Safety and Efficacy of Double Antithrombotic Therapy With Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Antithrombotic therapy after left atrial appendage occlusion

INTRODUCTION

Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) represents a strategy to minimize thromboembolic risk in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. However, LAAO carries some risks of periprocedural bleeding, device embolization, peri-device leaks or device-related thrombosis; the latter is due to direct blood contact with the device, justifying and represents the rationale behind antithrombotic therapy following LAAO.

AREAS COVERED

A comprehensive literature search (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane) has been performed up to November 2024. Antithrombotic drugs after LAAO include vitamin K antagonists (VKA), direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC), antiplatelet drugs, and their combinations. Initially, high-intensity regimens were implemented, while current strategies prioritize simplified approaches to promote device healing without increasing the bleeding risk. The aims of our review were to define the rationale and implications for post-LAAO antithrombotic therapy and provide an overview of current evidence on various antithrombotic regimens.

EXPERT OPINION

The optimal post-LAAO antithrombotic regimen remains controversial, highlighting the need for randomized trials on this topic. Current data suggest that DOACs have the lowest probability of thromboembolic events and major bleeding, while DAPT may be preferred in patients who do not tolerate OAC; finally, single antiplatelet therapy or no antithrombotic therapy are alternative options for patients at high bleeding risk.

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.

2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes" incorporates new evidence since the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction" and the corresponding "2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes" and the "2015 ACC/AHA/SCAI Focused Update on Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction." The "2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes" and the "2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization" retire and replace, respectively, the "2016 ACC/AHA Guideline Focused Update on Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease."

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from July 2023 to April 2024. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

Relative Benefit of Dual Versus Single Antiplatelet Therapy Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Oral Anticoagulation According to Time After ACS and PCI: Insights From the AUGUSTUS Trial

BACKGROUND

In the AUGUSTUS trial (An Open-Label, 2 x 2 Factorial, Randomized Controlled, Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety of Apixaban vs Vitamin K Antagonist and Aspirin vs Aspirin Placebo in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndrome or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention), the combination of dual antiplatelet therapy plus oral anticoagulation increased the risk of bleeding without reducing ischemic events compared with a P2Y12 inhibitor plus oral anticoagulation among patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or elective percutaneous coronary intervention. However, AUGUSTUS enrolled patients up to 14 days after acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention, and there may be a benefit to dual antiplatelet therapy plus oral anticoagulation early after an ischemic event.

METHODS

In this secondary analysis of AUGUSTUS, we divided patients into groups based on whether they were enrolled <6 days (early) or ≥6 days (later) after their index acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention, and tested the interaction between time from the index event to enrollment and randomized treatment (apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist and aspirin versus placebo) on 30-day and 6-month clinical outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Among 4605 patients enrolled in AUGUSTUS with data available on time from the index event to enrollment, the median time from the index event to enrollment was 6 (range, 0-14) days. There were no significant interactions between time from the index event and aspirin versus placebo on clinical outcomes at 30 days or 6 months, though patients with time from the index event <6 days had a nominally significant reduction in death or ischemic events at 30 days with aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.30-0.99]), whereas patients with time from the index event ≥6 days did not (hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.54-1.43]; interaction P=0.23). There were no significant interactions between time from the index event and apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist on clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with atrial fibrillation with acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, there was no difference in the relative benefit of apixaban versus vitamin K antagonist or aspirin versus placebo when patients were enrolled early versus later after their index event.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02415400.

Aspirin Hypersensitivity in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: An Updated Review and Practical Recommendations

Acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) represents a cornerstone of antiplatelet therapy for the treatment of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD). ASA is in fact indicated in case of an acute coronary syndrome or after a percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation. Aspirin hypersensitivity is frequently reported by patients, and this challenging situation requires a careful evaluation of the true nature of the presumed sensitivity and of its mechanisms, as well as to differentiate it from a more frequent (and more easily manageable) aspirin intolerance. Two main strategies are available to allow ASA administration for patients with CAD and suspected ASA hypersensitivity: a low-dose ASA challenge, aimed at assessing the tolerability of ASA at the antiplatelet dose of 100 mg, and desensitization, a therapeutic procedure which aims to induce tolerance to ASA. For those patients who cannot undergo ASA challenge and desensitization due to previous serious adverse reactions, or for those in whom desensitization was unsuccessful, a number of further alternative strategies are available, even if these have not been validated and approved by guidelines. The aim of this state-of-the-art review is therefore to summarize the established evidence regarding pathophysiology, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and management of aspirin hypersensitivity and to provide a practical guide for cardiologists (and clinicians) who have to face the not uncommon situation of a patient with concomitant coronary artery disease and aspirin hypersensitivity.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndromes

The antithrombotic management of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) involves a 6-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), followed by chronic aspirin therapy. In patients with a baseline indication for anticoagulation, a variable duration of triple antithrombotic therapy is administered, followed by dual antithrombotic therapy until the sixth month post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and ultimately a transition to chronic anticoagulation. However, advancements in stent technology reducing the risk of stent thrombosis and a growing focus on the impact of bleeding on prognosis have prompted the development of new therapeutic strategies. These strategies aim to enhance protection against ischemic events in the initial stages after PCI while mitigating the risk of bleeding in the long term. This article delineates the therapeutic strategies outlined in European and American guidelines for CCS management, with special attention to investigational strategies.

Antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation after percutaneous coronary intervention

INTRODUCTION

Patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting usually require a period of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) but, when an indication for long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) such as atrial fibrillation (AF) coexists, triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) with DAPT and OAC causes concern for excessive bleeding. Achieving the right balance between bleeding and adequate protection from ischemic events remains an issue of debate and subject to ongoing investigation of various antithrombotic regimens and durations.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the landmark clinical trials comparing TAT to a period of dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) and subsequent meta-analyses. It also describes the international recommendations that have been derived from this evidence and identifies outstanding issues that could be addressed in upcoming or future trials.

