Percutaneous cardiovascular interventions have changed dramatically in recent years, and the impetus given by the rapid implementation of novel techniques and devices have been mirrored by a refinement of antithrombotic strategies for secondary prevention, which have been supported by a significant burden of evidence from clinical studies. In the current manuscript, we aim to provide a comprehensive, yet pragmatic, revision of the current available evidence regarding antithrombotic strategies in the domain of percutaneous cardiovascular interventions. We revise the evidence regarding antithrombotic therapy for secondary prevention in coronary artery disease and stent implantation, the complex interrelation between antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with concomitant atrial fibrillation, and finally focus on the novel developments in the secondary prevention after structural heart disease intervention. A special focus on treatment individualization is included to emphasize risk and benefits of each therapeutic strategy.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), consisting of the combination of aspirin and an inhibitor of the platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor for ADP, remains among the most investigated treatments in cardiovascular medicine. While a substantial amount of research initially stemmed from the observations of late and very late stent thrombosis events in the first-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) era, DAPT has been recently transitioning from a purely stent-related to a more systemic secondary prevention strategy. Oral and parenteral platelet P2Y₁₂ inhibitors are currently available for clinical use. The latter have been shown to be extremely suitable in drug-naïve patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), mainly because oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors are associated with delayed efficacy in patients with STEMI and because pre-treatment with P2Y₁₂ inhibitors is discouraged in NSTE-ACS, and in patients with recent DES implantation and in need of urgent cardiac and non-cardiac surgery. More definitive evidence is needed, however, about optimal switching strategies between parenteral and oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors and about newer potent subcutaneous agents that are being developed for the pre-hospital setting.

The use of excimer laser atherectomy (ELA) has significantly evolved from the mid-1990s to the present, showing substantial improvements in both coronary and peripheral artery interventions. Initially associated with suboptimal outcomes due to low-energy settings and limited techniques, advancements such as high-energy delivery, improved catheter designs, contrast injection protocols, and refined procedural approaches have greatly enhanced clinical efficacy. In coronary applications, ELA has become an established technique for treating intracoronary thrombus, under-expanded stents, in-stent restenosis, and heavily calcified lesions, offering favorable procedural and clinical outcomes with low complication rates. The excimer laser operates through photochemical, photothermal, and photomechanical mechanisms, enabling precise plaque ablation with minimal collateral damage. In peripheral interventions, especially in critical limb ischemia (CLI), ELA has emerged as a viable option for complex, non-crossable lesions and in-stent restenosis, demonstrating high technical success, improved patency, and promising limb salvage rates. Multiple clinical trials and registries support the safety and effectiveness of ELA, particularly in high-risk patient populations. This narrative review summarizes current evidence and practical considerations on the use of excimer laser atherectomy in coronary and peripheral interventions.

Background. The Lambre is a plug occluder for left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), but direct comparisons of the most used Watchman FLX and Lambre devices are lacking. Objectives. To compare the safety and efficacy of Lambre and the well-established Watchman FLX occluder for left atrial appendage (LAA) closure Methods. Between January 2023 and April 2025, a cohort of 253 consecutive patients who underwent LAAC with Lambre or Watchman FLX at Umberto I Hospital of Siracusa were included. The primary safety endpoint included major peri-procedural complications while the primary efficacy endpoint included all cause stroke, cardiovascular/unexplained death, systemic embolism and bleedings at a mean follow up of 12 months. 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed. Results. After PSM, 152 patients were included: Lambre group (n=76) and Watchman FLX group (n=76). The mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.5 ± 1.3 (Lambre) vs. 4.5 ± 1.4( Watchman FLX), p=0.97; and the HAS-BLED score was 2.7 ± 0.9 vs. 2.7± 0.8, p=0.97. At a mean follow-up of 12 months, the primary efficacy endpoint (14.9% vs. 12.5%; HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 0.52–4.72; P = 0.77) and the primary safety endpoint (3.9% vs. 2.6%; HR, 1.51; CI 0.25-9.03; P=1) were similar between groups. Conclusions. LAAC with the Lambre device has demonstrated similar efficacy and safety to the Watchman devices. In a high-volume center, experienced operators, using both singleand double-element devices, can adopt a customized strategy based on each patient’s anatomy and achieve 100% successful left atrial closure.