3.8), and an erythema signal when combining nifedipine (Ω 0.025:0.23, lift: 8.17, conviction: 1.077).

Conclusion

Among the 9 signals identified in this study, 4 were off-label adverse drug reactions that require further clinical research for exploration and confirmation, in order to provide more scientifically informed drug labeling. Five adverse events associated with aspirin-induced bleeding were identified. Notably, different adverse drug reactions were observed in different populations, suggesting the need for future studies to expedite the development of personalized medicine.

Genotype-Guided P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy Within 7 Days of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in High Bleeding Risk Patients: The CHAMP Trial - A Pilot Study and Safety Assessment

OBJECTIVE

To test the feasibility and safety of genotype guidance in the selection of P2Y12 monotherapy within 1 week of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) among patients with high bleeding risk (HBR).

PATIENT AND METHODS

The study was a single-center, open-label, pilot trial. Patients (n=100) with HBR (as defined by an academic research consortium) after successful PCI received dual antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel and aspirin. Following availability of cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) genotype results (mean, 2.9 days), aspirin was discontinued. Normal, rapid, or ultrarapid CYP2C19 metabolizers continued clopidogrel monotherapy for 90 days whereas loss-of-function allele carriers switched to prasugrel or ticagrelor monotherapy. The primary safety endpoints were a composite of post-dismissal cardiac death/spontaneous myocardial infarction less than 30 days or stent thrombosis <90 days of discharge. The subjects also underwent post-dismissal assessment for BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) type 3 or 5 bleeding, all-cause death, any MI, and/or repeat revascularization up to 90 days.

RESULTS

There were 98 patients with complete data (median age, 76.5 years, 36% women; 49% acute coronary syndrome). Sixty-nine (70.4%) were normal, rapid, or ultrarapid metabolizers and continued clopidogrel monotherapy, and 29 (29.6%) were intermediate CYP2C19 metabolizers and received monotherapy with prasugrel (n=21) or ticagrelor (n=8). The mean duration of dual antiplatelet therapy was 5.1 days. During 90-day follow-up, no patient died, there was one possible stent thrombosis, and three patients on clopidogrel had Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 bleeding events.

CONCLUSION

Genotype-guided P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy within a week of PCI is feasible and likely safe in patients with HBR (CHAMP [Clopidogrel With High Bleeding Risk and Adverse Events With Monotherapy in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions]; NCT05223335).

Therapeutic strategies aiming at the reduction of the antiplatelet intensity should not overlook the ischemic risk in patients with coronary syndromes

De-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is gaining traction as a strategy to reduce bleeding risks while ensuring ischemic outcomes. Undiscriminating de-escalation, notably in patients with high ischemic risk, might expose them to major adverse cardiac events. Platelet function and genetic tests are emerging tools to guide de-escalation, but both present specific drawbacks. Recent meta-analyses have aimed to consolidate the findings of individual trials to provide clearer insights. Yet, limitations remain for patients with concomitant high bleeding and ischemic risks. These high-risk patients are frequently underrepresented in clinical trials, and, therefore, currently available guidelines lack evidence-based recommendations for this subset. While DAPT de-escalation strategies hold promise, the choice of approach, whether clinically or assay-guided, remains complex and should be individualized.

Patient Management Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a mainstay procedure for the treatment of coronary artery disease. PCI techniques have evolved considerably since the advent of PCI in 1978, and with this evolution in techniques has come changes in the best practices for patient management following PCI. The objective of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of key considerations in patient management following PCI. The long-term management of patients post-PCI should follow 3 main principles: 1) lifestyle modification and reduction of risk factors; 2) implementation of secondary prevention therapies; and 3) timely detection of restenosis. Best practices in achieving these principles include promotion of smoking cessation, regular physical activity, and a healthy diet, as well as blood pressure, diabetes mellitus, lipid, and weight management; prescription of secondary prevention therapies balancing ischemic and bleeding risk; and avoidance of routine surveillance for restenosis.

Aspirin vs. clopidogrel monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention: 1-year follow-up of the STOPDAPT-3 trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There was no previous trial comparing aspirin monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy following short dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents.

