Pengcheng He1,2, Yuanhui Liu1, Xuebiao Wei1, Lei Jiang1, Wei Guo1, Zhiqiang Guo2, Chunying Lin1,2, Ning Tan1, Jiyan Chen1. 1. Department of Cardiology, Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Coronary Heart Disease Prevention, Guangdong General Hospital, Guangdong Academic of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou 510100, China. 2. Department of Cardiology, The Second People's Hospital of Nanhai District, Guangdong General Hospital's Nanhai Hospital, Foshan 528251, China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No randomized trial has been conducted to directly compare enoxaparin with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). In an era where early invasive strategies are recommended in high risk patients, the effect of enoxaparin and UFH needs to be re-evaluated. The authors performed a meta-analysis to determine whether enoxaparin is superior to UFH in patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing PCI. METHODS: The composite efficacy end point included all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) in the hospital or within 60 days. Major bleeding, as defined in the individual clinical trials evaluated, was the main safety endpoint within the same time period. Pooled estimates of the difference in outcome between enoxaparin and UFH were calculated using fixed or random effects models. RESULTS: A total of 8,861 patients from 4 trials were included. In the pooled analysis, rates of death or MI were similar in patients treated with enoxaparin and UFH [risk ratio (RR), 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77-1.02, P=0.09; I2 =50%]. Major bleeding was also similar between enoxaparin and UFH (RR, 1.21, 95% CI: 0.94-1.56, P=0.15, I2=39%). A subgroup analysis, including randomized trials only or trials with a large sample size, and a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis, demonstrated similar results with above, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PCI for NSTE-ACS, rates for both death/MI and major bleeding were similar between patients treated with enoxaparin and UFH.
BACKGROUND: No randomized trial has been conducted to directly compare enoxaparin with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). In an era where early invasive strategies are recommended in high risk patients, the effect of enoxaparin and UFH needs to be re-evaluated. The authors performed a meta-analysis to determine whether enoxaparin is superior to UFH in patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing PCI. METHODS: The composite efficacy end point included all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) in the hospital or within 60 days. Major bleeding, as defined in the individual clinical trials evaluated, was the main safety endpoint within the same time period. Pooled estimates of the difference in outcome between enoxaparin and UFH were calculated using fixed or random effects models. RESULTS: A total of 8,861 patients from 4 trials were included. In the pooled analysis, rates of death or MI were similar in patients treated with enoxaparin and UFH [risk ratio (RR), 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.77-1.02, P=0.09; I2 =50%]. Major bleeding was also similar between enoxaparin and UFH (RR, 1.21, 95% CI: 0.94-1.56, P=0.15, I2=39%). A subgroup analysis, including randomized trials only or trials with a large sample size, and a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis, demonstrated similar results with above, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PCI for NSTE-ACS, rates for both death/MI and major bleeding were similar between patients treated with enoxaparin and UFH.
Authors: Shamir R Mehta; Christopher B Granger; William E Boden; Philippe Gabriel Steg; Jean-Pierre Bassand; David P Faxon; Rizwan Afzal; Susan Chrolavicius; Sanjit S Jolly; Petr Widimsky; Alvaro Avezum; Hans-Jurgen Rupprecht; Jun Zhu; Jacques Col; Madhu K Natarajan; Craig Horsman; Keith A A Fox; Salim Yusuf Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-05-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christian W Hamm; Jean-Pierre Bassand; Stefan Agewall; Jeroen Bax; Eric Boersma; Hector Bueno; Pio Caso; Dariusz Dudek; Stephan Gielen; Kurt Huber; Magnus Ohman; Mark C Petrie; Frank Sonntag; Miguel Sousa Uva; Robert F Storey; William Wijns; Doron Zahger Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: J Hirsh; T E Warkentin; S G Shaughnessy; S S Anand; J L Halperin; R Raschke; C Granger; E M Ohman; J E Dalen Journal: Chest Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Harvey D White; Neal S Kleiman; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Yuliya Lokhnygina; Karen S Pieper; Karen Chiswell; Marc Cohen; Robert A Harrington; Derek P Chew; John L Petersen; Lisa G Berdan; Philip E G Aylward; Christopher C Nessel; James J Ferguson; Robert M Califf Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Sabina A Murphy; Charles Michael Gibson; David A Morrow; Frans Van de Werf; Ian B Menown; Shaun G Goodman; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Marc Cohen; Carolyn H McCabe; Elliott M Antman; Eugene Braunwald Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2007-06-28 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Keun-Ho Park; Myung Ho Jeong; Youngkeun Ahn; Sang Sik Jung; Moo Hyun Kim; Hyoung-Mo Yang; Junghan Yoon; Seung Woon Rha; Keum Soo Park; Kyoo Rok Han; Byung Ryul Cho; Kwang Soo Cha; Byung Ok Kim; Min Soo Hyon; Won-Yong Shin; Hyunmin Choe; Jang-Whan Bae; Hee Yeol Kim Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Panagiotis Volteas; Panagiotis Drakos; Leor N Alkadaa; Nathaniel A Cleri; Anthony A Asencio; Anthony Oganov; Stefanos Giannopoulos; Jordan R Saadon; Charles B Mikell; Jerry A Rubano; Nicos Labropoulos; Apostolos K Tassiopoulos; Sima Mofakham; Mohsen Bannazadeh Journal: J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord Date: 2022-06-15