Efficiency and safety of bivalirudin in patients undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention via radial access: A subgroup analysis from the bivalirudin in acute myocardial infarction versus heparin and GPI plus heparin trial
Randomized controlled trial published in Catheter Cardiovasc Interv (2016)
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore the efficiency and safety of bivalirudin in patients undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention via radial access. BACKGROUND: Bivalirudin reduces bleeding risks over heparin in patients undergoing PCI. However, bleeding advantages of bivalirudin in patients undergoing transradial intervention is uncertain. METHODS: In the BRIGHT trial, 1,723 patients underwent emergency PCI via radial access, with 576 patients in the bivalirudin arm, 576 in the heparin arm and 571 in the heparin plus tirofiban arm. The primary outcome was 30-day net adverse clinical event (NACE), defined as a composite of major cardiac and cerebral events or any bleeding. RESULTS: 30-day NACE occurred in 5.7% with bivalirudin, 7.8% with heparin alone (vs. bivalirudin, P = 0.159), and 10.3% with heparin plus tifofiban (vs. bivalirudin, P = 0.004). The 30-day bleeding rate was 0.9% for bivalirudin, 2.3% for heparin (vs. bivalirudin, P = 0.057), and 5.8% for heparin plus tirofiban (vs. bivalirudin, P < 0.001). Major cardiac and cerebral events (4.9 vs. 5.7 vs. 4.6%, P = 0.899), stent thrombosis (0.5 vs. 0.5 vs. 0.7%, P = 0.899) and acquired thrombocytopenia (0.2 vs. 0.5 vs. 0.9%, P = 0.257) at 30 days were similar among three arms. The interaction test for PCI access and randomized treatment showed no significance on all bleeding (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The bleeding benefit of bivalirudin was independent of artery access. Bivalirudin lead to statistical reduction on bleeding risks in comparison to heparin plus tirofiban, and only small numerical difference in comparison to heparin, with comparable risks of ischemic events and stent thrombosis in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing emergency transradial PCI. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.
Zusammenfassung
To explore the efficiency and safety of bivalirudin in patients undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention via radial access.
Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist
Die BRIGHT-Studie untersuchte Bivalirudin versus Heparin oder Heparin plus Tirofiban bei 1.723 Patient*innen, die sich einer notfallmäßigen perkutanen Koronarintervention über radialen Zugang bei akutem Myokardinfarkt unterzogen, mit dem primären Endpunkt der 30-tägigen Net Adverse Clinical Events (NACE). Bivalirudin zeigte eine statistisch signifikante Reduktion der 30-tägigen Blutungsrate im Vergleich zu Heparin plus Tirofiban (0,9 % vs. 5,8 %, P < 0,001), während ischämische Ereignisse, Stentthrombosen und Thrombozytopenie zwischen den Studienarmen vergleichbar waren; der Blutungsnutzen war unabhängig vom arteriellen Zugang. Das Abstract liefert keine Informationen über Blutegel, Hirudotherapie oder irgendwelche vom Blutegel stammenden Verbindungen, und es kann keine vertretbare Verbindung zum Fachgebiet der ASH aus dieser Quelle hergeleitet werden. Diese Studie ist ausschließlich ein pharmakologischer Vergleich von Antikoagulationsregimen in der interventionellen Kardiologie.
Zitation
Efficiency and safety of bivalirudin in patients undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention via radial access: A subgroup analysis from the bivalirudin in acute myocardial infarction versus heparin and GPI plus heparin trial.
Wang H et al. · Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2016
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: 18. Juni 2026