Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
EuroIntervention ; 20(7): e408-e424, 2024 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38562073

ABSTRACT

Pulmonary embolism (PE) ranks as a leading cause of in-hospital mortality and the third most common cause of cardiovascular death. The spectrum of PE manifestations varies widely, making it difficult to determine the best treatment approach for specific patients. Conventional treatment options include anticoagulation, thrombolysis, or surgery, but emerging percutaneous interventional procedures are being investigated for their potential benefits in heterogeneous PE populations. These novel interventional techniques encompass catheter-directed thrombolysis, mechanical thrombectomy, and hybrid approaches combining different mechanisms. Furthermore, inferior vena cava filters are also available as an option for PE prevention. Such interventions may offer faster improvements in right ventricular function, as well as in pulmonary and systemic haemodynamics, in individual patients. Moreover, percutaneous treatment may be a valid alternative to traditional therapies in high bleeding risk patients and could potentially reduce the burden of mortality related to major bleeds, such as that of haemorrhagic strokes. Nevertheless, the safety and efficacy of these techniques compared to conservative therapies have not been conclusively established. This review offers a comprehensive evaluation of the current evidence for percutaneous interventions in PE and provides guidance for selecting appropriate patients and treatments. It serves as a valuable resource for future researchers and clinicians seeking to advance this field. Additionally, we explore future perspectives, proposing "percutaneous primary pulmonary intervention" as a potential paradigm shift in the field.


Subject(s)
Pulmonary Embolism , Thrombolytic Therapy , Humans , Thrombolytic Therapy/methods , Thrombectomy/methods , Pulmonary Embolism/therapy , Treatment Outcome , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use
2.
J Clin Med ; 13(8)2024 Apr 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38673650

ABSTRACT

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains the primary cause of target lesion failure following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), resulting in 10-year incidences of target lesion revascularization at a rate of approximately 20%. The treatment of ISR is challenging due to its inherent propensity for recurrence and varying susceptibility to available strategies, influenced by a complex interplay between clinical and lesion-specific conditions. Given the multiple mechanisms contributing to the development of ISR, proper identification of the underlying substrate, especially by using intravascular imaging, becomes pivotal as it can indicate distinct therapeutic requirements. Among standalone treatments, drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have been the most effective. The main advantage of a DCB-based approach is the avoidance of an additional metallic layer, which may otherwise enhance neointimal hyperplasia, provide the substratum for developing neoatherosclerosis, and expose the patient to a persistently higher risk of coronary ischemic events. On the other hand, target vessel scaffolding by DES implantation confers relevant mechanical advantages over DCB angioplasty, generally resulting in larger luminal gain, while drug elution from the stent surface ensures the inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia. Nevertheless, repeat stenting with DES also implies an additional permanent metallic layer that may reiterate and promote the mechanisms leading to ISR. Against this background, the selection of either DCB or DES on a patient- and lesion-specific basis as well as the implementation of adjuvant treatments, including cutting/scoring balloons, intravascular lithotripsy, and rotational atherectomy, hold the potential to improve the effectiveness of ISR treatment over time. In this review, we comprehensively assessed the available evidence from randomized trials to define contemporary interventional treatment of ISR and provide insights for future directions.

3.
Circulation ; 149(14): 1065-1086, 2024 04 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38344859

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Results from multiple randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes after intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)- and optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with invasive coronary angiography (ICA)-guided PCI as well as a pivotal trial comparing the 2 intravascular imaging (IVI) techniques have provided mixed results. METHODS: Major electronic databases were searched to identify eligible trials evaluating at least 2 PCI guidance strategies among ICA, IVUS, and OCT. The 2 coprimary outcomes were target lesion revascularization and myocardial infarction. The secondary outcomes included ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel myocardial infarction, death, cardiac death, target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and major adverse cardiac events. Frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted. The results were replicated by Bayesian random-effects models. Pairwise meta-analyses of the direct components, multiple sensitivity analyses, and pairwise meta-analyses IVI versus ICA were supplemented. RESULTS: The results from 24 randomized trials (15 489 patients: IVUS versus ICA, 46.4%, 7189 patients; OCT versus ICA, 32.1%, 4976 patients; OCT versus IVUS, 21.4%, 3324 patients) were included in the network meta-analyses. IVUS was associated with reduced target lesion revascularization compared with ICA (odds ratio [OR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.54-0.87]), whereas no significant differences were observed between OCT and ICA (OR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63-1.09]) and OCT and IVUS (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.88-1.66]). Myocardial infarction did not significantly differ between guidance strategies (IVUS versus ICA: OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.70-1.19]; OCT versus ICA: OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.68-1.11]; OCT versus IVUS: OR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.69-1.33]). These results were consistent with the secondary outcomes of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization, and sensitivity analyses generally did not reveal inconsistency. OCT was associated with a significant reduction of stent thrombosis compared with ICA (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.26-0.92]) but only in the frequentist analysis. Similarly, the results in terms of survival between IVUS or OCT and ICA were uncertain across analyses. A total of 25 randomized trials (17 128 patients) were included in the pairwise meta-analyses IVI versus ICA where IVI guidance was associated with reduced target lesion revascularization, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: IVI-guided PCI was associated with a reduction in ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization compared with ICA-guided PCI, with the difference most evident for IVUS. In contrast, no significant differences in myocardial infarction were observed between guidance strategies.


