Choice of access site and type of anticoagulant in acute coronary syndromes with advanced Killip class or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Patients who are vulnerable to hemodynamic or electrical disorders (VP) are often excluded from clinical trials and data on the optimal access-site or antithrombotic treatment are limited. We assessed outcomes of transradial vs transfemoral access and bivalirudin vs unfractionated heparin (UFH) in VP with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management. METHODS: The MATRIX trial randomized 8404 patients to radial or femoral access and 7213 patients to bivalirudin or UFH. Among them, 934 (11.1%) were deemed VP due to advanced Killip class (n = 808), cardiac arrest (n = 168), or both (n = 42). The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACE: death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (NACE: MACE or major bleeding). RESULTS: MACE and NACE were similarly reduced with radial vs femoral access in VP and non-VP. Transradial access was also associated with consistent relative benefits in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding with greater absolute benefits in VP. The effects of bivalirudin vs UFH on MACE and NACE were consistent in VP and non-VP. Bivalirudin was associated with lower all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in VP but not in non-VP, with borderline interaction testing. Bivalirudin reduced bleeding in both VP and non-VP with a larger absolute benefit in VP. CONCLUSIONS: In acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing invasive management, the effects of randomized treatments were consistent in VP and non-VP, but absolute risk reduction with radial access and bivalirudin were greater in VP, with a 5- to 10-fold lower number needed to treat for benefits. Trial registry number: NCT01433627.

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

Patients who are vulnerable to hemodynamic or electrical disorders (VP) are often excluded from clinical trials and data on the optimal access-site or antithrombotic treatment are limited.

Leech-derived molecules this paper discusses, each with a full profile in the ASH compound registry:

Explore how this research connects to clinical practice

More peer-reviewed studies in Drug Development.

• Novel Leech Antimicrobial Peptides — Hirunipins — Kumar et al. (2025)
• Medicinal Leech Genome Assembly — Anticoagulant Gene Catalog — Kvist et al. (2020)
• Effects of hirudotherapy on liver functions, lipid profile, and insulin sensitivity in rats with metabolic syndrome — Bilden A et al. (2026)
• Hirudotherapy in Medicine and Dentistry — Jha K et al. (2015)
• Medicinal leech therapy (hirudotherapy): a brief overview — Singh A (2010)
• HIRUDOTHERAPY IN PRESBYACUZIS PRAECOX IN CLEAN-UP WORKERS AFTER THE CHORNOBYL ACCIDENT DURING THE POST-CATASTROPHE YEARS — Zabolotnyi D, Mishchanchuk N (2019)
• Investigation of oxidant-antioxidant status in patients treated with hirudotherapy: an experimental study — Sarikan I, Savas H (2024)
• Leech therapeutic applications — Abdualkader A et al. (2013)
• Non-Occlusive Mesenteric Ischemia Due to Hirudotherapy: A Case Report — Akalın Ç, Ekmen N (2020)
• Leech therapy: a history — Hyson J (2005)

Browse all ASH-analysed research →