Patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) represent a prevalent subgroup among those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Early aspirin discontinuation after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has emerged as a bleeding avoidance strategy. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT in a contemporary HBR population. This prespecified analysis of the TWILIGHT trial evaluated the treatment effects of early aspirin withdrawal followed by ticagrelor monotherapy in HBR patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents. After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free patients were randomized to 12 months of aspirin or placebo in addition to ticagrelor. A total of 1064 (17.2%) met the Academic Research Consortium definition for HBR. Ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the incidence of the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2, 3, or 5 bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin in HBR (6.3% vs. 11.4%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35–0.82) and non-HBR patients (3.5% vs. 5.9%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46–0.77) with similar relative (P_interaction = 0.67) but a trend towards greater absolute risk reduction in the former [−5.1% vs. −2.3%; difference in absolute risk differences (ARDs) −2.8%, 95% CI −6.4% to 0.8%, P = 0.130]. A similar pattern was observed for more severe BARC 3 or 5 bleeding with a larger absolute risk reduction in HBR patients (−3.5% vs. −0.5%; difference in ARDs −3.0%, 95% CI −5.2% to −0.8%, P = 0.008). There was no significant difference in the key secondary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke between treatment arms, irrespective of HBR status. Among HBR patients undergoing PCI who completed 3-month DAPT without experiencing major adverse events, aspirin discontinuation followed by ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced bleeding without increasing ischaemic events, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin. The absolute risk reduction in major bleeding was larger in HBR than non-HBR patients. Effects of ticagrelor plus placebo vs. ticagrelor plus aspirin on bleeding and ischaemic events among high bleeding risk and non-high bleeding risk patients who tolerated 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with a drug-eluting stent. BARC, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium; CI, confidence interval; DAPT, dual antiplatelet therapy; HBR, high bleeding risk; HR, hazard ratio; MI, myocardial infarction; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; tica, ticagrelor.

Since its introduction in 1977, percutaneous coronary intervention has become one of the most commonly performed therapeutic procedures worldwide. Such widespread diffusion, however, would have not been possible without a concomitant evolution of the pharmacotherapies associated with this intervention. Antithrombotic agents are fundamental throughout the management of patients undergoing coronary stent implantation, starting from the procedure itself to the long-term prevention of cardiovascular events. The last 40 years of interventional cardiology have seen remarkable improvements in both drug therapies and device technologies, which largely reflected a progressive understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms of coronary artery disease, as well as procedure- and device-related adverse events. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the important milestones in antithrombotic pharmacology that have shaped clinical practice of today while also providing insights into knowledge gaps and future directions.

Despite many improvements in its prevention and management, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the developed world. Lipid management is an important part of secondary prevention after ACS, but many patients currently remain undertreated and do not attain guideline‐recommended levels of low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction. This review details the current state of evidence on lipid management in patients presenting with ACS, provides directions for identification of patients who may benefit from early escalation of lipid‐lowering therapy, and discusses novel lipid‐lowering medication that is currently under investigation in clinical trials. Moreover, a treatment algorithm aimed at attaining guideline‐recommended low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels is proposed. Despite important advances in the initial treatment and secondary prevention of ACS, ≈20% of ACS survivors experience a subsequent ischemic cardiovascular event within 24 months, and 5‐year mortality ranges from 19% to 22%. Knowledge of the current state of evidence‐based lipid management after ACS is of paramount importance to improve outcomes after ACS.

Background: Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) has been suggested as an alternative to long‐term oral anticoagulation for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, but comparative data remain scarce. We aimed to assess ischemic and bleeding outcomes of LAAC compared with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for the prevention of cardioembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation. Methods and Results: Embase and MEDLINE were searched for randomized trials comparing LAAC, VKAs, and DOACs. The primary efficacy end point was any stroke or systemic embolism. Treatment effects were calculated from a network meta‐analysis and ranked according to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Seven trials and 73 199 patients were included. The risk of the primary end point was not statistically different between LAAC versus VKAs (odds ratio [OR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.62–1.50]) and LAAC versus DOACs (OR, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.71–1.73]). LAAC and DOACs resulted in similar risk of major or minor (OR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.61–1.42]) and major bleeding (OR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.58–1.46]); however, after exclusion of procedural bleeding, bleeding risk was significantly lower in those undergoing LAAC. Both LAAC and DOACs reduced the risk of all‐cause death compared with VKAs (LAAC versus VKAs: OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.53–0.91]; DOACs versus VKAs: OR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.85–0.95], respectively). DOACs ranked as the best treatment for stroke or systemic embolism prevention (66.9%) and LAAC for reducing major bleeding (63.9%) and death (96.4%). Conclusions: As a nonpharmacological alternative to oral anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation, LAAC showed similar efficacy and safety compared with VKAs or DOACs. Prospective confirmation from larger studies is warranted.

Vitamin D is rightly recognized as an essential key factor in the regulation of calcium and phosphate homeostasis, affecting primary adequate bone mineralization. In the last decades, a more complex and wider role of vitamin D has been postulated and demonstrated. Cardiovascular diseases have been found to be strongly related to vitamin D levels, especially to its deficiency. Pre-clinical studies have suggested a direct role of vitamin D in the regulation of several pathophysiological pathways, such as endothelial dysfunction and platelet aggregation; moreover, observational data have confirmed the relationship with different conditions, including coronary artery disease, heart failure, and hypertension. Despite the significant evidence available so far, most clinical trials have failed to prove any positive impact of vitamin D supplements on cardiovascular outcomes. This discrepancy indicates the need for further information and knowledge about vitamin D metabolism and its effect on the cardiovascular system, in order to identify those patients who would benefit from vitamin D supplementation.