METHODS

In the STOPDAPT-3, patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk (HBR) were randomly assigned to either 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and prasugrel followed by aspirin monotherapy (aspirin group) or 1-month prasugrel monotherapy followed by clopidogrel monotherapy (clopidogrel group). This secondary analysis compared aspirin monotherapy with clopidogrel monotherapy by the 30-day landmark analysis. The co-primary endpoints were the cardiovascular endpoint defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischaemic stroke and the bleeding endpoint defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5.

RESULTS

Of the 6002 assigned patients, 5833 patients (aspirin group: N = 2920 and clopidogrel group: N = 2913) were included in the 30-day landmark analysis. Median age was 73 (interquartile range 64-80) years, women 23.4%, acute coronary syndrome 74.6%, and high bleeding risk 54.1%. The assigned monotherapy was continued at 1 year in 87.5% and 87.2% in the aspirin and clopidogrel groups, respectively. The incidence rates beyond 30 days and up to 1 year were similar between the aspirin and clopidogrel groups for both cardiovascular endpoint [4.5 and 4.5 per 100 person-year, hazard ratio 1.00 (95% confidence interval .77-1.30), P = .97], and bleeding endpoint [2.0 and 1.9, hazard ratio 1.02 (95% confidence interval .69-1.52), P = .92].

CONCLUSIONS

Aspirin monotherapy compared with clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with similar cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes beyond 1 month and up to 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (STOPDAPT-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04609111).

Ticagrelor monotherapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: An individual patient-level meta-analysis from TICO and T-PASS trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) tend to be excluded or under-represented in randomized clinical trials evaluating the effects of potent P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT).

METHODS

Individual patient data were pooled from randomized clinical trials that included STEMI patients undergoing drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation and compared ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term (≤3 months) DAPT versus ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT in terms of centrally adjudicated clinical outcomes. The co-primary outcomes were efficacy outcome (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and safety outcome (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding) at 1 year.

FINDINGS

The pooled cohort contained 2,253 patients with STEMI. The incidence of the primary efficacy outcome did not differ between the ticagrelor monotherapy group and the ticagrelor-based DAPT group (1.8% versus 2.0%; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49-1.61; p = 0.684). There was no difference in cardiac death between the groups (0.6% versus 0.7%; HR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.32-2.46; p = 0.822). The incidence of the primary safety outcome was significantly lower in the ticagrelor monotherapy group (2.3% versus 4.0%; HR = 0.56; 95% CI = 0.35-0.92; p = 0.020). No heterogeneity of treatment effects was observed for the primary outcomes across subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with STEMI treated with DES implantation, ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term DAPT was associated with lower major bleeding without an increase in the risk of ischemic events compared with ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT. Further research is necessary to extend these findings to non-Asian patients.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Biotronik (Bülach, Switzerland).

Major Bleeding and Mortality After Revascularization of Left Main Disease

BACKGROUND

The incidence and prognostic impact of major bleeding (MB) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) are unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to investigate the rates and outcomes of MB after LMCAD revascularization.

METHODS

In the EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, 1,905 patients with unprotected LMCAD were randomized to undergo PCI (n = 948) or CABG (n = 957) and followed up for 5 years. MB was defined as TIMI major or minor bleeding, BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) types 3 to 5 bleeding, or any overt bleeding requiring blood transfusion. The association between MB and subsequent mortality was assessed in time-adjusted Cox regression models.

RESULTS

At 5 years, 217 patients (11.4%) had at least 1 MB event. Rates of 5-year MB were 7.9% after PCI vs 14.8% after CABG (OR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.36-0.65; P < 0.0001). However, in-hospital MB was lower after PCI (3.8% vs 13.5%; OR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.17-0.37), whereas postdischarge MB was lower after CABG (4.5% vs 2.0%; OR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.33-3.09; Pinteraction < 0.0001). All 41 postdischarge MB events after PCI occurred in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. MB events within 5 years were associated with a higher subsequent risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.95-3.77; P < 0.0001), whether in-hospital or postdischarge (Pinteraction = 1.00) and after both PCI and CABG (Pinteraction = 0.95), driven both by increased cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In the EXCEL trial, CABG resulted in higher 5-year rates of all MB and in-hospital MB, although postdischarge MB was more frequent after PCI. MB after both procedures was associated with increased cardiovascular and noncardiovascular mortality within 5 years. (Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization [EXCEL]; NCT01205776).

