Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Single vs. dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with severe peripheral arterial disease undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Insights from The Hostile Registry

Mattia Galli*, Roberto Nerla, Fausto Castriota, Francesco Saia, Won-Keun Kim, Alessandro Iadanza, Ole De Backer, Francesco Burzotta, Nicolas M Van Mieghem, Thomas Pilgrim, Giuseppe Musumeci, Max M Meertens, Michael Joner, Francesco Meucci, Stefan Toggweiler, Luca Testa, Sergio Berti, Matteo Montorfano, Daniel Braun, Marco De CarloMarco Barbanti, Giulio Stefanini, Georg Nickenig, Tommaso Piva, Azeem Latib, Italo Porto, Ran Kornowski, Antonio L Bartorelli, Mohamed Abdel-Wahab, Tullio Palmerini*

*Corresponding author for this work
1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

AIMS: Single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) has been shown to be a safer alternative to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients without atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, antithrombotic therapy for TAVI patients with severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) remains an underexplored area. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the outcomes of SAPT and DAPT in this high-risk patient population.

METHODS AND RESULTS: The HOSTILE registry was a multicentre, international, observational study including 1707 consecutive patients with hostile femoral access undergoing TAVI in 28 international centres. Among 573 patients without AF treated through transfemoral or non-thoracic alternative approach, 144 received SAPT and 429 DAPT after TAVI. The primary efficacy endpoint was the propensity-adjusted rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or transient ischaemic attack. The primary safety endpoint was the propensity-adjusted rate of major bleeding. Outcomes were reported at 30 days and 12 months. Dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with a non-significant reduction in MACE at 30 days [hazard ratio (HR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-2.18; P = 0.59] and at 12 months (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35-2.24; P = 0.80) compared with SAPT, but with a significant interaction between antiplatelet strategy and PAD severity (P = 0.01), suggesting a greater benefit of DAPT in patients with a high PAD severity. Dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with reduced all-cause death at 12 months (HR 0.22, 95% CI 0.10-0.47; P < 0.001) but not at 30 days (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.05-1.22; P = 0.09) compared with SAPT. There was no difference in major bleeding at 30 days (P = 0.13) or 12 months (P = 0.10) between groups. There were no differences between groups in any bleeding at 30 days (P = 0.16) or 12 months (P = 0.17).

CONCLUSION: In TAVI patients with severe PAD, DAPT was associated with a trend towards improved outcomes compared with SAPT, particularly in those with higher PAD severity. These findings, including the observed reduction in 1-year mortality with DAPT, warrant further investigation in prospective studies.

Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy
Volume11
Issue number6
Pages (from-to)524-531
Number of pages8
ISSN2055-6837
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Sept 2025

Keywords

  • Dual antiplatelet therapy
  • Peripheral artery disease
  • Single antiplatelet therapy
  • Transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Single vs. dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with severe peripheral arterial disease undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Insights from The Hostile Registry'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this