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Thrombosis , Humans , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/surgery , Coronary Angiography/methods , Tomography, Optical Coherence , Network Meta-Analysis , Bayes Theorem , Ultrasonography, Interventional/adverse effects , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods , Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Thrombosis/etiology , Treatment Outcome , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
4.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother ; 10(3): 245-258, 2024 May 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38196141

ABSTRACT

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


Subject(s)
Blood Coagulation , Factor XI , Hemorrhage , Humans , Factor XI/antagonists & inhibitors , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Blood Coagulation/drug effects , Treatment Outcome , Risk Factors , Animals , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use , Risk Assessment , Thrombosis/prevention & control
5.
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther ; 22(1-3): 41-58, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37996219

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a leading cause of global mortality, imposing substantial healthcare economic burdens. Among the modifiable risk factors, hypercholesterolemia, especially elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), plays a pivotal role in ASCVD development. Novel therapies such as PCSK9 (Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin type 9) inhibitors are emerging to address this concern. These inhibitors offer the potential to reduce ASCVD risk by directly targeting LDL-C levels. AREAS COVERED: The article reviews the structural and functional aspects of PCSK9, highlighting its role in LDL receptor regulation. The pharmacological strategies for PCSK9 inhibition, including monoclonal antibodies, binding peptides, gene silencing, and active immunization, are explored. Clinical evidence from various trials underscores the safety and efficacy of PCSK9 inhibitors in reducing LDL-C levels and potentially improving cardiovascular outcomes. Despite these promising results, challenges such as cost-effectiveness and long-term safety considerations are addressed. EXPERT OPINION: Among PCSK9 inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies represent a cornerstone. Many trials have showed their efficacy in reducing LDL-C and the risk for major adverse clinical events, revealing long-lasting effects, with special benefits particularly for statin-intolerant and familial hypercholesterolemia patients. However, long-term impacts, high costs, and patient selection necessitate further research.


Subject(s)
Anticholesteremic Agents , Atherosclerosis , Humans , PCSK9 Inhibitors , Cholesterol, LDL/metabolism , Anticholesteremic Agents/therapeutic use , Proprotein Convertase 9/metabolism , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Atherosclerosis/drug therapy
6.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) ; 77(4): 324-331, 2024 Apr.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37848159

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Randomized trials are often presented at medical conferences and published simultaneously or later. Predictors of simultaneous publication and its consequences are undetermined. Our aim was to characterize the practice of simultaneous publication, identify its predictors, and evaluate its impact. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we included randomized trials presented at late-breaking science sessions of major cardiovascular conferences from 2015 to 2021. The association of trial characteristics with the timing of publication was analyzed. The impact of simultaneous vs nonsimultaneous publication was investigated on the number of 1-year citations and 1-month mentions, and the total citations and mentions at the longest observation follow-up. RESULTS: Of 478 trials included in the analysis, 48.7% were published simultaneously. Simultaneous publications were more likely to be presented in the main conference room (OR, 6.09; 95%CI, 1.34-36.92; P=.029) and were characterized by a shorter review time (OR, 0.95; 95%CI, 0.91-0.96; P<.001). Simultaneous publications were associated with higher 1-year citations (R2, 43.81; 95%CI, 23.89-63.73; P<.001), 1-month mentions (R2, 132.32; 95%CI, 85.42-179.22; P<.001) and total citations (R2, 222.89; 95%CI, 127.98-317.80; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Randomized trials presented in the main conference room and with shorter review time were more likely to be published simultaneously. Simultaneous publications were associated with more citations and mentions than nonsimultaneous publications.


Subject(s)
Bibliometrics , Humans , Cross-Sectional Studies , Cardiology , Journal Impact Factor , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Congresses as Topic
7.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 82(15): 1538-1557, 2023 10 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37793752

ABSTRACT

Stroke is a devastating condition with significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Antithrombotic therapy plays a crucial role in both primary and secondary prevention of stroke events. Single or dual antiplatelet therapy is generally preferred in cases of large-artery atherosclerosis and small-vessel disease, whereas anticoagulation is recommended in conditions of blood stasis or hypercoagulable states that mostly result in red thrombi. However, the benefit of antithrombotic therapies must be weighed against the increased risk of bleeding, which can pose significant challenges in the pharmacological management of this condition. This review provides a comprehensive summary of the currently available evidence on antithrombotic therapy for ischemic stroke and outlines an updated therapeutic algorithm to support physicians in tailoring the strategy to the individual patient and the underlying mechanism of stroke.


