Federica Agnello

BACKGROUND: The best management of coronary artery disease in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is debated. We investigated the clinical impact of the residual extent of myocardium at risk in patients undergoing TAVI. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the REVASC-TAVI (Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing TAVI With Coronary Artery Disease) international multicenter registry were stratified according to the myocardium jeopardized by coronary artery disease using the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Jeopardy Score (BCIS-JS) after a planned coronary revascularization. A planned revascularization included percutaneous coronary interventions performed before TAVI, during TAVI, or within 1 month after TAVI. The study population was divided according to the residual BCIS-JS (rBCIS-JS): patients with extensive residual myocardial at risk (rBCIS-JS >4 group) and patients without extensive residual myocardial at risk (rBCIS-JS ≤4 group). The primary study end point was the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and rehospitalization for heart failure at 2 years. RESULTS: Among the 2407 patients enrolled, 294 pairs of patients were selected by propensity matching and compared. At 2-year follow-up, the incidence of the primary end point was higher in patients with rBCIS-JS >4 compared with patients with rBCIS-JS ≤4 (37.5% versus 23.0%, P =0.004). A significantly lower rate of myocardial infarction was reported in patients with BCIS-JS ≤4 (8.2% versus 2.6%, P =0.011). At multivariate analysis, rBCIS-JS >4 (hazard ratio, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.11–1.84]; P =0.005) independently predicted 2-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with concomitant coronary artery disease and severe aortic stenosis, the residual myocardial risk significantly affects TAVI outcomes. In particular, a rBCIS-JS >4 is associated with higher rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 2 years.

The progressive aging of the atrial fibrillation (AF) population, frequently characterized by high ischemic and bleeding risks, has led to a substantial increase in referrals for left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). The expansion of indications and the high procedural success rate of LAAO have further contributed to rising procedural volumes. However, this growth introduces important challenges: LAAO candidates are often elderly and frail, with increased anesthesia-related risks, and high-volume catheterization laboratories may face logistical constraints, particularly in centers without dedicated anesthesiology support. The current gold standard approach, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) under general anesthesia (GA), ensures optimal imaging and procedural control but may increase procedural complexity and perioperative risks. In response, minimalist strategies are increasingly explored, targeting either the anesthetic protocol or the imaging modality. Conscious sedation (CS) protocols have been adopted to reduce anesthesia-related burden while maintaining TEE guidance. Alternatively, imaging-based strategies aim to replace TEE with less invasive modalities, including intracardiac echocardiography (ICE), transesophageal–intracardiac echocardiography (TE-ICE), and MicroTEE. Each approach presents specific advantages and limitations regarding safety, feasibility, operator expertise, and institutional resources. Taken together, these findings support a patient-centered approach to LAAO, whether traditional or minimalist, in which the choice of anesthetic strategy and echocardiographic guidance is driven by institutional resources, operator expertise, and individual patient characteristics rather than by expected differences in procedural or clinical efficacy. This review summarizes current evidence on minimalist LAAO pathways and discusses their role in achieving a tailored, resource-conscious procedural model.

Aortic valve stenosis (AVS) is the most common valvular disease in developed countries, and no pharmacological therapy is currently available. Increasing evidence identifies lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] as a causal factor linking lipid metabolism, inflammation, and valve calcification. Lp(a) levels are largely genetically determined and remain stable throughout life, making them a potential therapeutic target. This review summarizes the current evidence on Lp(a) and AVS pathophysiology, the diagnostic and prognostic role of Lp(a), and the therapeutic potential of Lp(a)-lowering agents. Emerging Lp(a)-targeted therapies, including antisense oligonucleotides and siRNA-based agents, could reshape AVS management by providing the first pharmacological option to slow disease progression in selected high-risk patients.