EXPERT OPINION

The current recommended default strategy of a short period of TAT with clopidogrel followed by the withdrawal of aspirin faces a challenge from the prospect of more consistent P2Y12 inhibition provided by ticagrelor and prasugrel. Ticagrelor monotherapy has already been trialed in patients after PCI without an indication for OAC. DAT with ticagrelor or prasugrel immediately post-procedure could emerge as a comparably safe and more efficacious regimen than one involving clopidogrel in the right setting.

Impact of the Type of Anticoagulation Therapy on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Coronary Bifurcation Lesion and Atrial Fibrillation-Insights from the Bulgarian Bifurcation Registry

Background and Objectives: Patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease represent a group with a greater risk of mortality. To evaluate patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and a significant coronary bifurcation lesion and compare the clinical outcomes between the patients on anticoagulant treatment with Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and those on direct anticoagulant (DOAC). Materials and Methods: This is a prospective study of patients with AF and stable coronary artery disease, who had evidence of a significant coronary bifurcation lesion. A log-rank test was used to assess the difference in mortality between patients taking VKA and those on DOAC. The primary endpoint was the incidence of all-cause and cardiovascular death at mid-term. Results: A total of 226 patients with AF and a significant bifurcation lesion were included. The mean age was 70.9 ± 9.2, and 70% were males. Of the patients, 123 (54.7%) were on VKA treatment, and 103 (45.3%) were taking DOAC. For a median follow-up time of 55 (39-96) months, overall mortality was 40%, whereas CV mortality was 31%. Both all-cause (28.2% versus 50.4%, p = 0.020) and CV death (12.7% versus 24.9%, p = 0.032) were significantly lower in patients taking DOAC versus those on VKA. In patients treated with PCI, CV mortality was significantly lower in patients taking DOAC (21.4% versus 40.5%, p = 0.032). VKA therapy was an independent predictor of cardiovascular death (HR 1.88; 95% CI 1.11-3.18; p = 0.01), together with chronic kidney disease (HR 1.81; 95% CI 1.13-2.92; p = 0.01). Conclusions: Treatment with DOAC in patients with atrial fibrillation and coronary bifurcation lesion was associated with significantly lower mortality independently of the treatment approach. VKA was an independent predictor of CV mortality.

Duration of triple antithrombotic therapy and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) with aspirin, a P2Y12 inhibitor, and oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) raises concerns about increased bleeding. Regimens incorporating more potent P2Y12 inhibitors over clopidogrel have not been investigated adequately.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A retrospective observational study was performed on 387 patients with AF receiving TAT for 1 month (n = 236) or ≤1 week (n = 151) after PCI. Major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were assessed up to 30 days post-procedure.

RESULTS

Bleeding was less frequent with ≤1 week versus 1 month of TAT (3.3 vs 9.3%; p = 0.025) while MACCE were similar (4.6 vs 4.7%; p = 0.998). No differences in bleeding or MACCE were observed between ticagrelor/prasugrel and clopidogrel regimens. For patients receiving ≤1 week of TAT, no excess of MACCE was seen in the subgroup given no further aspirin post-PCI compared with those given aspirin for up to 1 week (3.6 vs 5.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

TAT post-PCI for ≤1 week was associated with less bleeding despite greater use of ticagrelor/prasugrel but similar MACCE versus 1-month TAT. These findings support further studies on safety and efficacy of dual therapy with ticagrelor/prasugrel immediately after PCI.

Optimal Antithrombotic Therapy Beyond 1-Year After Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Currently, non-vitamin K-antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) monotherapy has been suggested as the optimal antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF) beyond one year after coronary revascularization. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between NOAC monotherapy and NOAC plus antiplatelet combination therapy using real-world data.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2020, patients with AF who had received NOACs beyond one year after coronary revascularization were enrolled from Korean national insurance data. We emulated a pragmatic sequence of trials between the NOAC monotherapy and the antiplatelet combination therapy followed by propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke.

RESULTS

Among 206,407 person-trials from 4,465 individuals, we compared 3,275 pairs of the monotherapy and the matched combination therapy. During a median follow-up of 1.24 years, the incidence rate of MACCE was 19.4% and 20.0% per patient-year in the monotherapy group and the antiplatelet combination group, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-1.05; P = 0.422). Compared with the antiplatelet combination group, the monotherapy group had a significantly lower incidence rate of major bleeding, defined as intracranial bleeding or gastrointestinal bleeding requiring hospitalization (2.8% vs. 3.6% per patient-year; HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.97; P = 0.024).

CONCLUSION

As an antithrombotic therapy for AF beyond one year after coronary revascularization, NOAC monotherapy was associated with a similar risk of MACCE and a lower risk of major bleeding compared to NOAC plus antiplatelet combination therapy.

Atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease: (un)solved therapeutic dilemma?

Concomitant presence of atrial fibrillation and coronary artery disease requiring percutaneous coronary intervention is a frequent occurrence. The choice of optimal antithrombotic therapy, in this context, is still challenging. To offer the best protection both in terms of stroke and stent thrombosis, triple therapy with oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy would be required. Several drug combinations have been tested in recent years, including direct oral anticoagulants, with the aim of balancing ischemic and bleeding risk. Both pharmacokinetic aspects of the molecules and patient's characteristics should be analyzed in choosing oral anticoagulation. Then, as suggested by guidelines, triple therapy should start with a seven-day duration and the aim to prolong to thirty days in high thrombotic risk patients. Dual therapy should follow to reach twelve months after coronary intervention. Even not fully discussed by the guidelines, in order to balance ischemic and bleeding risk it should also be considered: 1) integrated assessment of coronary artery disease and procedural complexity of coronary intervention; 2) appropriateness to maintain the anticoagulant drug dosage indicated in technical data sheet; the lack of data on the suspension of antiplatelet drugs one year after percutaneous intervention; 3) the possibility of combination therapy with ticagrelor; and 4) the need to treat the occurrence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation during acute coronary syndrome. With data provided clinician should pursue a therapy as personalized as possible, both in terms of drug choice and treatment duration, in order to balance ischemic and bleeding risk.