Looking Back, Leaning Forward-A Contemporary Overview of Acute Coronary Syndrome

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the most common cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide [...].

Breaking boundaries: Ticagrelor monotherapy in high-risk patients

Atherosclerotic plaque formation is a leading cause of arterial thrombosis that significantly impacts global health by instigating major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) like myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke. Platelets are central to this process, leading to the development of antiplatelet therapies, to mitigate MACE risks. The combination of aspirin with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor known as dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the standard for post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) aimed at reducing ischemic events. However, DAPT's associated bleeding risks, particularly in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients, require a balanced approach to optimize therapeutic outcomes. Recent advancements have led to the exploration of ticagrelor monotherapy as a promising strategy after short-term DAPT to reduce bleeding risks while preserving ischemic protection. This review manuscript focuses on ticagrelor monotherapy for HBR patients with discussion on optimal timing, patient selection, and treatment duration. It highlights ticagrelor's broad efficacy in diverse patient sub-groups and outlines its superiority over aspirin (ASA) and clopidogrel monotherapies. Trials such as TICO, TWILIGHT, GLOBAL LEADERS, and ULTIMATE-DAPT as well as literature meta-analyses validate ticagrelor monotherapy's role in lowering mortality and clinical adverse events versus conventional DAPT. The review endorses a personalized treatment regimen, beginning with DAPT before moving to ticagrelor monotherapy, as a balanced method for managing both bleeding and ischemic risks in post-PCI acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, especially those facing higher bleeding threats.

Secondary prevention therapies following percutaneous coronary intervention or acute coronary syndrome in patients with diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus (DM) promotes atherosclerosis, leading to increased risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Diabetics represent a challenging subset of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or who have experienced an acute coronary syndrome (ACS), a subset characterized by higher rates of recurrent ischemic events compared with non-diabetics. These events are caused by both patient-related accelerated atherosclerotic disease progression and worse stent-related adverse clinical outcomes translating into a higher risk for repeat revascularization. In addition, DM is paradoxically associated with an increased risk of major bleeding following PCI or an ACS. Secondary prevention therapies following PCI or an ACS in diabetic patients are therefore of paramount importance. This mini review focuses on the currently available evidence regarding short- and long-term secondary prevention treatments for diabetic patients undergoing PCI or who have experienced an ACS.

Associations Between Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Score and Long-Term Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Analysis of More Than 27,000 Patients

BACKGROUND

The dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) score was developed to identify patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) who are likely to derive benefit (score ≥ 2) or harm (score < 2) from extended DAPT beyond 1 year after PCI in terms of ischemic and bleeding outcomes. We examined the associations between DAPT score at index PCI and long-term mortality from an all-comers PCI registry in patients receiving DAPT according to the standard of care.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined prospectively collected data from the Melbourne Interventional Group PCI database (2005-2018) and grouped patients as having DAPT score ≥ 2 or < 2. Long-term mortality was assessed from the Australian National Death Index linkage. The primary end point was long-term mortality as determined using survival analysis. Secondary end points included in-hospital events and 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularisation.

RESULTS

Of 27,740 study patients, 9402 (33.9%) had DAPT score ≥ 2. Patients with DAPT score ≥ 2 were younger, included more women, and had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. Patients with DAPT score ≥ 2 had higher in-hospital mortality (3.0% vs 1.0%), major bleeding (2.3% vs 1.6%), 30-day MACE (7.1% vs 3.1%), and long-term mortality at a median follow-up of 5.17 years (21.9% vs 16.5%) P < 0.001 for all.

CONCLUSIONS

One-third of all-comer patients undergoing PCI had a DAPT score ≥ 2 with greater short-term ischemic and bleeding risk, and higher long-term mortality. Risk assessment with the DAPT score may guide the duration and intensity of DAPT beyond the early post-PCI period.

