OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the risk-benefit of enoxaparin (Sanofi-Aventis, Paris, France) in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Randomized studies have demonstrated the superiority of enoxaparin over unfractionated heparin (UFH) in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with fibrinolytics. METHODS: In the FINESSE (Facilitated INtervention with Enhanced Reperfusion Speed to Stop Events) trial--a double-blind, placebo-controlled study-2,452 patients with STEMI were randomized to primary PCI or facilitated PCI with abciximab alone or with half-dose reteplase. In this prospective FINESSE substudy, centers pre-specified use of either enoxaparin (0.5 mg/kg intravenous [IV], 0.3 mg/kg subcutaneous [SC]) or UFH (40 U/kg IV, 3,000 U maximum) with PCI. A logistic-regression model and a propensity multivariate model, both adjusted for baseline variables, were used to evaluate primary safety and secondary efficacy end points for enoxaparin versus UFH. RESULTS:Enoxaparin was administered to 759 patients and UFH to 1,693 patients. Nonintracranial Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major/minor bleeding was not significantly different, but lower nonintracranial TIMI major bleeding was found with enoxaparin (2.6% vs. UFH 4.4%, logistic-regression adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31 to 0.99, p = 0.045), whereas intracranial hemorrhage was similar (0.27% vs. 0.24%, adjusted OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.11 to 9.68, p = 0.980). Lower death, myocardial infarction, urgent revascularization, or refractory ischemia through 30 days was also associated with enoxaparin (5.3%) versus UFH (8.0%, adjusted OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.72, p = 0.0005) as was all-cause mortality through 90 days (3.8% vs. 5.6%, respectively, adjusted OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.99, p = 0.046). End points evaluating the net clinical benefit also significantly favored enoxaparin over UFH. CONCLUSIONS:Enoxaparin seems to be associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular outcomes compared with UFH in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. Confirmation of these findings in a randomized study is warranted. (A Study of Abciximab and Reteplase When Administered Prior to Catheterization After a Myocardial Infarction [Finesse]; NCT00046228). Copyright (c) 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the risk-benefit of enoxaparin (Sanofi-Aventis, Paris, France) in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Randomized studies have demonstrated the superiority of enoxaparin over unfractionated heparin (UFH) in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with fibrinolytics. METHODS: In the FINESSE (Facilitated INtervention with Enhanced Reperfusion Speed to Stop Events) trial--a double-blind, placebo-controlled study-2,452 patients with STEMI were randomized to primary PCI or facilitated PCI with abciximab alone or with half-dose reteplase. In this prospective FINESSE substudy, centers pre-specified use of either enoxaparin (0.5 mg/kg intravenous [IV], 0.3 mg/kg subcutaneous [SC]) or UFH (40 U/kg IV, 3,000 U maximum) with PCI. A logistic-regression model and a propensity multivariate model, both adjusted for baseline variables, were used to evaluate primary safety and secondary efficacy end points for enoxaparin versus UFH. RESULTS:Enoxaparin was administered to 759 patients and UFH to 1,693 patients. Nonintracranial Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major/minorbleeding was not significantly different, but lower nonintracranial TIMI major bleeding was found with enoxaparin (2.6% vs. UFH 4.4%, logistic-regression adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31 to 0.99, p = 0.045), whereas intracranial hemorrhage was similar (0.27% vs. 0.24%, adjusted OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.11 to 9.68, p = 0.980). Lower death, myocardial infarction, urgent revascularization, or refractory ischemia through 30 days was also associated with enoxaparin (5.3%) versus UFH (8.0%, adjusted OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.72, p = 0.0005) as was all-cause mortality through 90 days (3.8% vs. 5.6%, respectively, adjusted OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.99, p = 0.046). End points evaluating the net clinical benefit also significantly favored enoxaparin over UFH. CONCLUSIONS:Enoxaparin seems to be associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular outcomes compared with UFH in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. Confirmation of these findings in a randomized study is warranted. (A Study of Abciximab and Reteplase When Administered Prior to Catheterization After a Myocardial Infarction [Finesse]; NCT00046228). Copyright (c) 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Jung Sun Cho; Sung-Ho Her; Ju Yeal Baek; Mahn-Won Park; Hyoung Doo Kim; Myung Ho Jeong; Young keun Ahn; Shung Chull Chae; Seung Ho Hur; Taek Jong Hong; Young Jo Kim; In Whan Seong; Jei Keon Chae; Jay Young Rhew; In Ho Chae; Myeong Chan Cho; Jang Ho Bae; Seung Woon Rha; Chong Jim Kim; Donghoon Choi; Yang Soo Jang; Junghan Yoon; Wook Sung Chung; Jeong Gwan Cho; Ki Bae Seung; Seung Jung Park Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2010-10-26 Impact factor: 2.153