The Cost of Breaking Even: a Perspective on the Net Clinical Impact of Adding Aspirin to Antithrombotic Therapies in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

PURPOSE

Outcomes from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) inform the latest recommendations on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) management of a short period of oral anticoagulation (OAC), a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor, and aspirin for 1 week or until hospital discharge in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing PCI, and up to 4 weeks in individuals considered to be at high-risk for ischemic events, followed by discontinuation of aspirin and continuation of OAC and a P2Y12 inhibitor for up to 12 months.

METHODS

We examined and summarized the outcomes of bleeding and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) from RCTs and meta-analyses, published between 2013 and 2022, comparing therapy with OAC and a P2Y12 inhibitor with and without aspirin in AF patients undergoing PCI with stenting.

RESULTS

Data comparing dual therapy with OAC and a P2Y12 inhibitor alone to triple therapy with OAC, a P2Y12 inhibitor, and aspirin with respect to the risks of MACEs, including stent thrombosis within the first 30 days, are underpowered and inconclusive. The addition of aspirin does not appear to be associated with a decreased risk of ischemic events, even in patients with high-risk CHA2DS2-VASc scores, but does significantly increase bleeding hazards. The increased safety of newer generation drug-eluting stents may have further minimized any theoretical anti-ischemic benefits of aspirin. The possible attenuation of the pleiotropic effects of concomitant cardiovascular medications by aspirin may also have been a contributing factor.

CONCLUSION

The addition of aspirin to OAC and a P2Y12 inhibitor is likely associated with a net clinical harm in patients with AF who undergo PCI with stenting, even within the first 1-4 weeks after PCI. Revisiting the guideline recommendations to administer aspirin in this timeframe may be warranted.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Coronary Artery Disease With Recent or Remote Events: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Ongoing debate remains regarding optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the following: (i) dual-pathway therapy (DPT; oral anticoagulant [OAC] plus antiplatelet) vs triple therapy (OAC and dual-antiplatelet therapy) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and (iii) OAC monotherapy vs DPT at least 1 year after PCI or ACS. Following a 2-stage process, we identified systematic reviews published between 2019 and 2022 on these 2 clinical questions, and we updated the most comprehensive search for additional RCTs published up to October 2022. Outcomes of interest were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), death, stent thrombosis, and major bleeding. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model.

Results

Based on 6 RCTs (n = 10,435), DPT reduced major bleeding (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.52-0.73) and increased stent thrombosis (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.02-2.36), vs triple therapy after PCI or medically-managed ACS, with no significant differences in MACE and death. In 2 RCTs (n = 2905), OAC monotherapy reduced major bleeding (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49-0.91) vs DPT in AF patients with remote PCI or ACS, with no significant differences in MACE or death.

Conclusions

In patients with AF and coronary artery disease, using less-aggressive antithrombotic treatment (DPT after PCI or ACS, and OAC alone after remote PCI or ACS) reduced major bleeding, with an increase in stent thrombosis with recent PCI. These results support a minimalist yet personalized antithrombotic strategy for these patients.

Optimal Medical Therapy for Chronic Coronary Disease in 2024: Focus on Antithrombotic Therapy

Antiplatelet therapy is the cornerstone of the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Aspirin is indicated for all patients with chronic coronary disease to prevent recurrent ischemic events. A more potent antithrombotic therapy-including P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, dual antiplatelet therapy, or vascular dose anticoagulation-reduces the risk of ischemic events but also increases bleeding risk. Clinicians must weigh both ischemic risks and bleeding risks when determining an optimal antithrombotic therapy for patients with chronic coronary disease, and soliciting patient involvement in shared decision-making is critical.

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.

Antithrombotic Therapy Optimization in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

The antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) poses numerous challenges. Triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT), which combines dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with oral anticoagulation (OAC), provides anti-ischemic protection but increases the risk of bleeding. Therefore, TAT is generally limited to a short phase (1 week) after PCI, followed by aspirin withdrawal and continuation of 6-12 months of dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT), comprising OAC plus clopidogrel, followed by OAC alone. This pharmacological approach has been shown to mitigate bleeding risk while preserving adequate anti-ischemic efficacy. However, the decision-making process remains complex in elderly patients and those with co-morbidities, significantly influencing ischemic and bleeding risk. In this review, we discuss the available evidence in this area from randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses for post-procedural antithrombotic therapies in patients with non-valvular AF undergoing PCI.

Management of Patients Treated with Direct Oral Anticoagulants in Clinical Practice and Challenging Scenarios

It is well established that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the cornerstone of anticoagulant strategy in atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) and should be preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) since they are superior or non-inferior to VKAs in reducing thromboembolic risk and are associated with a lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage (IH). In addition, many factors, such as fewer pharmacokinetic interactions and less need for monitoring, contribute to the favor of this therapeutic strategy. Although DOACs represent a more suitable option, several issues should be considered in clinical practice, including drug-drug interactions (DDIs), switching to other antithrombotic therapies, preprocedural and postprocedural periods, and the use in patients with chronic renal and liver failure and in those with cancer. Furthermore, adherence to DOACs appears to remain suboptimal. This narrative review aims to provide a practical guide for DOAC prescription and address challenging scenarios.

A network meta-analysis of the antithrombotic strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation and percutaneous coronary interventions: Focus on bleeding

BACKGROUND

We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC)-based versus vitamin K antagonists (VKA)-based regimens in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndromes or PCI, aiming to examine the precise impact of recently established antithrombotic strategies on major bleeding as primary end-point and other safety and efficacy as secondary end-points.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted for randomized controlled trials. Our search took place in three major databases. The primary endpoint of our study was bleeding. To combine direct and indirect evidence across trials, a frequentist network meta-analysis with a random-effects model was used.

