Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Design and rationale for the Minimizing Adverse haemorrhagic events by TRansradial access site and systemic Implementation of angioX program

Randomized controlled trial published in American heart journal (2014)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Randomized controlled trialKlinische StudienArzneimittelentwicklungSicherheit & InfektionskontrolleSpeichel-PharmakologieValgimigli M et al. · American heart journal, 2014

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Transradial intervention (TRI) and bivalirudin infusion compared with transfemoral coronary intervention or unfractionated heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors decrease bleeding complications in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Although bleeding is thought to be associated with worse outcomes, it remains unclear whether TRI and bivalirudin both independently lower ischemic or combined ischemic and bleeding complications in ACS patients undergoing contemporary invasive management. HYPOTHESES: The primary objectives of the MATRIX program are to assess whether TRI or bivalirudin as compared, respectively, with transfemoral coronary intervention (MATRIX access site) or unfractionated heparin plus provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, (MATRIX antithrombin) decrease the 30-day incidence of an ischemic (ie, death, myocardial infarction or stroke) or an ischemic and bleeding composite end point across the whole spectrum of ACS patients, including clarifying the optimal duration of bivalirudin infusion after percutaneous coronary intervention (MATRIX treatment duration). STUDY DESIGN: The MATRIX (NCT01433627) study, which incorporates 3 randomized comparisons in a nonfactorial manner and primary end points at 30 days and clinical follow-up ≤ 1 year, is a large-scale, multicenter study with blind event adjudication conducted at approximately 100 European sites. With 8,200 patients in the randomized comparison of access sites and 6,800 individuals participating in the randomized comparison of antithrombin regimens, this study will have ≥ 85% power for the primary end points. SUMMARY: The MATRIX program aims at conclusively ascertaining the role of TRI and bivalirudin infusion in the whole spectrum of ACS patients undergoing contemporary invasive management.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Indexed MeSH termsAcute Coronary SyndromeAgedAntithrombinsEuropeFemaleFemoral ArteryHeparinHirudinsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial Infarction

Zusammenfassung

Transradial intervention (TRI) and bivalirudin infusion compared with transfemoral coronary intervention or unfractionated heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors decrease bleeding complications in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS).

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This article describes the design and rationale of the MATRIX program, a large-scale multicenter randomized study (~100 European sites; 8,200 patients for access-site comparison; 6,800 for anticoagulant comparison) assessing whether transradial intervention and bivalirudin infusion reduce 30-day ischemic and bleeding complications in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing invasive management. Bivalirudin is compared against unfractionated heparin plus provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors as a procedural anticoagulant regimen. The article presents no results. The abstract does not mention leeches, hirudin, or hirudotherapy; its relevance to ASH's domain is therefore not established by the source text, and any link to the leech secretome is absent from the abstract.

Zitation

Design and rationale for the Minimizing Adverse haemorrhagic events by TRansradial access site and systemic Implementation of angioX program

Valgimigli M et al. · American heart journal, 2014

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.