SummaryBackground Current guidelines recommend potent platelet inhibition with prasugrel or ticagrelor for 12 months after an acute coronary syndrome managed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the greatest antiischaemic benefit of potent antiplatelet drugs over the less potent clopidogrel occurs early, while most excess bleeding events arise during chronic treatment. Hence, a stage-adapted treatment with potent platelet inhibition in the acute phase and de-escalation to clopidogrel in the maintenance phase could be an alternative approach. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of early de-escalation of antiplatelet treatment from prasugrel to clopidogrel guided by platelet function testing (PFT).

The transradial approach for carotid artery stenting is safe and efficacious; however, the crossover rate is higher with transradial access. There are no differences in the total procedure duration and fluoroscopy time between the two approaches but the radiation dose is significantly higher in the radial group, and the hospitalisation is shorter with the use of transradial access by per-protocol analysis. By evaluating the patient data according to intention-to-treat analysis we found no difference in major adverse events and hospitalisation. In both groups, vascular complications rarely occurred.

This real-world study of femoropopliteal artery disease treatment with drug-coated balloons confirmed positive findings reported from more strictly designed randomized controlled trials and showed that outcomes are durable in this population up to 2 years after treatment. (IN.PACT Global Clinical Study; NCT01609296).

Carotid artery stenting with cerebral protection devices can be safely and effectively performed, with acceptable morbidity and high technical success, by using radial artery access. We recommend obtaining imaging of the aortic arch and supra-aortic trunks with computed tomography, as well as a duplex scan of radial artery, before attempting carotid artery stenting using radial artery access. Further study is needed before recommending that femoral access be replaced by radial access for carotid artery intervention.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Oral factor XIa (FXIa) inhibitors may modulate coagulation to prevent thromboembolic events without significantly increasing bleeding. We explored the pharmacodynamics, safety, and efficacy of the oral FXIa inhibitor asundexian for secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction (MI). Methods: We randomized 1601 patients with recent acute MI to oral asundexian 10, 20, or 50 mg or placebo once daily for 6–2 months in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2, dose-ranging trial. Patients were randomized within 5 days of their qualifying MI and received dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor. The effect of asundexian on factor XIa inhibition was assessed at 4 weeks. The prespecified main safety outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding comparing all pooled asundexian doses with placebo. The prespecified efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, or stent thrombosis comparing pooled asundexian 20 and 50 mg doses with placebo. Results: The median age was 68 years, 23% were women, 51% had ST-elevation MI, 80% were treated with aspirin plus ticagrelor or prasugrel, and 99% underwent percutaneous coronary intervention before randomization. Asundexian caused dose-related inhibition of FXIa activity with 50 mg resulting in >90% inhibition. Over a median follow-up of 368 days, the main safety outcome occurred in 30 (7.6%), 32 (8.1%), 42 (10.5%), and 36 (9.0%) patients receiving asundexian 10, 20, 50 mg, and placebo (pooled asundexian vs. placebo: HR 0.98, 90% CI 0.71–1.35). The efficacy outcome occurred in 27 (6.8%), 24 (6.0%), 22 (5.5%), and 22 (5.5%) patients assigned asundexian 10, 20, 50 mg, and placebo (pooled asundexian 20 and 50 mg vs. placebo: HR 1.05, 90% CI 0.69–1.61). Conclusions: : In patients with recent acute MI, 3 doses of asundexian, when added to aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor, resulted in dose-dependent, near-complete inhibition of FXIa activity without a significant increase in bleeding and a low rate of ischemic events. These data support the investigation of asundexian at a dose of 50 mg daily in an adequately powered clinical trial of patients following acute MI.

BackgroundCardioprotective value of ischemic post- (IPostC), remote (RIC) conditioning in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is unclear in clinical trials. To evaluate cardioprotection, most translational animal studies and clinical trials utilize necrotic tissue referred to the area at risk (AAR) by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, determination of AAR by MRI‚ may not be accurate, since MRI-indices of microvascular damage, i.e., myocardial edema and microvascular obstruction (MVO), may be affected by cardioprotection independently from myocardial necrosis. Therefore, we assessed the effect of IPostC, RIC conditioning and ischemic preconditioning (IPreC; positive control) on myocardial necrosis, edema and MVO in a clinically relevant, closed-chest pig model of AMI.Methods and resultsAcute myocardial infarction was induced by a 90-min balloon occlusion of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) in domestic juvenile female pigs. IPostC (6 × 30 s ischemia/reperfusion after 90-min occlusion) and RIC (4 × 5 min hind limb ischemia/reperfusion during 90-min LAD occlusion) did not reduce myocardial necrosis as assessed by late gadolinium enhancement 3 days after reperfusion and by ex vivo triphenyltetrazolium chloride staining 3 h after reperfusion, however, the positive control, IPreC (3 × 5 min ischemia/reperfusion before 90-min LAD occlusion) did. IPostC and RIC attenuated myocardial edema as measured by cardiac T2-weighted MRI 3 days after reperfusion, however, AAR measured by Evans blue staining was not different among groups, which confirms that myocardial edema is not a measure of AAR, IPostC and IPreC but not RIC decreased MVO.ConclusionWe conclude that IPostC and RIC interventions may protect the coronary microvasculature even without reducing myocardial necrosis.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12967-017-1166-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.