Subject(s)
Ischemic Stroke , Stroke , Humans , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Secondary Prevention , Stroke/etiology , Stroke/prevention & control , Stroke/drug therapy , Anticoagulants/therapeutic use
8.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 16(19): 2347-2364, 2023 10 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37821180

ABSTRACT

Multivessel disease (MVD) affects approximately 50% of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and is significantly burdened by poor outcomes and high mortality. It represents a clinical challenge in patient management and decision making and subtends an evolving research area related to the pathophysiology of unstable plaques and local or systemic inflammation. The benefits of complete revascularization are established in hemodynamically stable ACS patients with MVD, and guidelines provide some reference points to inform clinical practice, based on an evidence level that is solid for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and less robust for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. However, several areas of uncertainty remain, such as the optimal timing for complete revascularization or the best guiding strategy for intermediate stenoses. We performed a systematic review of current evidence in the field of percutaneous revascularization in ACS and MVD, also including future perspectives from ongoing trials that will directly compare different timing strategies and investigate the role of invasive and noninvasive guidance techniques. (Complete percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease; CRD42022383123).


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , Coronary Artery Disease , Myocardial Infarction , Non-ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Humans , Acute Coronary Syndrome/diagnostic imaging , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Treatment Outcome , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods
9.
J Thromb Thrombolysis ; 56(1): 91-102, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37148437

ABSTRACT

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is characterized by some risk of major adverse events despite the availability of effective medical therapies for secondary prevention. There is emerging evidence suggesting that thrombin partly contributes to this residual risk. In fact, thrombin (i.e., activated coagulation factor II) triggers not only the conversion of fibrinogen to fibrin but also platelet activation and various pathways responsible for pro-atherogenic and/or pro-inflammatory effects through interaction with protease activated receptors. To reduce the risk associated with thrombin activation, oral anticoagulants antagonists of vitamin K showed promise, but were associated with unacceptable bleeding rates. Direct oral anticoagulants targeting the activated factors X and II carry a lower risk of bleeding than vitamin K antagonists. Rivaroxaban, a direct inhibitor of activated factor X approved at the dose of 20 mg once daily for the prevention of thromboembolic events, has been also investigated at a reduced dose of 2.5 mg twice daily in several alternative scenarios of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, in combination with standard of care. Current guidelines recommend that low-dose rivaroxaban is given in an adjunct to standard therapy to patients with stable atherosclerosis and acute coronary syndromes at low bleeding risk. Several studies are underway to evaluate its putative benefits in other clinical settings.


Subject(s)
Atherosclerosis , Cardiovascular Diseases , Humans , Rivaroxaban/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Thrombin , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Atherosclerosis/drug therapy , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Hemorrhage/drug therapy , Vitamin K , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Factor Xa Inhibitors/therapeutic use
10.
Am J Cardiol ; 199: 7-17, 2023 07 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37216783

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors , Humans , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Secondary Prevention , Treatment Outcome , Drug Therapy, Combination
11.
Circulation ; 147(11): 897-913, 2023 03 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36913497

ABSTRACT

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


Subject(s)
Stroke , Thrombosis , Venous Thromboembolism , Humans , Factor XI , Anticoagulants/adverse effects , Venous Thromboembolism/drug therapy , Blood Coagulation , Thrombosis/drug therapy , Thrombosis/prevention & control , Hemorrhage/etiology , Stroke/drug therapy
12.
Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther ; 20(10): 839-849, 2022 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36245102

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: In patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor is normally recommended for 12 months. However, the greatest anti-ischemic benefit of DAPT occurs early, while most excess bleeding events occur during chronic treatment. De-escalation of DAPT is an emerging treatment strategy for ACS patients. AREAS COVERED: This review critically evaluates the evidence for de-escalation based on clinical judgment (i.e. unguided) or guided by either platelet function testing or CYP2C19 genotyping. Ongoing trials and research directions are also discussed. EXPERT OPINION: De-escalation of antiplatelet therapy represents a viable therapeutic alternative to standard DAPT for patients after an ACS, aimed at providing a good balance between the risks of thrombosis and bleeding. It is not clear if this approach is better with or without guidance by platelet function testing or genotyping. Also, the benefit versus short DAPT is uncertain. Current guidelines support the de-escalation of DAPT for selected patients who are unsuitable for potent platelet inhibition, a cohort of patients that was not specifically represented in landmark trials of de-escalation. More studies are needed to define the optimal candidates for this strategy.


Subject(s)
Acute Coronary Syndrome , Myocardial Infarction , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Humans , Prasugrel Hydrochloride/therapeutic use , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Hemorrhage/etiology , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...