Should We Use Aspirin or P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy in Stable Ischemic Heart Disease?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the recent evidence and guideline recommendations on aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and provide insights into future directions on this topic, which involves transition to a personalized assessment of bleeding and thrombotic risks.

RECENT FINDINGS

It has been questioned whether the evidence for aspirin as the foundational component of secondary prevention in patients with coronary artery disease aligns with contemporary pharmaco-invasive strategies. The recent HOST-EXAM study randomized patients who had received dual antiplatelet therapy for 6 to 18 months without ischemic or major bleeding events to either clopidogrel or aspirin for a further 24 months, and demonstrated that the patients in the clopidogrel arm had significantly lower rates of both thrombotic and bleeding complications compared to those in the aspirin arm. The patient-level PANTHER meta-analysis showed that in patients with established coronary artery disease, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was associated with lower rates of myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis as well as gastrointestinal bleeding and hemorrhagic stroke compared to aspirin monotherapy, albeit with similar rates of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and major bleeding. Long-term low-dose aspirin is recommended for secondary prevention in patients with stable ischemic heart disease, with clopidogrel monotherapy being acknowledged as a feasible alternative. Dual antiplatelet therapy for six months after percutaneous coronary intervention remains the standard recommendation for patients with stable ischemic heart disease. However, the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy may be shortened and followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy or prolonged based on individualized evaluation of the patient's risk profile.

Pathological evaluation of predictors for delayed endothelial coverage after currently available drug-eluting stent implantation in coronary arteries: Impact of lesions with acute and chronic coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after currently available drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation to prevent stent thrombosis (ST) remains controversial. Delayed healing is frequently identified as a leading cause of ST in the early phase. However, a thorough pathological investigation into strut coverage after currently available DES implantation is lacking-a gap addressed in the current study.

METHODS

From our autopsy registry of 199 stented lesions, 4,713 struts from 66 currently available DES-stented lesions with an implant duration ≤370 days were histologically evaluated. Endothelial coverage was defined as the presence of luminal endothelial cells overlying struts and an underlying smooth muscle cell layer. The stented lesions were classified into acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (n = 40) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) (n = 26) groups and were compared. Endothelial coverage predictors were identified through logistic analysis.

RESULTS

Although ACS and CCS lesions presented comparable clinical characteristics, including age, sex, and cause of death, the latter exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of chronic kidney disease and hemodialysis than the former (33.3% vs. 65.2%; P = .02, 7.7% vs. 30.4%; P = .02). The poststent implant median duration was significantly shorter in ACS lesions than in CCS lesions (13 [IQR 5-26 days] vs. 40 [IQR 16-233 days]; P < .01). The endothelial coverage percentage was 3.5% at 30 days and 27.7% at 90 days after currently available DES implantation. Multivariable logistic regression analysis implicated implant duration of ≤90 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.009; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.006-0.012; P < .01), superficial calcification (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.07-0.17; P < .01), ACS culprit site (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.94; P = .039), and circumferentially durable polymer-coated DES (OR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.24-0.41; P < .01) as delayed endothelial coverage predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Endothelial coverage was limited at 90 days after currently available DES implantation, and the ACS culprit site and circumferentially durable polymer-coated DES were identified as independent predictors of delayed endothelial coverage. Our findings suggest the importance of underlying plaque morphology and stent technology for vessel healing after such implantation.

CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in 2024

Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has significantly contributed to reducing the mortality of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) even in cardiogenic shock and is now the standard of care in most of Japanese institutions. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics (CVIT) proposed an expert consensus document for the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2018 and updated in 2022. Recently, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) published the guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndrome in 2023. Major new updates in the 2023 ESC guideline include: (1) intravascular imaging should be considered to guide PCI (Class IIa); (2) timing of complete revascularization; (3) antiplatelet therapy in patient with high-bleeding risk. Reflecting rapid advances in the field, the Task Force on Primary PCI of the CVIT group has now proposed an updated expert consensus document for the management of ACS focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2024 version.