RESULTS

Five studies were found eligible for the meta-analysis enrolling a total of 11,542 patients. Five studies (N = 4903 patients) contributed to the network. Compared to the triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT)-based VKA, only the dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) based NOAC reduced the bleeding (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.40-0.82). There was no statistically significant difference between DAT-based VKA (RR = 0.66, 95%CI = 0.40-1.09) or TAT-based NOAC (RR = 0.80, 95%CI = 0.43-1.49). DAT-based NOAC ranked best (P-score = 0.91), followed by DAT-based VKA (P-score = 0.67), TAT-based NOAC (P-score = 0.40), and TAT-based VKA (P-score = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

The network meta-analysis of four antithrombotic strategies, demonstrated that in patients with AF undergoing PCI the combination of DAT-based NOAC is associated with a significantly lower risk of major bleeding events. This strategy does not seem to be less effective in terms of prevention of ischemic events compared to the other regimens.

Atrial fibrillation and stroke prevention: 25 years of research at EP Europace journal

Stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is one pillar of the management of this common arrhythmia. Substantial advances in the epidemiology and associated pathophysiology underlying AF-related stroke and thrombo-embolism are evident. Furthermore, the introduction of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (also called direct oral anticoagulants) has clearly changed our approach to stroke prevention in AF, such that the default should be to offer oral anticoagulation for stroke prevention, unless the patient is at low risk. A strategy of early rhythm control is also beneficial in reducing strokes in selected patients with recent onset AF, when compared to rate control. Cardiovascular risk factor management, with optimization of comorbidities and attention to lifestyle factors, and the patient's psychological morbidity are also essential. Finally, in selected patients with absolute contraindications to long-term oral anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion or exclusion may be considered. The aim of this state-of-the-art review article is to provide an overview of the current status of AF-related stroke and prevention strategies. A holistic or integrated care approach to AF management is recommended to minimize the risk of stroke in patients with AF, based on the evidence-based Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway, as follows: A: Avoid stroke with Anticoagulation; B: Better patient-centred, symptom-directed decisions on rate or rhythm control; C: Cardiovascular risk factor and comorbidity optimization, including lifestyle changes.

Eligibility to Intensified Antithrombotic Regimens for Secondary Prevention in Patients Who Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) and intensified antithrombotic regimens (prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy [DAPT] or dual pathway inhibition [DPI]) are recommended for secondary prevention in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after initial DAPT. We aimed to characterize eligibility to such strategies and to explore to what extent guidelines are applied in clinical practice. Patients who underwent PCI for acute or chronic coronary syndrome who completed initial DAPT were analyzed from a prospective registry. Patients were categorized into SAPT, prolonged DAPT/DPI, or DPI groups as per guideline indication by using a risk stratification algorithm. Predictors of receiving intensified regimens and the divergency of practice from guidelines were investigated. Between October 2019 and September 2021, a total of 819 patients were included. Based on the guidelines, 83.7% of patients qualified for SAPT, 9.6% for any intensified regimen (i.e., prolonged DAPT or DPI), and 6.7% for DPI only. At multivariable analysis, patients were more likely to receive an intensified regimen if they had diabetes, dyslipidemia, peripheral artery disease, multivessel disease, or previous myocardial infarction. Conversely, they were less likely to receive an intensified regimen if they had atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease, or previous stroke. Guidelines were not followed in 18.3% of cases. In particular, only 14.3% of candidates to intensified regimens were treated accordingly. In conclusion, although the majority of patients who underwent PCI after the initial period of DAPT were eligible for SAPT, 1 out of 6 had an indication to intensified regimens. However, such intensified regimens were underused among eligible patients.

Gender differences in efficacy and safety of antiplatelet strategies for acute coronary syndromes

INTRODUCTION

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) represents the cornerstone of secondary prevention in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite its undisputed efficacy in reducing thrombotic events, DAPT increases the risk of bleeding, which is associated with higher morbidity and mortality. Novel antiplatelet strategies (i.e. in terms of timing, selection of drugs and their combinations, and modulation strategies) have been tested in randomized trials, suggesting the utility of tailored approaches in selected populations (i.e. patients at high bleeding or ischemic risk). It remains uncertain whether the effect of these strategies is influenced by sex.

AREAS COVERED

This narrative review provides an overview of available evidence surrounding sex differences in the efficacy and safety of antiplatelet strategies for ACS and analyzes the potential reasons behind these findings. Relevant content was searched for in PubMed.

EXPERT OPINION

Significant differences between women and men exist in terms of clinical presentation, pharmacotherapies, interventional management, and prognosis of ACS. However, these observations do not appear to be attributed to different pharmacodynamic effects of antiplatelet therapies between women and men. Unfortunately, a critical issue depends on women being often underrepresented in clinical trials, leading to a substantial lack of sex-specific evidence.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy and Cancer; Balancing between Ischemic and Bleeding Risk: A Narrative Review

Cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with cancer can be caused by concomitant CV risk factors, cancer itself, and anticancer therapy. Since malignancy can dysregulate the hemostatic system, predisposing cancer patients to both thrombosis and hemorrhage, the administration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to patients with cancer who suffer from acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a clinical challenge to cardiologists. Apart from PCI and ACS, other structural interventions, such as TAVR, PFO-ASD closure, and LAA occlusion, and non-cardiac diseases, such as PAD and CVAs, may require DAPT. The aim of the present review is to review the current literature on the optimal antiplatelet therapy and duration of DAPT for oncologic patients, in order to reduce both the ischemic and bleeding risk in this high-risk population.

Advances in the available pharmacotherapy for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation

INTRODUCTION

Non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS), including non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and unstable angina, represent a leading cause of mortality worldwide, with important socio-economic consequences. NSTEMI accounts for the majority of acute coronary syndromes and usually develops on the background of a nonocclusive thrombus. We searched for relevant literature in the field in PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov as of July 2022.

