Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Impact of anticoagulation regimen prior to revascularization in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: The ACUITY trial

Randomized controlled trial published in Catheter Cardiovasc Interv (2015)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Randomized controlled trialArzneimittelentwicklungKlinische StudienGeisler T et al. · Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2015

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the impact of antithrombotic regimens during the medical phase of treatment among 13,819 patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) treated with an early invasive strategy in the acute catheterization and urgent intervention triage strategy (ACUITY) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Endpoints included composite major adverse cardiac events (MACE), major bleeding, and net adverse clinical events (NACE; MACE or major bleeding). The median (interquartile range) duration of antithrombin use in the medical only treatment phase was 6.5 (1.8-22.5) hours. MACE, major bleeding, and NACE during the medical only phase occurred in 63 (0.5%), 117 (0.9%), and 178 (1.3%) patients, respectively. MACE rates in the medical-treatment-only phase were not significantly different between the four randomized medical regimens used (heparin alone, bivalirudin alone, heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor [GPI], and bivalirudin plus GPI) (Ptrend  = 0.65). The lowest rates of major bleeding and NACE during the medical treatment phase occurred in patients treated with bivalirudin alone (Ptrend  = 0.0006 and Ptrend  = 0.0004, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing an early invasive strategy, treatment with bivalirudin alone significantly reduced major bleeding and improved net clinical outcomes during the upstream medical management phase with comparable rates of MACE. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeComparative StudyJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled Trial
Indexed MeSH termsAcute Coronary SyndromeAgedAnticoagulantsAntithrombinsCoronary Artery BypassDrug Therapy, CombinationEnoxaparinFemaleHemorrhageHirudinsHumansMale

Zusammenfassung

ACUITY trial analysis of 13,819 NSTE-ACS patients; bivalirudin alone associated with lowest rates of major bleeding and net adverse clinical events during medical treatment phase.

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This randomized controlled trial (ACUITY) evaluated antithrombotic regimens during the upstream medical management phase among 13,819 patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes treated with an early invasive strategy, finding that bivalirudin alone was associated with the lowest rates of major bleeding and net adverse clinical events during the medical treatment phase, with comparable MACE rates across regimens. The abstract describes bivalirudin as an antithrombin agent but does not mention leeches, hirudin, hirudotherapy, or any leech-derived connection. Consequently, the article's relevance to ASH's domain is not established by the abstract.

Zitation

Impact of anticoagulation regimen prior to revascularization in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: The ACUITY trial.

Geisler T et al. · Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2015

Verwandter klinischer Kontext

Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 27, 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: June 18, 2026

Diese Website stellt Bildungsinformationen bereit und ist weder eine medizinische Beratung noch eine Diagnose oder Behandlungsempfehlung. Die medizinische Blutegeltherapie ist mit klinisch relevanten Risiken verbunden und sollte ausschließlich von qualifizierten Klinikerinnen und Klinikern unter institutionell genehmigten Protokollen durchgeführt werden. Die FDA-510(k)-Zulassung für medizinische Blutegel ist auf bestimmte Indikationen beschränkt; experimentelle und Off-Label-Diskussionen werden entsprechend gekennzeichnet. Für patientenspezifische Beratung wenden Sie sich an eine qualifizierte Gesundheitsfachkraft.