American Society of Hirudotherapy

Pharmacological adjuvant therapies in primary coronary interventions: bivalirudin

Review published in Cardiovascular & hematological agents in medicinal chemistry (2013)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Narrative reviewDrug DevelopmentLupi A et al. · Cardiovascular & hematological agents in medicinal chemistry, 2013

Abstract

The direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin has gained popularity in cardiovascular medicine over the past decade because, in comparison with unfractionated heparin, it guarantees a predictable dose-related degree of anticoagulation with a low immunogenic profile and, possibly, with reduced rates of major bleeding complications. In the past bivalirudin has been frequently employed in the management of patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. The REPLACE-2, ACUITY and ISAR-REACT4 studies demonstrated bivalirudin non-inferiority in comparison with unfractionated heparin in terms of ischemic end-points with a reduction of the bleeding rate also in patients acute coronary syndrome without ST elevation. Finally the results of the HORIZONS-AMI study positioned this drug as a first choice anticoagulant during percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. In fact the bivalirudin alone regimen, compared to unfractionated heparin plus GP2b3a inhibitors, decreased in-hospital bleeding rates and short and long term mortality. Given the body of clinical evidence, bivalirudin is likely to contend to GP2b3a inhibitors the leading place among the proposed anticoagulation strategies in the setting of acute coronary syndromes. The duration of the bivalirudin infusion after PCI and the optimal oral antiplatelet regimen associated to bivalirudin are important issues to be solved in future randomized controlled studies.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleReview
Indexed MeSH termsAntithrombinsCardiovascular DiseasesChemotherapy, AdjuvantHirudinsHumansMyocardial InfarctionPeptide FragmentsRecombinant Proteins

Summary

This review summarizes clinical trial evidence positioning bivalirudin as a first-line anticoagulant during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, citing reduced bleeding and mortality versus heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in HORIZONS-AMI and related studies.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This review summarized the role of bivalirudin, described in the abstract as a direct thrombin inhibitor, as an anticoagulant during percutaneous coronary interventions, citing the REPLACE-2, ACUITY, ISAR-REACT 4, and HORIZONS-AMI studies. The abstract reports that bivalirudin demonstrated non-inferiority to unfractionated heparin on ischemic endpoints with reduced bleeding rates, and decreased in-hospital bleeding and short- and long-term mortality in ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Although bivalirudin is categorized under the MeSH term 'Hirudins,' the abstract itself does not mention leeches, hirudin, or hirudotherapy at any point. Bivalirudin (formerly Hirulog) is a synthetic peptide anticoagulant designed partly on the C-terminal sequence of hirudin, the anticoagulant of the medicinal leech (Maraganore et al., 1990); this paper studies the drug, not leech therapy.

Citation

Reference (Vancouver style)

Lupi A, Rognoni A, Cavallino C, Secco GG, Prando MD, Santagostino M, et al. Pharmacological adjuvant therapies in primary coronary interventions: bivalirudin. Cardiovasc Hematol Agents Med Chem. 2013;11(2):106-114. doi:10.2174/1871525711311020006. PMID: 22963495

Bibliographic details (authors, volume, pages, DOI) are taken from the PubMed record.

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.