AREAS COVERED

A number of pharmacotherapies are currently available for treatment and secondary prevention, mainly including antithrombotic, lipid-lowering and anti-inflammatory drugs. Pretreatment with aspirin, anticoagulant and statin therapy is of key importance in the preprocedural phase, while pretreating with an oral P2Y12 inhibitor is not routinely indicated in patients undergoing early invasive management. For patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization, pharmacotherapy essentially consists of antithrombotic drugs, which should be carefully selected. Finally, antithrombotic, lipid-lowering and anti-inflammatory drugs are important components of long-term secondary prevention after a NSTE-ACS.

EXPERT OPINION

This article reviews the evidence supporting recommendation on pharmacotherapy in patients presenting with a NSTE-ACS. Several randomized clinical trials are still ongoing and are expected to further inform scientific knowledge and clinical practice, with the final aim to improve the treatment of NSTE-ACS patients.

Antithrombotic Management in AF Patients Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A European Perspective

AF is a highly prevalent disease, often requiring long-term oral anticoagulation to prevent stroke or systemic embolism. Coronary artery disease, which is common among AF patients, is often referred for myocardial revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which requires dual antiplatelet therapy to minimise the risk of stent-related complications. The overlap of AF and PCI is a clinical conundrum, especially in the early post-procedural period, when both long-term oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy are theoretically indicated as a triple antithrombotic therapy. However, stacking drugs is not a desirable option because of the increased bleeding risk. Several strategies have been investigated to mitigate this concern, including shortening triple antithrombotic therapy duration and switching to a dual antithrombotic regimen. This review analyses the mechanisms underlying thrombotic complications in AF-PCI, summarises evidence surrounding antithrombotic therapy regimens and reports and comments on the latest European guidelines.

Platelet function testing in atrial fibrillation patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Platelet function testing (PFT) could be a useful clinical tool to guide individualized antithrombotic treatment in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to investigate platelet reactivity (PR) in the context of a contemporary registry. "Real-world" data were retrieved from a nationwide, multicenter, observational study of AF patients on oral anticoagulants (OAC) undergoing PCI. Patients treated with a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor, namely clopidogrel or ticagrelor, as part of double or triple antithrombotic therapy, were submitted to PFT before discharge and were followed up for 12 months. Out of 101 patients included in the study, 66 were submitted to PFT while on clopidogrel and 35 while on ticagrelor; PR was 162.9 ± 68 PRU and 46.02 ± 46 PRU, respectively (P < 0.001). High on-treatment PR (HTPR) was observed in 15 patients under clopidogrel (22.7%); 7 of them escalated to ticagrelor. Low on-treatment PR (LTPR) was found in 9 clopidogrel and 28 ticagrelor-treated patients (13.6% vs. 80%, P < 0.001), of whom only 1 de-escalated to clopidogrel. PR did not differ by OAC regimen. PFT results had no impact on aspirin prescription at discharge, while failed to predict significant bleeding events at follow up. Ticagrelor administration led to lower PR and lower incidence of HTPR in comparison with clopidogrel. Physicians' behavior in response to knowledge of a patient's PR was variable. Further studies are required to elucidate the role of PFT as a tool to guide individualized antithrombotic treatment in this clinical scenario.

P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

For 20 years, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of the combination of aspirin and a platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor inhibitor, has been the gold standard of antithrombotic pharmacology after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In the past 5 years, several investigations have challenged this paradigm by testing the efficacy and safety of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy (that is, without aspirin) following a short course of DAPT. Collectively, these studies suggested a reduction in the risk of major bleeding and no significant increase in thrombotic or ischaemic events compared with guideline-recommended DAPT. Current recommendations are evolving to inform clinical practice on the ideal candidates for P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after PCI. Generalizing the results of studies of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy requires a thorough understanding of their design, populations, interventions, comparators and results. In this Review, we provide an up-to-date overview on the use of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after PCI, including supporting pharmacodynamic and clinical evidence, practical recommendations and future directions.

Therapeutic uncertainties: first finding of atrial fibrillation in acute coronary syndrome

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and coronary artery disease share several risk factors and their simultaneous presentation in the same patient, sometimes in the course of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), is not a rare occurrence. Patients with AF and ACS represent an important clinical challenge in terms of diagnosis, prognosis and therapy. From a diagnostic point of view, AF may be new onset as a complication of ACS, or a pre-existing asymptomatic AF that is occasionally diagnosed during ACS. Regarding the prognosis, AF, whether new onset or already known, has been shown to exert a negative prognostic impact during ACS. Finally, the main therapeutic dilemma concerns the selection of the optimal antithrombotic therapy, which, at least in the first period following ACS, would require the combination of anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs, with a consequent increase in the risk of bleeding complications. Several randomized studies have evaluated the therapeutic options in patients with AF and coronary artery disease, overall showing the advantage of a dual therapy with an antiplatelet and an anticoagulant compared with a long-term triple therapy with dual antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy; the analyses of the ACS subgroups of these randomized studies confirmed such results also in the acute setting.

P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy: Considerations for Acute and Long-Term Secondary Prevention Post-PCI

Following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), an initial course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y 12 inhibitor ( P2Y 12 -i) is recommended to minimize the risk of thrombotic complications. After the initial period of DAPT, antiplatelet monotherapy, usually consisting of aspirin, is administered for long-term secondary prevention. However, over the last few years there has been accruing evidence on P2Y 12 -i monotherapy, both in the acute (i.e., post-PCI; after a brief period of DAPT, transitioning to monotherapy before six or 12 months in patients with chronic or acute coronary syndrome, respectively) and chronic (i.e., long-term secondary prevention; after completion of six or 12 months of DAPT, in patients with chronic or acute coronary syndrome, respectively) settings. In aggregate, most studies of short DAPT with transition to P2Y 12 -i monotherapy showed a reduced risk of bleeding complications, without any significant increase in ischemic events as compared to standard DAPT. On the other hand, the evidence on long-term P2Y 12 -i monotherapy is scarce, but results from a randomized trial showed that clopidogrel monotherapy outperformed aspirin monotherapy in terms of net benefit, ischemic events and bleeding. Antiplatelet therapy is also recommended for patients undergoing PCI and with an established indication for long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC). In this scenario, a brief period of triple therapy (i.e., aspirin, P2Y 12 -i and OAC) is followed by a course of dual antithrombotic therapy (usually with P2Y 12 -i and OAC) and ultimately by lifelong OAC alone. European and American guidelines have been recently updated to provide new recommendations on antithrombotic therapy, including the endorsement of P2Y 12 -i monotherapy in different settings. However, some areas of uncertainty still remain and further randomized investigations are ongoing to fulfil current gaps in knowledge. In this review, we assess the current knowledge and evidence on P2Y 12 -i monotherapy for the early and long-term secondary prevention in patients undergoing PCI, and explore upcoming research and future directions in the field.

