American Society of Hirudotherapy

Intracoronary Bivalirudin Bolus in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Treated with Primary Angioplasty: Theoretical Bases, Clinical Experience, and Future Applications

Review published in American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs (2016)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Research reportClinical TrialsDrug DevelopmentLupi A et al. · American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs, 2016

Abstract

Intracoronary thrombus is a common finding in acute coronary syndromes and often correlates with adverse prognosis and complications during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). Bivalirudin, a direct thrombin inhibitor, is one of the recommended antithrombotic treatments for PCI in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The intracoronary administration of a bivalirudin loading dose, even if off-label, offers theoretical advantages over the standard intravenous route, providing a very high drug concentration in the infarct-related artery without increasing the total dose of the drug administered. After the description in case reports of such an approach, a larger scale experience was recently reported in a large cohort of patients with STEMI treated during primary PCI with a bivalirudin intracoronary loading dose followed by the standard intravenous maintenance infusion. As a control group, a propensity score-matched cohort of patients undergoing primary PCI treated with intravenous bivalirudin in the same institution was selected. Compared with the intravenous bolus, the intracoronary administration of bivalirudin was associated with improved ST-segment resolution, lower post-procedural peak CK-MB levels, and better Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) frame count values, without difference in bleeding rates. Thus, this new promising antithrombotic strategy, based on the intracoronary administration of a bivalirudin loading dose during primary PCI, appeared safe, improved myocardial reperfusion, and mitigated enzymatic myocardial infarct size compared with the standard intravenous protocol. Randomized trials are warranted to confirm these results and evaluate the possible long-term clinical benefits.

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

Publication typeJournal Article
Indexed MeSH termsAngioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryAnticoagulantsAntithrombinsElectrocardiographyHemorrhageHirudinsHumansInjections, IntravenousMyocardial InfarctionMyocardial ReperfusionPeptide FragmentsPercutaneous Coronary Intervention

Summary

Intracoronary bivalirudin loading dose during primary PCI for STEMI improved ST-segment resolution, lowered post-procedural CK-MB peak, and improved TIMI frame counts vs intravenous-only administration without increasing bleeding.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This article describes the intracoronary administration of a bivalirudin loading dose during primary PCI for STEMI, reporting improved ST-segment resolution, lower post-procedural CK-MB, and better TIMI frame counts versus standard intravenous bolus in a propensity score-matched cohort. The abstract describes bivalirudin as a direct thrombin inhibitor but does not mention hirudin, leeches, leech saliva, or any leech-related origin. No defensible connection to hirudotherapy or the leech secretome exists from the abstract alone; this is a cardiology study of a pharmaceutical anticoagulant with no involvement of leeches, and findings are preliminary pending randomized confirmation.

Citation

Intracoronary Bivalirudin Bolus in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Treated with Primary Angioplasty: Theoretical Bases, Clinical Experience, and Future Applications.

Lupi A et al. · American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs, 2016

Added to ASH library: May 27, 2026 · Site last updated: June 18, 2026

This website provides educational information and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment recommendations. Medicinal leech therapy carries clinically meaningful risks and should be performed only by qualified clinicians under institutionally approved protocols. FDA 510(k) clearance for medicinal leeches is limited to specific indications; investigational and off-label discussions are labeled accordingly. For patient-specific guidance, consult a qualified healthcare provider.