Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Scientific foundation and possible implications for practice of the Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site andSystemic Implementation of AngioX (MATRIX) trial

Randomized controlled trial published in Journal of cardiovascular translational research (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. · Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 2014

Abstract

Early invasive management and the use of combined antithrombotic therapies have decreased the risk of recurrent ischaemia in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) but have also increased the bleeding risk. Transradial intervention (TRI) and bivalirudin infusion compared to transfemoral intervention (TFI) or unfractionated heparin (UFH) plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) decrease bleeding complications in patients with ACS. To what extent, a bleeding preventive strategy incorporating at least one of these two treatment options translates into improved outcomes is a matter of debate. The Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of AngioX study is a large-scale, multicenter, prospective, open-label trial, conducted at approximately 100 sites in Europe aiming to primarily assess whether TRI and bivalirudin infusion, as compared to TFI and UFH plus provisional GPI, decrease the 30-day incidence of death, myocardial infarction or stroke across the whole spectrum of ACS patients.

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

Publication typeComparative StudyJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Indexed MeSH termsAcute Coronary SyndromeAnticoagulantsAntithrombinsClinical ProtocolsDrug Therapy, CombinationEuropeFemoral ArteryHemorrhageHeparinHirudinsHumansPeptide Fragments

Zusammenfassung

Early invasive management and the use of combined antithrombotic therapies have decreased the risk of recurrent ischaemia in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) but have also increased the bleeding risk.

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This article outlines the scientific foundation and design of the MATRIX trial, a large-scale, multicenter, prospective, open-label trial conducted at approximately 100 sites in Europe, evaluating transradial intervention and bivalirudin infusion versus transfemoral intervention with unfractionated heparin plus provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors for acute coronary syndrome. The trial aims to assess whether this approach decreases the 30-day incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke across the spectrum of acute coronary syndrome patients. The abstract does not mention leeches, hirudotherapy, or any relationship between bivalirudin and leech-derived compounds. Consequently, no defensible relevance to the American Society of Hirudotherapy can be established from the abstract alone.

Zitation

Scientific foundation and possible implications for practice of the Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site andSystemic Implementation of AngioX (MATRIX) trial

Valgimigli M et al. · Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 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.