Recent Advances in Antiplatelet Therapy in Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Antithrombotic therapy is the cornerstone of secondary cardiovascular prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Improvements in drug-eluting stent (DES) design and materials over the last 2 decades have prompted the development of new antithrombotic strategies. Current guidelines recommend to tailor dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) according to clinical presentation and individual ischemic and bleeding risk. Given the growing number of complex PCI procedures performed nowadays, it is a priority to define the optimal antithrombotic treatment in this challenging patient subset. In this review article, we sought to summarize and discuss the current evidence on antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing complex PCI.

The Impact of Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with De-compensated Heart Failure and Iron

Abstract: The iron deficient anaemia is a common medical condition in patients with heart failure receiving antithrombotic therapy. Especially during the COVID19 pandemic period the rate of bleeding complications associated with the antithrombotic therapy tend to be higher, as the patient’s referral to medical services is lower and the interaction doctor-patient is limited. In our retrospective observational study we included 300 consecutive patients with decompensated heat failure associating iron deficient anaemia. For defining the medical conditions we used the ESC guidelines terminology and diagnostic criteria. We assessed the association between the iron deficient anaemia and different antithrombotic therapies, recommended in concordance to ESC Guidelines. We found that aspirin 75mg/day was statistical significant associated with iron deficient anaemia (p 0.012) and anaemia severity (p 0.002), this association being assessed by Chi square and Pearson tests. Also, neither clopidogrel, ticagrelor, VKA or non-VKA were associated to the presence of anaemia. By assessing the mortality rate associated to anaemia severity, the severe anaemia was associated to higher mortality rate, meanwhile no antithrombotic therapy was associated with higher readmission or mortality rate (p<0.001). In conclusion, aspirin was the only antithrombotic therapy associated with the presence of anaemia and anaemia severity, while only severe anaemia was associated with statistic significant increase of patient’s mortality, with nonstatistical result regarding the readmission rate. This finding is concordant to the necessity of a permanent evaluation of the antithrombotic therapy in heart failure patients. Keywords: antithrombotic therapy, decompensated heart failure, iron deficient anaemia, COVID 19 pan-demic, mortality rate

Precision medicine in interventional cardiology: implications for antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Precision medicine is a medical model that proposes the customization of medical treatments to the individual patient, as opposed to a one-drug-fits-all model. Such a "personalized medicine" approach has been widely adopted in several medical fields, such as cancer medicine, but the implementation of precision medicine in cardiovascular medicine has not been similarly straightforward. Because pharmacogenomics plays an important role in the safety and efficacy of cardiovascular drug therapy, there has been a great interest in the use of tools aiming at personalizing antiplatelet therapy. Moreover, antiplatelet therapy is essential for the treatment of cardiovascular patients to reduce the risk of thrombotic complications, particularly those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, but it is inevitably associated with increased bleeding risk. In this review, the authors discuss the rationale, summarize the evidence and discuss the current and future directions for the personalization of antiplatelet treatment regimens in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Antithrombotic therapy after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a treatment option for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis across the entire spectrum of surgical risk. TAVI conveys some risk for thrombotic complications, requiring antithrombotic drugs for their prevention. Bleeding events represent the major drawback of antithrombotic therapy, which should be carefully tailored over the individual patient's risk profile.

AREAS COVERED

This review aimed at exploring the rationale for the adoption of a tailored antithrombotic therapy after successful TAVI, with a description and analysis of common complications and their impact on therapy selection. In addition, we aimed at reviewing and discussing current knowledge in this area, with a main focus on the high-quality evidence supporting latest guideline recommendations. Finally, ongoing studies and future directions on antithrombotic therapy after TAVI were outlined.

EXPERT OPINION

Initial experience with antithrombotic therapy after TAVI was derived from percutaneous coronary intervention practice. Accruing evidence in the field led to the current monotherapy paradigm, which prioritizes oral anticoagulant and single antiplatelet therapy in patients with or without an established indication for long-term anticoagulation, respectively. Future studies will investigate the role of alternative antithrombotic strategies to improve clinical outcomes of TAVI patients by minimizing both thrombotic and bleeding complications.

The optimal duration of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation and acute coronary syndrome or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT) consisting of anticoagulant and dual antiplatelet agents is a core treatment for prevention of ischemic events in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), however, due to bleeding risks, the optimal duration of TAT is unclear.

METHODS

We searched the database and conducted a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the optimal duration of TAT for patients with AF and ACS or undergoing PCI by comparing the probability of ischemic and bleeding outcomes for four different TAT durations.

RESULTS

After analyzing data from 12,329 patients, we determined that short-term TAT is advantageous to varying degrees for reducing bleeding events. While long-term TAT has a lower stent thrombosis risk than short-term TAT, the four strategies have comparable outcomes for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), stroke, all-cause death, and myocardial infarction events. Based on Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values, no treatment duration has an absolute advantage for reducing these ischemic events.

CONCLUSION

Long-term TAT may be reasonable for patients at a high risk for stent thrombosis, but short-term TAT is associated with fewer bleeding complications, and there are no significant differences in most ischemic events across treatment durations. Overall, our results indicate that short-term TAT should be the default strategy unless there is a high risk of stent thrombosis that warrants appropriate prolongation of TAT duration.

Antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention

Antiplatelet therapy is key to reducing local thrombotic complications and systemic ischaemic events among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), but it is inevitably associated with increased bleeding. The continuous refinement in stent technologies, together with the high incidence of ischaemic recurrences after PCI and the understanding of prognostic implications associated with bleeding, have led to a substantial evolution in antiplatelet treatment regimens over the past decades. Numerous investigations have been conducted to better stratify patients undergoing PCI according to their ischaemic and bleeding risks and to implement antithrombotic regimens accordingly. Evidence from these investigations have resulted in a number of antithrombotic treatment options as recommended by recent guidelines. In this State-of-the-Art review we provide the rationale, summarise the evidence, and discuss current and future directions of antiplatelet treatment regimens after PCI.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are characterized by a sudden reduction in blood supply to the heart and include ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI (NSTEMI), and unstable angina. Each year, an estimated more than 7 million people in the world are diagnosed with ACS, including more than 1 million patients hospitalized in the US.

OBSERVATIONS

Chest discomfort at rest is the most common presenting symptom of ACS and affects approximately 79% of men and 74% of women presenting with ACS, although approximately 40% of men and 48% of women present with nonspecific symptoms, such as dyspnea, either in isolation or, more commonly, in combination with chest pain. For patients presenting with possible ACS, electrocardiography should be performed immediately (within 10 minutes of presentation) and can distinguish between STEMI and non-ST-segment elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS). STEMI is caused by complete coronary artery occlusion and accounts for approximately 30% of ACS. ACS without significant ST-segment elevation on electrocardiography, termed NSTE-ACS, account for approximately 70% of ACS, are caused by partial or intermittent occlusion of the artery and are associated with ST-segment depressions (approximately 31%), T-wave inversions (approximately 12%), ST-segment depressions combined with T-wave inversions (16%), or neither (approximately 41%). When electrocardiography suggests STEMI, rapid reperfusion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 120 minutes reduces mortality from 9% to 7%. If PCI within 120 minutes is not possible, fibrinolytic therapy with alteplase, reteplase, or tenecteplase at full dose should be administered for patients younger than 75 years without contraindications and at half dose for patients 75 years or older (or streptokinase at full dose if cost is a consideration), followed by transfer to a facility with the goal of PCI within the next 24 hours. High-sensitivity troponin measurements are the preferred test to evaluate for NSTEMI. In high-risk patients with NSTE-ACS and no contraindications, prompt invasive coronary angiography and percutaneous or surgical revascularization within 24 to 48 hours are associated with a reduction in death from 6.5% to 4.9%.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Each year, an estimated more than 7 million people are diagnosed with ACS worldwide. For patients with STEMI, coronary catheterization and PCI within 2 hours of presentation reduces mortality, with fibrinolytic therapy reserved for patients without access to immediate PCI. For high-risk patients with NSTE-ACS without contraindications, prompt invasive coronary angiography followed by percutaneous or surgical revascularization is associated with lower rates of death.

Bleeding avoidance strategies in percutaneous coronary intervention

For many years, bleeding has been perceived as an unavoidable consequence of strategies aimed at reducing thrombotic complications in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the paradigm has now shifted towards bleeding being recognized as a prognostically unfavourable event to the same extent as having a new or recurrent ischaemic or thrombotic complication. As such, in parallel with progress in device and drug development for PCI, there is clinical interest in developing strategies that maximize not only the efficacy but also the safety (for example, by minimizing bleeding) of any antithrombotic treatment or procedural aspect before, during or after PCI. In this Review, we discuss contemporary data and aspects of bleeding avoidance strategies in PCI, including risk stratification, timing of revascularization, pretreatment with antiplatelet agents, selection of vascular access, choice of coronary stents and antithrombotic treatment regimens.

Antithrombotic Strategies in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) are at increased risk for coronary artery disease (CAD). After percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the antithrombotic therapy consists of a combination of anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents to reduce the ischemic and thromboembolic risk, at the cost of increased bleeding events. In the past few years, several randomized clinical trials involving over 12,000 patients have been conducted to compare the safety of vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in association with a single- or double-antiplatelet agent, in the so-called dual- (DAT) or triple-antithrombotic therapy (TAT). These studies and several meta-analyses showed a consistent benefit for reducing bleeding events of DAT over TAT and of DOAC over VKA, without concerns about ischemic endpoints, except for a trend for increased stent thrombosis risk. The present paper examines current international guidelines’ recommendations and reviews clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies conducted on AF patients treated with DAT or TAT after PCI for acute coronary syndromes.

Appraising the contemporary role of aspirin for primary and secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events

INTRODUCTION

Although the role of aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) has been disputed, its use in secondary ASCVD prevention is well established. Recent trials of primary prevention do not suggest a significant net benefit with aspirin, whereas accruing evidence supports adopting aspirin-free strategies in the context of potent P2Y₁₂ inhibition for the secondary prevention of selected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

AREAS COVERED

This updated review aims at summarizing and appraising the pharmacological characteristics and the contemporary role of aspirin for the primary and secondary prevention of ASCVD.

EXPERT OPINION

Recent trials and metanalyses in the context of primary prevention highlighted a modest reduction in ischemic events with aspirin use, counterbalanced by a significant increase in bleeding events. However, ongoing studies on cancer prevention could modify the current paradigm of the unfavorable benefit-risk ratio of aspirin in patients with no overt ASCVD. Conversely, aspirin use is crucial for secondary ASCVD prevention, both in chronic and acute coronary syndromes. Nevertheless, after a brief period of dual antiplatelet therapy, patients at high bleeding risk may benefit from discontinuation of aspirin if a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor is used, hence reducing the bleeding risk with no rebound in thrombotic events.

