Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Alternatives to unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation in cardiopulmonary bypass.

Review published in Perfusion (2001)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Narrative reviewKlinische StudienArzneimittelentwicklungvon Segesser et al. · Perfusion, 2001

Abstract

Despite the progress made in the development of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) equipment, systemic anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin and post-bypass neutralization with protamine are still used in most perfusion procedures. However, there are a number of situations where unfractionated heparin, protamine or both cannot be used for various reasons. Intolerance of protamine can be addressed with extracorporeal heparin removal devices, perfusion with (no) low systemic heparinization and, to some degree, by perfusion with alternative anticoagulants. Various alternative anticoagulation regimens have been used in cases of intolerance to unfractionated heparin, including extreme hemodilution, low molecular weight heparins, danaparoid, ancrod, r-hirudin, abciximab, tirofiban, argatroban and others. In the presence of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and thrombosis, the use of r-hirudin appears to be an acceptable solution which has been well studied. The main issue with r-hirudin is the difficulty in monitoring its activity during CPB, despite the fact that ecarin coagulation time assessment is now available. A more recent approach is based on selective blockage of platelet aggregation by means of monoclonal antibodies directed to GPIIb/IIIa receptors (abciximab) or the use of a GPIIb/IIIa inhibitor (tirofiban). An 80% blockage of the GPIIb/IIIa receptors and suppression of platelet aggregation to less than 20% allows the giving of unfractionated heparin and running CPB in a standard fashion despite HIT and thrombosis. Likewise, at the end of the procedure, unfractionated heparin is neutralized with protamine as usual and donor platelets are transfused if necessary. GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors are frequently used in interventional cardiology and, therefore, are available in most hospitals.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleReview
Indexed MeSH termsAbciximabAncrodAntibodies, MonoclonalAnticoagulantsArginineCardiopulmonary BypassChondroitin SulfatesCross ReactionsDermatan SulfateDrug CombinationsDrug HypersensitivityFactor Xa Inhibitors

Zusammenfassung

Despite the progress made in the development of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) equipment, systemic anticoagulation with unfractionated heparin and post-bypass neutralization with protamine are still used in most perfusion procedures. However, there are a number of situations where unfractionated...

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This review evaluates alternative anticoagulation strategies for cardiopulmonary bypass in patients unable to receive unfractionated heparin or protamine neutralization. The abstract identifies r-hirudin as a well-studied and acceptable anticoagulant option in cases complicated by heparin-induced thrombocytopenia and thrombosis, while noting that difficulty in monitoring its activity during bypass remains a key limitation. For ASH's domain, the inclusion of r-hirudin among clinically utilized anticoagulants is notable. However, the article addresses systemic pharmacological agents only and provides no discussion of hirudotherapy, live leeches, or the broader leech secretome; the abstract does not state the biological origin of r-hirudin.

Zitation

Alternatives to unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation in cardiopulmonary bypass.

von Segesser et al. · Perfusion, 2001

Verwandter klinischer Kontext

Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 28, 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.