Bivalirudin as compared to unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization: A meta-analysis of 22 randomized trials
Systematic review published in Thrombosis research (2015)
Abstract
UNLABELLED: Bivalirudin has gained ground against unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), due to a reported better safety profile. However, whether bivalirudin may provide also advantages in clinical outcome beyond the known benefits in major bleedings, is still a debated matter and was, therefore, the aim of present meta-analysis of randomized trials, evaluating efficacy and safety of bivalirudin as compared with UFH in PCI. METHODS AND STUDY OUTCOMES: Literature archives (Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane) and main scientific sessions were scanned. Primary endpoint was overall mortality. Secondary endpoints were: 1) mortality within 30-days; 2) overall and within 30-days non fatal myocardial infarction; 3) overall and within 30-days stent thrombosis. Safety endpoints were major bleedings (per protocol definition or TIMI classification). A prespecified analysis was conducted according to clinical presentation (Elective, ACS, STEMI). RESULTS: A total of 22 randomized clinical were finally included, involving 40156 patients randomized to bivalirudin (52.9%) or to UFH (47.1%). Death occurred in 1100 (2.8%) of patients, with no difference between bivalirudin and UFH (2.7% vs 2.8% OR[95%C]=0.94[0.83,-.06], p=0.32, phet=0.48). The results did not change according to clinical presentation. By meta-regression analysis, the effects on mortality were not related to patients risk profile (r=-0.38(-0.89-0.14), p=0.15) or the reduction in bleeding complications (r=-0.008(-0.86-0.85), p=0.98). A significant increase in short-term stent thrombosis was observed with bivalirudin (OR[95%CI]=1.42 [1.10-1.83], p=0.006). However, Bivalirudin significantly reduced bleedings according to both study protocol definition (OR[95%CI]=0.62[0.56-0.69],p<0.00001; phet=0.0003) or TIMI major criteria (OR[95%CI]=0.65[0.53-0.79],p<0.0001, phet=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: In present meta-analysis, among patients undergoing PCI, bivalirudin, as compared with UFH, is associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding complications that, however, does not translate into mortality benefits. Furthermore, bivalirudin is associated with higher rate of 30-days stent thrombosis and recurrent MI among STEMI patients.
Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.
Zusammenfassung
Bivalirudin has gained ground against unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), due to a reported better safety profile.
Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist
This meta-analysis (publication type: Meta-Analysis) of 22 randomized trials (40,156 patients) evaluated the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary intervention, with the primary endpoint of overall mortality. Bivalirudin showed no mortality difference compared to UFH (2.7% vs 2.8%), but was associated with significant reductions in major bleeding and a significant increase in short-term (30-day) stent thrombosis (OR 1.42), with higher recurrent MI rates among STEMI patients; the bleeding reduction did not translate into a mortality benefit. The abstract does not mention leeches, hirudin, or hirudotherapy, so the article's relevance to ASH's domain is not apparent from the source text.
Zitation
Bivalirudin as compared to unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization: A meta-analysis of 22 randomized trials
Verdoia M et al. · Thrombosis research, 2015
Verwandter klinischer Kontext
Erfahren Sie, wie diese Forschung mit der klinischen Praxis verknüpft ist
Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 27, 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: June 18, 2026