Bivalirudin versus heparin with primary percutaneous coronary intervention

被引:3
|
作者
Venetsanos, Dimitrios [1 ,2 ]
Lawesson, Ofia Sederholm [1 ,2 ]
James, Stefan [3 ]
Koul, Sasha [4 ]
Erlinge, David [4 ]
Swahn, Eva [1 ,2 ]
Alfredsson, Joakim [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Linkoping Univ, Dept Cardiol, SE-58183 Linkoping, Sweden
[2] Linkoping Univ, Dept Med & Hlth Sci, SE-58183 Linkoping, Sweden
[3] Uppsala Univ, Dept Med Sci, Uppsala, Sweden
[4] Lund Univ, Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Cardiol, Clin Sci, Lund, Sweden
关键词
ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION; UNFRACTIONATED HEPARIN; THROMBOSIS; OUTCOMES; TRIAL; METAANALYSIS; ASSOCIATION; REPERFUSION; MONOTHERAPY; STRATEGIES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ahj.2018.03.014
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Optimal adjunctive therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated with primary PCI (PPCI) remains a matter of debate. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin to unfractionated heparin (UFH), with or without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in a large real-world population, using data from the Swedish national registry, SWEDEHEART. Method: From 2008 to 2014 we identified 23,800 STEMI patients presenting within 12 hours from symptom onset treated with PPCI and UFH +/- GPI or bivalirudin +/- GPI. Primary outcomes included 30-day all-cause mortality and major in-hospital bleeding. Multivariable regression models and propensity score modelling were utilized to study adjusted association between treatment and outcome. Results: Treatment with UFH +/- GPI was associated with similar risk of 30-day mortality compared to bivalirudin +/- GPI (5.3% vs 5.5%, adjusted HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.82-1.07). The adjusted risk for 1-year mortality, 30-day and 1-year stent thrombosis and re-infarction did not differ significantly between UFH +/- GPI and bivalirudin +/- GPI. In contrast, treatment with UFH +/- GPI was associated with a significant higher risk of major in-hospital bleeding (adjusted OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.30-2.03). When including GPI use in the multivariable analysis, the difference was attenuated and no longer significant (adjusted OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.92-1.70). Conclusion: Bivalirudin +/- GPI was associated with significantly lower risk for major in hospital bleeding but no significant difference in 30-day or one year mortality, stent thrombosis or re-infarction compared with UFH +/- GPI. The bleeding reduction associated with bivalirudin could be explained by the greater GPI use with UFH. (C) 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:9 / 16
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A comparison of heparin without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition versus bivalirudin in elective percutaneous coronary intervention
    Gade, Christopher L. F.
    Feldman, Dmitny N.
    Ross, Michael
    Polin, Nichole
    Bergman, Geoffrey
    Wong, S. Chiu
    Minutello, Robert M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2008, 51 (10) : B87 - B87
  • [42] Bivalirudin, glycoprotein inhibitor, and heparin use and association with outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the United Kingdom
    Sirker, Alex
    Mamas, Mamas
    Robinson, Derek
    Anderson, Simon G.
    Kinnaird, Tim
    Stables, Rod
    de Belder, Mark A.
    Ludman, Peter
    Hildick-Smith, David
    [J]. EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2016, 37 (16) : 1312 - 1320
  • [43] An updated comprehensive meta-analysis of bivalirudin vs heparin use in primary percutaneous coronary intervention
    Shah, Rahman
    Rogers, Kelly C.
    Matin, Khalid
    Askari, Raza
    Rao, Sunil V.
    [J]. AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL, 2016, 171 (01) : 14 - 24
  • [44] A meta-analysis of bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing urgent percutaneous coronary intervention versus elective percutaneous coronary intervention
    Liu, Yulong
    Li, Liang
    Wang, Mei
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2017, 70 (16) : C111 - C111
  • [45] Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin: a meta-analysis of patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes
    Farag, Mohamed
    Gorog, Diana A.
    Prasad, Abhiram
    Srinivasan, Manivannan
    [J]. OPEN HEART, 2015, 2 (01):
  • [46] Heparin Versus Bivalirudin for Non-Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Post-Hoc Analysis of the CPORT-E Trial
    Czarny, Matthew J.
    Hwang, Chao-Wei
    Naiman, Daniel Q.
    Lemmon, Cynthia C.
    Hasan, Rani K.
    Wang, Thomas
    Aversano, Thomas
    [J]. CATHETERIZATION AND CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2017, 90 (03) : 366 - 377
  • [47] SAFETY OF HEPARIN COMPARED WITH BIVALIRUDIN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING TRANSRADIAL PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION
    Bittl, John A.
    Stables, Rod
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY, 2017, 69 (11) : 1346 - 1346
  • [48] Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin for percutaneous coronary intervention with radial access: A meta-analysis of randomized trials
    Mahmoud, Ahmed N.
    Elgendy, Islam Y.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2016, 216 : 128 - 132
  • [49] One-Year Safety and Effectiveness of Bivalirudin versus Heparin in Patients Undergoing Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Li, Jiawen
    Li, Yulong
    Su, Shuhong
    Wang, Zhifang
    Liu, Haiwei
    Yang, Weixian
    Qiao, Shubin
    Yang, Yuejin
    Xu, Bo
    Gao, Runlin
    Yuan, Jinqing
    Zhao, Xueyan
    [J]. REVIEWS IN CARDIOVASCULAR MEDICINE, 2023, 24 (08)
  • [50] Cost minimization analysis of bivalirudin versus heparin plus planned abxicimab in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention
    Cequier, A.
    Moris, C.
    Badia, X.
    Lara, N.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2006, 9 (06) : A348 - A349