American Society of Hirudotherapy

In-hospital outcomes after switching from a bivalirudin-first strategy to an unfractionated heparin-first strategy for percutaneous coronary interventions

Research article published in Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy (2018)

Last Updated: June 18, 2026Reviewed by: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Research reportClinical TrialsJaswaney et al. · Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2018

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal anticoagulation strategy for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) remains debated. We report outcomes after switching from a bivalirudin-first to an unfractionated heparin (UFH)-first strategy for PCIs in a large academic center. METHODS: Patients undergoing PCI from June 1st 2013-May 31st, 2015 were identified through the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR), and divided into the "bivalirudin era" (June 2013-July 2014) and the "UFH era" (October 2014-May 2015). Bleeding outcomes were compared using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: A total of 1,145 patients were identified (bivalirudin era =752, UFH era =393). Radial access for PCI increased over time, and was lower in the bivalirudin era (26% vs. 34%, P<0.05). There were 32 major bleeds (4.3%) in the bivalirudin era and 29 major bleeds (7.4%) in the UFH era (P=0.03), with the majority being hemoglobin drops (≥3 g/dL) without overt clinical bleeding (85.7% of bleeds in the bivalirudin era and 86.2% of bleeds in the UFH era). After adjustments for other common major causes of bleeding, bivalirudin was associated with 78% lower odds of bleeding (OR =0.22; 95% CI: 0.05-0.91). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in major bleeding events occurred after switching to an UFH-first strategy, primarily associated with hemoglobin drop (≥3 g/dL) without overt clinical bleeding. Major overt bleeding was rare (0.3%) and similar in both groups. These results suggest a UFH-first strategy for PCI may have a role in patients with low bleeding risk.

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

Publication typeJournal Article

Summary

Peer-reviewed clinical and outcomes research relevant to anticoagulation, leech therapy, and microsurgical flap management. Indexed in PubMed and verified against the NCBI record.

Why This Matters for Hirudotherapy

This single-center registry analysis compared anticoagulation strategies for percutaneous coronary intervention before and after the institution switched from a bivalirudin-first to an unfractionated-heparin-first approach; among 1,145 patients the abstract reports more major bleeds in the heparin era (7.4% vs 4.3%, P=0.03, mostly hemoglobin drops without overt bleeding), with bivalirudin associated with 78% lower adjusted odds of bleeding, while overt major bleeding was rare and similar in both groups. The relevance to hirudotherapy is mechanistic and indirect: bivalirudin is a synthetic peptide engineered from hirudin, the medicinal leech's direct thrombin inhibitor, so this is a real-world data point in the broader 'leech secretome to anticoagulant drug' lineage. Caveat: this is a non-randomized before-after cohort at one academic center, subject to confounding by era (radial access also rose over time) — it suggests, but cannot establish, a bleeding advantage, and it concerns a hirudin-derived drug rather than leech therapy itself.

Citation

In-hospital outcomes after switching from a bivalirudin-first strategy to an unfractionated heparin-first strategy for percutaneous coronary interventions.

Jaswaney et al. · Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy, 2018

Added to ASH library: May 28, 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.