Thomas G Nührenberg1, Willibald Hochholzer2, Kambis Mashayekhi2, Miroslaw Ferenc2, Franz-Josef Neumann2. 1. Department of Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Suedring 15, 79189, Bad Krozingen, Germany. thomas.nuehrenberg@universitaets-herzzentrum.de. 2. Department of Cardiology and Angiology II, University Heart Center Freiburg-Bad Krozingen, Suedring 15, 79189, Bad Krozingen, Germany.
Abstract
AIMS: The efficacy and safety of bivalirudin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for treatment of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) remains controversial despite recent evidence from large randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin as compared to heparin in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Clinical Trials.gov databases were searched for RCTs. Primary endpoint was MACE consisting of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were components of the primary endpoint and stent thrombosis. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. We identified 12 RCTs comprising 33,844 patients. Between bivalirudin and heparin, there were no significant differences for MACE (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.96-1.17; p = 0.24), death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. Similar results were seen following stratification by use of glycoprotein inhibitors (GPI). Major bleeding trended to be less frequent in patients treated with bivalirudin. However, no safety benefit for bivalirudin was seen when use of GPI was balanced between groups (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.67-1.16; p = 0.35; p for heterogeneity < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with heparin, bivalirudin was associated with a similar incidence of ischemic events following PCI for ACS. An association of bivalirudin with decreased bleeding was not seen with balanced use of GPI.
AIMS: The efficacy and safety of bivalirudin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for treatment of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) remains controversial despite recent evidence from large randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). Thus, this systematic review and meta-analysis sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin as compared to heparin in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Clinical Trials.gov databases were searched for RCTs. Primary endpoint was MACE consisting of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke within 30 days. Secondary endpoints were components of the primary endpoint and stent thrombosis. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. We identified 12 RCTs comprising 33,844 patients. Between bivalirudin and heparin, there were no significant differences for MACE (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.96-1.17; p = 0.24), death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. Similar results were seen following stratification by use of glycoprotein inhibitors (GPI). Major bleeding trended to be less frequent in patients treated with bivalirudin. However, no safety benefit for bivalirudin was seen when use of GPI was balanced between groups (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.67-1.16; p = 0.35; p for heterogeneity < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with heparin, bivalirudin was associated with a similar incidence of ischemic events following PCI for ACS. An association of bivalirudin with decreased bleeding was not seen with balanced use of GPI.
Authors: Adeel Shahzad; Ian Kemp; Christine Mars; Keith Wilson; Claire Roome; Rob Cooper; Mohammed Andron; Clare Appleby; Mike Fisher; Aleem Khand; Babu Kunadian; Joseph D Mills; John L Morris; William L Morrison; Shahzad Munir; Nick D Palmer; Raphael A Perry; David R Ramsdale; Periaswamy Velavan; Rod H Stables Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-07-04 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Gregg W Stone; Harvey D White; E Magnus Ohman; Michel E Bertrand; A Michael Lincoff; Brent T McLaurin; David A Cox; Stuart J Pocock; James H Ware; Frederick Feit; Antonio Colombo; Steven V Manoukian; Alexandra J Lansky; Roxana Mehran; Jeffrey W Moses Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-03-17 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Borja Ibanez; Stefan James; Stefan Agewall; Manuel J Antunes; Chiara Bucciarelli-Ducci; Héctor Bueno; Alida L P Caforio; Filippo Crea; John A Goudevenos; Sigrun Halvorsen; Gerhard Hindricks; Adnan Kastrati; Mattie J Lenzen; Eva Prescott; Marco Roffi; Marco Valgimigli; Christoph Varenhorst; Pascal Vranckx; Petr Widimský Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-01-07 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Tilak Pasala; Rama Dilip Gajulapalli; Shari Bolen; Navkaranbir S Bajaj; Sanjay Gandhi; Anwar Tandar; Theophilus Owan; Frederick G P Welt Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Giuseppe Patti; Vincenzo Pasceri; Luca D'Antonio; Andrea D'Ambrosio; Michele Macrì; Giordano Dicuonzo; Giuseppe Colonna; Antonio Montinaro; Germano Di Sciascio Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2012-05-12 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Marco Roffi; Carlo Patrono; Jean-Philippe Collet; Christian Mueller; Marco Valgimigli; Felicita Andreotti; Jeroen J Bax; Michael A Borger; Carlos Brotons; Derek P Chew; Baris Gencer; Gerd Hasenfuss; Keld Kjeldsen; Patrizio Lancellotti; Ulf Landmesser; Julinda Mehilli; Debabrata Mukherjee; Robert F Storey; Stephan Windecker Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2015-08-29 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Mohaned Egred; Alan Bagnall; Ioakim Spyridopoulos; Ian F Purcell; Rajiv Das; Nick Palmer; Ever D Grech; Ajay Jain; Gregg W Stone; Robin Nijveldt; Thomas McAndrew; Azfar Zaman Journal: Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc Date: 2020-05-15
Authors: Ping Li; Hongyan Zhang; Caidong Luo; Zheng Ji; Zeqi Zheng; Zhenyong Li; Fan Wu; Jinlong Li; Lang Hong Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-04-29