Background—: Ticagrelor and prasugrel provide stronger platelet inhibition compared with clopidogrel. Direct pharmacodynamic comparison between them has not yet been reported in ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients. Methods and Results—: In a prospective, single-center, single-blind study, 55 out of 117 (47%) screened consecutive ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to either ticagrelor 180 mg loading followed by 90 mg bid, or prasugrel 60 mg loading followed by 10 mg od for 5 days. Platelet reactivity (PR) was assessed with the VerifyNow P2Y12 function assay and the Multiplate Analyzer at 0, 1, 2, 6, 24 hours, and 5 days postrandomization. The primary end point, PR with VerifyNow at hour 1, did not differ significantly between patients randomized to ticagrelor versus prasugrel (257.3 P2Y12 reaction unit [PRU], 95% CI 230.8–283.8 versus 231.3 PRU, 95% CI 205.3–257.4; P =0.2). PR did not differ at 2, 6, and 24 hours, although at day 5 it was lower with ticagrelor than prasugrel (25.6 PRU, 95% CI 12.3–38.9 versus 50.3 PRU, 95% CI 36.4–64.1; P =0.01). At hour 2, high on-treatment PR rates (cutoff 208 PRU) were 46.2% and 34.6% for ticagrelor and prasugrel, respectively, decreased significantly thereafter, whereas did not differ significantly between the 2 agents at all the time points of the study. Conclusions—: In patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, both ticagrelor and prasugrel exhibit an initial delay in the onset of their antiplatelet action. Ticagrelor did not appear superior to prasugrel in reducing PR during the first 24 hours of ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01463163.

Kounis syndrome is the concurrence of acute coronary syndromes with conditions associated with mast cell activation, such as allergies or hypersensitivity and anaphylactic or anaphylactoid insults that can involve other interrelated and interacting inflammatory cells behaving as a 'ball of thread'. It is caused by inflammatory mediators such as neutral proteases including tryptase and chymase, arachidonic acid products, histamine, platelet activating factor and a variety of cytokines and chemokines released during the activation process. Platelets with FCεRI and FCεRII receptors also participate in the above cascade. Vasospastic allergic angina, allergic myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis with occluding thrombus infiltrated by eosinophils and/or mast cells constitute the three reported variants of this syndrome. Kounis syndrome is a ubiquitus disease that represents a magnificent natural paradigm and nature's own experiment, in a final trigger pathway implicated in cases of coronary artery spasm and plaque rupture. Kounis syndrome can complicate anesthesia, vaccination, medical therapy and stent implantation and it seems to be associated with coronary allograft vasculopathy and takotsubo syndrome, it can often be confused with hypersensitivity myocarditis and can be the cause of unexplained sudden death. Kounis syndrome has revealed that the same mediators released from the same inflammatory cells are present in acute coronary events of nonallergic etiology. These cells are not only present in the culprit region before plaque erosion or rupture but they release their contents just before an actual coronary event. Therefore, does Kounis syndrome represent a magnificent natural paradigm and nature's own experiment in a final trigger pathway implicated in cases of coronary artery spasm and plaque rupture showing a novel way towards our effort to prevent acute coronary syndromes? Drugs, substances targeting the stem cell factor that is essential for mast cell development, proliferation, survival, adhesion and homing as well as monoclonal antibodies and natural molecules that protect mast cell surface and stabilize mast cell membrane could emerge as novel therapeutic ways capable to prevent acute coronary and acute cerebrovascular events.

Inflammation is a key feature of atherosclerosis and its clinical manifestations. The leukocyte count has emerged as a marker of inflammation that is widely available in clinical practice. Since inflammation plays a key role in atherosclerosis and its end results, discovering new biomarkers of inflammation becomes important in order to help diagnostic accuracy and provide prognostic information about coronary cardiac disease. In acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary intervention, elevated levels of almost all subtypes of white blood cell counts, including eosinophils, monocytes, neutrophils, and lymphocytes, and neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio and eosinophil–leukocyte ratio constitute independent predictors of adverse outcomes. Eosinophil count and eosinophil–leukocyte ratio, in particular, emerge as novel biomarkers for risk stratification in patients with coronary artery disease. Since the presence of eosinophils denotes hypersensitivity inflammation and hypersensitivity associated with Kounis syndrome, this reality is essential for elucidating the etiology of inflammation in order to consider predictive and preventive measures and to apply the appropriate therapeutic methods.

Background: Incidence of radial artery occclusions (RAO) and ulnar artery occclusions (UAO) in coronary procedures, factors predisposing to forearm arteries occlusion, and the benefit of anticoaggulation vary significantly in existing literature. We sought to determine the incidence of RAO/UAO and the impact of anticoagulation intensity. Methods and Results: Meta‐analysis of 112 studies assessing RAO and/or UAO (N=46 631) were included. Overall, there was no difference between crude RAO and UAO rates (5.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.4–6.0 versus 4.0%; 95% CI, 2.8–5.8; P =0.171). The early occlusion rate (in‐hospital or within 7 days after procedure) was higher than the late occlusion rate. The detection rate of occlusion was higher with vascular ultrasonography compared with clinical evaluation only. Low‐dose heparin was associated with a significantly higher RAO rate compared with high‐dose heparin (7.2%; 95% CI, 5.5–9.4 versus 4.3%; 95% CI, 3.5–5.3; Q=8.81; P =0.003). Early occlusions in low‐dose heparin cohorts mounted at 8.0% (95% CI, 6.1–10.6). The RAO rate was higher after diagnostic angiographies compared with coronary interventions, presumably attributed to the higher intensity of anticoagulation in the latter group. Hemostatic techniques (patent versus nonpatent hemostasis), geography (US versus non‐US cohorts) and sheath size did not impact on vessel patency. Conclusions: RAO and UAO occur with similar frequency and in the order of 7% to 8% when evaluated early by vascular ultrasonography following coronary procedures. More‐intensive anticoagulation is protective. Late recanalization occurs in a substantial minority of patients.