American Society of Hirudotherapy

Usefulness of Clopidogrel Loading in Patients Who Underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (from the BRAVO-3 Randomized Trial)

Randomized controlled trial published in The American journal of cardiology (2019)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Randomized controlled trialClinical TrialsSafety & Infection ControlNijenhuis VJ et al. · The American journal of cardiology, 2019

Abstract

P2Y12-inhibitor initiation with clopidogrel using a loading dose (LD) versus no LD (NLD) provides more rapid inhibition of platelet activation and reduced risk of ischemic events after coronary stenting. Whether a similar beneficial effect is achieved in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is unknown. We evaluate the effects of preprocedural clopidogrel LD versus no NLD on 48-hour and 30-day clinical outcomes after TAVI. In the BRAVO-3 trial, 802 patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent transfemoral TAVI were randomized to intraprocedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. Administration of clopidogrel LD was left to the discretion of the treating physician. For this analysis, patients were stratified according to receiving clopidogrel LD (n = 294, 36.6%) or NLD (n = 508, 63.4%) before TAVI. LD patients more often received a self-expandable prosthesis using larger sheaths. P2Y12-inhibitor maintenance therapy pre-TAVI was similar in patients with LD versus NLD (28.2% vs 33.1%, p = 0.16). LD versus NLD was associated with similar incidences of major adverse cardiovascular events (i e., death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) (4.1% vs 4.1%, p = 0.97) and major bleeding (8.5% vs 7.7%, p = 0.68), but a higher rate of major vascular complications (11.9% vs 7.1%, p = 0.02). Multivariable adjustment showed that clopidogrel LD did not affect any of the studied clinical events, including major vascular complications (odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.39, p = 0.67). Also patients on clopidogrel maintenance therapy and thus considered in steady state were not at reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with patients not on clopidogrel (3.7% vs 5.2%, p = 0.36). In conclusion, in patients who underwent TAVI, use of clopidogrel LD was associated with higher vascular complications and otherwise similar clinical events compared to NLD patients.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Indexed MeSH termsAged, 80 and overAortic Valve StenosisClopidogrelDose-Response Relationship, DrugEuropeFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMaleNorth AmericaPostoperative Complications

Summary

P2Y-inhibitor initiation with clopidogrel using a loading dose (LD) versus no LD (NLD) provides more rapid inhibition of platelet activation and reduced risk of ischemic events after coronary stenting.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This clinical trial evaluated the effects of a clopidogrel loading dose versus no loading dose on 48-hour and 30-day clinical outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). This study has no direct relevance to the American Society of Hirudotherapy, as it strictly focuses on antiplatelet and anticoagulant strategies in interventional cardiology without involving leeches, leech extracts, or the leech secretome. The findings simply indicate that clopidogrel loading doses were associated with higher vascular complications and otherwise similar clinical events compared to no loading dose. Therefore, this article does not contribute meaningful data to the field of hirudotherapy.

Citation

Usefulness of Clopidogrel Loading in Patients Who Underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (from the BRAVO-3 Randomized Trial)

Nijenhuis VJ et al. · The American journal of cardiology, 2019

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.