The use of imaging during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can improve the outcomes by giving key information in every phase of the procedure. It can improve the knowledge of plaque composition thus helping the subsequent technical strategy; it can precisely define the measure of the stent to implant; it can assess in detail the correct positioning of the stent (apposition, expansion, and full coverage of the atherosclerotic plaque); it helps in recognizing the complications that may occur after stenting (e.g., edge dissection or tissue/thrombus protrusion in the stent area). Further, it could help evaluation for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes of angiographic unknown or questionable findings [e.g., spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD), characterization of mycotic aneurysm and pseudoaneurysm]. In the follow up phase, the use of intracoronary imaging may significantly improve the understanding of the mechanisms leading to the procedural failure. What this review adds is to describe the similarities and differences between intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) technologies, to highlight the evidence supporting their utility to improve PCI outcomes, to give practical advice and tools on daily interventional routine, to show a point of view on future perspectives and integration with artificial intelligence (AI).

Systematic Severe aortic stenosis (AS) is a progressive disease and one of the most common valvular heart diseases in developed countries. The management of asymptomatic severe AS remains challenging and requires a tailored, patient-specific approach. Optimal timing of intervention in asymptomatic patients continues to be a matter of ongoing debate. In individuals with severe AS and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), both the ESC/EACTS and ACC/AHA guidelines recommend aortic valve replacement (AVR), regardless of symptom status. In contrast, for patients with preserved LVEF (≥50%), the decision to proceed with AVR must be individualized and based on a comprehensive risk assessment. Risk stratification plays a central role in guiding early intervention strategies and should incorporate clinical findings, echocardiographic parameters, biomarkers, and advanced imaging techniques such as cardiac magnetic resonance and computed tomography. Recent randomized controlled trials have yielded mixed results regarding the mortality benefit of early AVR but have consistently demonstrated a reduction in heart failure-related hospitalizations. Timely intervention in carefully selected high-risk patients may improve long-term outcomes, while avoiding unnecessary procedures in lower-risk individuals remains equally important.

Aortic valve stenosis (AVS) is the most prevalent valvular heart disease in developed countries, with incidence expected to rise due to aging populations. While surgical aor-tic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) re-main the only definitive treatments for symptomatic disease, no pharmacological therapy has been proven to halt AVS progression. In recent years, lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has emerged as a causal risk factor for cardiovascular disease, including coro-nary artery disease (CAD), aortic valve calcification, and AVS. Epidemiological studies and Mendelian randomization analyses have demonstrated a strong link between ele-vated Lp(a) concentrations and both the development and progression of calcific AVS. This review summarizes the biochemical structure and metabolism of Lp(a), its path-ogenetic role in aortic valve degeneration, and the clinical evidence supporting its as-sociation with AVS. We also discuss challenges in measuring Lp(a), current guideline recommendations, and the impact of commonly used lipid-lowering agents on Lp(a) levels. Finally, we highlight emerging Lp(a)-specific therapies, including antisense oli-gonucleotides and small interfering RNAs, which are currently being evaluated in large-scale clinical trials. While most ongoing studies focus on atherosclerotic out-comes, dedicated investigations into AVS progression are underway and may reshape future therapeutic strategies. By integrating mechanistic insights, clinical evidence, and novel pharmacological ap-proaches, this review underscores the potential of Lp(a)-targeted therapies to address an unmet clinical need in AVS management.

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.

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) represents a major global health challenge, significantly contributing to mortality rates. This chronic inflammatory condition affecting blood vessels is intricately linked to hypercholesterolemia, with elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recognized as a central and modifiable risk factor. The effectiveness of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) in mitigating ASCVD risk is well established, with studies revealing a substantial reduction in major ischemic events correlating with LDL-C reduction. While statins, often combined with ezetimibe, remain fundamental in dyslipidemia management, a significant proportion of patients on statin therapy continue to experience cardiovascular events. Recent pharmacological advancements, driven by a deeper understanding of atherogenesis, have unveiled novel therapeutic targets and potent drugs. Notably, agents like bempedoic acid and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors (evolocumab, alirocumab, inclisiran) have emerged as effective options to intensify LLT and achieve LDL-C goals, addressing limitations associated with statins, such as myopathy. Molecular insights into alternative pathways have spurred the investigation of emerging agents, offering promising perspectives for novel medications with efficacy comparable to established treatments, associated with advantages in cost and administration. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the evolving landscape of lipid-lowering strategies, highlighting the progress made in addressing ASCVD risk and the potential of upcoming therapies to further optimize cardiovascular prevention.