Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for aortic stenosis is becoming an appealing alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients and to medical therapy for inoperable ones. Several new-generation TAVI devices have been recently introduced, but comparative analyses are lacking. We aimed to compare 1-month outcomes associated with such five leading new-generation TAVI devices exploiting data collected in the prospective observational RISPEVA (Registro Italiano GISE sull’impianto di Valvola Aortica Percutanea) Study. We queried the dataset of the ongoing RISPEVA study to retrieve baseline, procedural and 1-month outcome details of patients undergoing TAVI with Acurate, Evolut, Portico, Lotus, and Sapien3. Analysis was based on unadjusted and propensity score-adjusted methods. We included 1976 patients, 234 (11.8%) treated with Acurate, 703 (35.6%) with Evolut, 151 (7.6%) with Lotus, 347 (17.6%) with Portico, and 541 (27.4%) with Sapien3. Unadjusted analysis for baseline features highlighted several significant differences, and other discrepancies were found for procedural features. Despite these differences, device and procedural success were similarly high (ranging from 98.0% to 99.4%, p > 0.05). However, procedural valve migration appeared more common with Acurate (p = 0.007), and major bleeding with Sapien3 (p = 0.002). Unadjusted analysis for 1-month outcomes also highlighted significant differences in the composite of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complication, major bleeding, or renal failure (favoring Portico, p < 0.001), major vascular complications (favoring Lotus, p < 0.001), renal failure (favoring Portico, p = 0.035), and permanent pacemaker implantation (favoring Acurate, p < 0.001). Propensity score-adjusted analyses showed lower rates of major adverse events with Evolut and Portico (p < 0.05), major vascular complications with Lotus and Portico (p < 0.05), renal failure with Sapien3 (p < 0.05) and permanent pacemaker implantation with Acurate (p < 0.05). In conclusion, new-generation TAVI devices have different profiles of early comparative safety and efficacy. These findings should be taken into account for individualized decision making and patient management.

In the last twenty years, our comprehension of the molecular mechanisms involved in the formation, progression and complication of atherosclerotic plaque has advanced significantly and the main role of inflammation and immunity in this phenomenon is now largely accepted. Accumulating evidence highlight the crucial role of different inflammatory and immune cells, such as monocytes and T-lymphocytes, in the pathophysiology of atherosclerotic lesion, particularly in contributing to its com-plications, such as rupture or ulceration. According to the new terminology, “vulnerable plaque” identi-fies an inflamed atherosclerotic lesion that is particularly prone to rupture. Once disrupted, prothrom-botic material is exposed to the flowing blood, thus activating coagulation cascade and platelet aggrega-tion, ultimately leading to acute thrombus formation within the coronary vessel. To date this is the key event underlying the clinical manifestations of acute coronary syndromes (ACS).The degree of vessel occlusion (complete vs. incomplete) and the time of blood flow cessation will define the severity of clinical picture. This phenomenon seems to be the final effect of a complex inter-action between different local and systemic factors, involving the degree of inflammation, type of cells infiltration and the rheological characteristics of blood flow at the site of plaque rupture, thrombogenic substrates within the atherosclerotic lesion and different soluble mediators, already present or acutely released in the circulating blood. This article will review currently available data on the pathophysiology of ACS, emphasizing the immunological and inflammatory aspects of vulnerable plaque. We may pos-tulate that intraplaque antigens and local microenvironment will define the immune-inflammatory re-sponse and cells phenotype, thus determining the severity of clinical manifestations.

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) still represent a major cause of death in Western countries; in the vast majority of cases, coronary atherosclerosis represents the common pathological lesion to all forms of ACS. It is currently believed that plaque complication (rupture, fissuration, and so on), with the consequent superimposed thrombosis, is a key factor ultimately leading to the clinical occurrence of ACS. Over the last two decades, our understanding of the basic mechanisms involved in the pathophysiology of ACS has progressed significantly and the crucial role of inflammation in this phenomenon is now widely recognized. The sequence of events is represented by plaque complication (i.e., rupture, fissuration or erosion), exposure of tissue factor and other prothrombotic substances, such as von Willebrand factor and collagen, to the blood flow, activation of platelets and of the coagulation cascade and thrombus formation within the coronary artery. However, not all complicated plaques cause the clinical occurrence of ACS and similar complicated plaques may cause different clinical manifestations. A complex interaction between different factors, such as arterial vessel wall substrates, degree of inflammation of the culprit lesion, local rheological characteristics of blood flow, as well as factors present in the circulating blood, will determine the severity (complete vs incomplete occlusion) and the persistence of coronary blood flow cessation, which, in turn, will be largely responsible for the clinical picture. Targeting tissue factor, the key player in the activation of the coagulation cascade, may represent an important therapeutic strategy to prevent the clinical manifestation of ACS.