Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Heparin and bivalirudin in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome

Review published in Cardiovasc Ther (2024)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Systematic reviewArzneimittelentwicklungKlinische StudienWang et al. · Cardiovascular therapeutics, 2024

Abstract

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is one of the most common leading global causes of mortality, encompassing ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and unstable angina (UA). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become a pivotal therapeutic approach for ACS, underscoring the importance of anticoagulation strategies. Among the commonly employed anticoagulants in PCI, heparin and bivalirudin take precedence, with heparin serving as the archetypal choice. Nevertheless, the determination of an optimal anticoagulation regimen remains a point of contention in contemporary clinical practice. To address the differences in anticoagulants during PCI, we meticulously conducted a literature review through PubMed and Web of Science, employing search terms such as "heparin," "bivalirudin," "percutaneous coronary intervention," and "acute coronary syndrome." For patients with PIC brought on by STEMI, NSTEMI, and stable or UA pectoris, the review focused on randomized controlled trials to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of heparin and bivalirudin as anticoagulant options. This systematic review is aimed at furnishing valuable insights into the ongoing debate surrounding the choice of anticoagulation regimens in PCI. By scrutinizing clinical evidence derived from relevant trials, we seek to inform and guide healthcare practitioners in making informed decisions based on the unique requirements of patients with various ACS presentations.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsHumansHirudinsPercutaneous Coronary InterventionAcute Coronary SyndromeHeparinPeptide FragmentsRecombinant ProteinsAnticoagulantsTreatment OutcomeAntithrombinsRisk FactorsHemorrhage

Zusammenfassung

Review of heparin and bivalirudin use in PCI for acute coronary syndromes.

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This systematic review compares the efficacy and safety of heparin and bivalirudin as anticoagulant options during percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome, focusing on randomized controlled trials identified through PubMed and Web of Science. The abstract does not mention leeches, hirudin, the leech secretome, or any connection to leech-derived therapeutics. CAVEAT: This article has no defensible relevance to hirudotherapy or ASH's domain based on its abstract; no outcome data are reported, and no link to the leech secretome is discussed in the source text.

Zitation

Heparin and bivalirudin in percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome.

Wang et al. · Cardiovascular therapeutics, 2024

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.