Carmen Anna Maria Spaccarotella

To date, no medical therapy can slow the progression of aortic stenosis. Fibrocalcific stenosis is the most frequent form in the general population and affects about 6% of the elderly population. Over the years, diagnosis has evolved thanks to echocardiography and computed tomography assessments. The application of artificial intelligence to electrocardiography could further implement early diagnosis. Patients with severe aortic stenosis, especially symptomatic patients, have valve repair as their only therapeutic option by surgical or percutaneous technique (TAVI). The discovery that the pathogenetic mechanism of aortic stenosis is similar to the atherosclerosis process has made it possible to evaluate the hypothesis of medical therapy for aortic stenosis. Several drugs have been tested to reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) levels, inflammation, and calcification. The Proprotein Convertase Subtilisin/Kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9-i) could decrease the progression of aortic stenosis and the requirement for valve implantation. Great interest is related to circulating Lp(a) levels as causally linked to degenerative aortic stenosis. New therapies with ASO (antisense oligonucleotides) and siRNA (small interfering RNA) are currently being tested. Olpasiran and pelacarsen reduce circulating Lp(a) levels by 85–90%. Phase 3 studies are underway to evaluate the effect of these drugs on cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial injury, and non-fatal stroke) in patients with elevated Lp(a) and CVD (cardiovascular diseases). For instance, if a reduction in Lp(a) levels is associated with aortic stenosis prevention or progression, further prospective clinical trials are warranted to confirm this observation in this high-risk population.

Iterations in stent technologies, advances in pharmacotherapy, and awareness of the implications of implantation techniques have markedly reduced the risk of stent failure, both in the form of stent thrombosis (ST) and in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, given the number of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) performed worldwide every year, ST and ISR, albeit occurring at a fairly low rate, represent a public health problem even with contemporary DES platforms. The understanding of mechanisms and risk factors for these two PCI complications has been of fundamental importance for the parallel evolution of stent technologies. Risk factors associated with ST and ISR are usually divided into patient-, lesion-, device- and procedure-related. A number of studies have shown how certain risk factors are related to early (1 month) versus late/very late ST (between 1 month and 1 year and >1 year, respectively). However, more research is required to conclusively show the role of time-dependence of risk factors also in the incidence of ISR (early [1 year] or late [>1 year]). A thorough risk assessment is required due to the complex etiology of ST and ISR. The most effective strategy to treat ST and ISR is still to prevent them; hence, it is crucial to identify patient-, lesion-, device- and procedure-related predictors.