Sociedad Americana de Hirudoterapia

Safety and Effectiveness of Bivalirudin in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Review published in Frontiers in pharmacology (2017)

Última actualización: 18 de junio de 2026Revisado por: ASH Editorial Board
Artículo de investigación — revisión de evidenciaReferencia del artículo
Evidence: Narrative reviewEnsayos clínicosDesarrollo de fármacosAhmad Hamdi AH et al. · Frontiers in pharmacology, 2017

Abstract

Recent clinical trials have shown that while bivalirudin exhibits similar efficacy with heparin, it offers several advantages over heparin, such as a better safety profile. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin use during Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) in the treatment of angina and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Science Direct from January 1980 to January 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bivalirudin to heparin during the course of PCI in patients with angina or ACS were included. Outcome measures included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularisation, stent thrombosis, stroke, and major bleeding. The selection, quality assessment, and data extraction of the included trials were done independently by four authors, and disagreements were resolved by consensus. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A total of 12 RCTs involving 44,088 subjects were included. Bivalirudin appeared to be non-superior compared to heparin in reducing all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularisation, and stroke. Bivalirudin appeared to be related to a higher risk of stent thrombosis when compared to heparin plus provisional use of a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI) at day 30 (RR 1.94 [1.16, 3.24] p < 0.01). Overall, bivalirudin-based regimens present a lesser risk of major bleeding (RR 0.56 [0.44-0.71] p < 0.001), and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding (RR 0.56 [0.43-0.73]) compared with heparin-based regimens either with provisional or routine use of a GPI. However, the magnitude of TIMI major bleeding effect varied greatly (p < 0.001), depending on whether a GPI was provisionally used (RR 0.42 [0.34-0.52] p < 0.001) or routinely used (RR 0.60 [0.43 -0.83] p < 0.001), in the heparin arm. This meta-analysis demonstrated that bivalirudin is associated with a lower risk of major bleeding, but a higher risk of stent thrombosis compared to heparin.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleReview

Resumen

Recent clinical trials have shown that while bivalirudin exhibits similar efficacy with heparin, it offers several advantages over heparin, such as a better safety profile.

Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia

Esta revisión sistemática y metaanálisis de 12 ensayos controlados aleatorizados (44.088 sujetos) evaluó la eficacia y la seguridad de la bivalirudina comparada con la heparina durante la intervención coronaria percutánea por angina o síndrome coronario agudo. La bivalirudina mostró no superioridad frente a la heparina en mortalidad por todas las causas, infarto de miocardio, revascularización y accidente cerebrovascular, pero se asoció con un menor riesgo de sangrado mayor y un mayor riesgo de trombosis del stent. El resumen no menciona sanguijuelas, hirudina, hirudoterapia ni ningún componente derivado de sanguijuela. No se describe ninguna conexión directa con el ámbito de la hirudoterapia de la ASH ni con el secretoma de la sanguijuela en este artículo.

Citación

Safety and Effectiveness of Bivalirudin in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ahmad Hamdi AH et al. · Frontiers in pharmacology, 2017

Contexto clínico relacionado

Añadido a la biblioteca ASH: May 27, 2026 · Última actualización del sitio: 18 de junio de 2026

Este sitio web proporciona información educativa y no constituye consejo médico, diagnóstico ni recomendaciones de tratamiento. La terapia con sanguijuelas medicinales conlleva riesgos clínicamente significativos y debe ser realizada únicamente por profesionales calificados bajo protocolos aprobados institucionalmente. La autorización 510(k) de la FDA para sanguijuelas medicinales se limita a indicaciones específicas; las discusiones sobre uso investigativo y fuera de indicación se señalan correspondientemente. Para orientación médica específica, consulte a un profesional de salud calificado.