The role of triple antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin plus clopidogrel forms the backbone of secondary prevention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), oral anticoagulation (OAC) is superior to antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism. Patients with AF who undergo PCI or have an ACS event therefore have an indication for both OAC and DAPT, so-called triple antithrombotic therapy. However, observational analyses have shown that the annual rate of major bleeding on triple therapy exceeds 10%. For this reason, five major randomized clinical trials have compared double antithrombotic therapy with OAC and a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor versus triple therapy in patients with AF who underwent PCI or had an ACS event. Each of the trials showed that double antithrombotic therapy reduced the rate of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding compared with triple therapy and was non-inferior for prevention of ischemic events, including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. In the one trial that directly compared warfarin with a non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), apixaban reduced the rate of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding compared with warfarin and was non-inferior with respect to prevention of ischemic events. As a result of these trials, consensus guidelines recommend that patients with AF who undergo PCI or have an ACS event should be treated with triple antithrombotic therapy (OAC + P2Y₁₂ inhibitor + aspirin) for 7 days or less, followed by double antithrombotic therapy (OAC + P2Y₁₂ inhibitor) for 6 to 12 months.

Cardiovascular and major bleeding outcomes with antiplatelet and direct oral anticoagulants in patients with acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation: A population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are replacing warfarin for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness and safety of concomitant treatment with antiplatelet-DOAC compared to antiplatelet-warfarin in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and AF.

DESIGN

Retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study using United States-based commercial healthcare database from January 2016 to June 2019.

PARTICIPANTS

New-users of antiplatelet-DOAC and antiplatelet-warfarin who initiated the combined therapy within 30 days following incident ACS diagnosis.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary study outcomes were recurrent cardiovascular diseases (CVD) (ie, a composite of stroke and myocardial infarction) and major bleeding events identified via discharge diagnoses. We controlled for potential confounders via propensity score matching (PSM). We generated marginal hazard ratios (HRs) via Cox proportional hazards regression using a robust variance estimator while adjusting for calendar time.

RESULTS

After PSM, a total of 2,472 persons were included (1,236 users of antiplatelet-DOAC and 1,236 users of antiplatelet-warfarin). The use of antiplatelet-DOAC (vs. antiplatelet-warfarin) was associated with a reduced rate of recurrent CVD (adjusted HR 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56-0.92) and major bleeding events (adjusted HR, 0.49, 95% CI 0.33-0.72).

LIMITATIONS

Residual confounding.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world data of AF patients with concurrent ACS, the use of antiplatelet-DOAC following ACS diagnosis was associated with a lower rate of recurrent CVD and major bleeding events compared with antiplatelet-warfarin. These findings highlight a potential promising role for DOACs in patients with ACS and AF requiring combined antiplatelet therapy.

Abbreviated Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients at High Bleeding Risk With or Without Oral Anticoagulant Therapy After Coronary Stenting: An Open-Label, Randomized, Controlled Trial

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in patients at high bleeding risk with or without oral anticoagulation (OAC) after coronary stenting remains unclear.

One-year clinical outcome of patients with left ventricular thrombus after acute myocardial infarction discharged on triple or dual antithrombotic therapy

In patients with left ventricular thrombus (LVT) after acute myocardial infarction (MI), both anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies are needed. It is unknown whether dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) is able to reduce the incidence of bleeding complications without significantly increasing the number of thromboembolic events, compared to triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT). We retrospectively evaluated all post-MI patients with LVT discharged on TAT or DAT from our tertiary hospital in the last decade. The primary outcome was the occurrence of all-cause mortality, thromboembolic events, hospitalizations for re-MI or heart failure and any bleeding at 1 year. A propensity-score matching was performed in order to compare the primary outcome between TAT and DAT. Out of 2564 acute MI patients, 83 (3.2%) had an LVT at echocardiography: 51 (61.4%) discharged on TAT and 32 (38.6%) on DAT. At clinical follow-up, completed in 93% of cases, the incidence of the primary outcome was 18.2% (25.5% in TAT and 6.7% in DAT group; p = 0.04). More than 2/3 of the events included in the primary outcome were related to bleeding complications and occurred during the first month from hospital discharge. In the matched cohort of 42 patients with follow-up data available, the primary outcome occurred in 9 (42.9%) patients in the TAT and 2 (9.5%) in the DAT group (p = 0.03). In post-MI patients with LVT, DAT seems more effective than TAT in reducing clinical outcome, especially early bleeding complications. A randomized study is warranted to confirm this hypothesis.

An update on antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation patients in long-term ambulatory setting after percutaneous coronary intervention: where do we go from here?

INTRODUCTION

In the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it is unclear which combination of antithrombotic drugs is preferable and which is the optimal duration of treatment.

AREAS COVERED

The authors review the available evidence in this area resulting from single studies and meta-analyses. In the absence of direct head-to-head comparisons between different non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOAC), the authors review the available studies with NOACS in these patients and derived indirect comparisons.

EXPERT OPINION

In patients with AF who undergo PCI, a dual antithrombotic strategy which includes a NOAC plus single antiplatelet therapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor (preferably clopidogrel) should be considered as the preferred treatment option in most cases. Oral anticoagulation associated with dual antiplatelet therapy (triple antithrombotic therapy) should be offered for no longer than 30 days to patients with very high thrombotic and low hemorrhagic risk. It is unclear whether the dual antithrombotic strategy should be continued beyond 12 months in patients at high risk of thrombotic events. Additional data from adequately powered controlled studies are needed to support the long-term efficacy of this strategy and to establish the best patient-tailored approach in this complex scenario.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Antiplatelet therapy is key to reduce systemic and local thrombotic events among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Antiplatelet treatment regimens have been subject to continuous changes over the years, with a dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor representing the cornerstone of treatment in these patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

The need for less aggressive antithrombotic drugs to prevent local ischemic events with newer generation drug-eluting stent together with the increased understanding of the prognostic relevance of bleeding events in PCI patients, have prompted investigations aimed at identifying antiplatelet treatment regimens associated with a more favorable balance between ischemic and bleeding risks. Several key randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on antiplatelet regimens in patients undergoing PCI have been recently reported resulting in updates in practice guidelines.

SUMMARY

This manuscript provides an overview of the advancements in the field deriving from key RCTs on antiplatelet regimens in patients undergoing PCI.