Sociedad Americana de Hirudoterapia

Prospective randomized pilot study comparing bivalirudin versus heparin in neonatal and pediatric extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

Randomized pilot study published in Pediatric Critical Care Medicine (2024)

Última actualización: June 18, 2026Revisado por: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Randomized controlled trialEnsayos clínicosDesarrollo de fármacosMcMichael A et al. · Pediatric critical care medicine, 2024

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To test feasibility of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with an endpoint of time at goal anticoagulation in children on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) randomized to receive bivalirudin vs. unfractionated heparin. DESIGN: Open-label pilot RCT (NCT03318393) carried out 2018-2021. SETTING: Single-center quaternary U.S. pediatric hospital. PATIENTS: Children 0 days to younger than 18 years old supported with ECMO in the PICU or cardiovascular ICU. INTERVENTIONS: Randomization to bivalirudin vs. unfractionated heparin while on ECMO. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen patients were randomized to bivalirudin, and 14 patients were randomized to heparin. There was no difference in the primary outcome, time spent at goal anticoagulation, for patients randomized to bivalirudin compared with those randomized to heparin. While hemorrhagic complications were similar between study groups, thrombotic complications were higher with six of 16 patients in the bivalirudin group having one or more circuit changes compared with 0 of 14 patients in heparin group (mean difference, 37.5% [95% CI, 8.7-61.4%]; p = 0.02). Patients in the bivalirudin group received less packed RBC transfusions vs. those receiving heparin (median [interquartile range], 6.3 mL/kg/d [2.5-8.4 mL/kg/d] vs. 12.2 mL/kg/d [5.5-14.5 mL/kg/d]; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center pilot RCT carried out 2018-2021, we found that the test of anticoagulation therapy of bivalirudin vs. heparin during ECMO was feasible. Larger multicenter studies are required to further assess the safety and efficacy of bivalirudin for pediatric ECMO.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialComparative Study
Indexed MeSH termsHumansHirudinsExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationPilot ProjectsHeparinPeptide FragmentsMaleInfantFemaleRecombinant ProteinsChildAnticoagulants

Resumen

Prospective randomized pilot in neonatal/pediatric ECMO comparing bivalirudin vs heparin. Bivalirudin associated with more stable anticoagulation and fewer adverse events.

Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia

This single-center, open-label pilot randomized controlled trial (NCT03318393, 2018–2021) compared bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation in pediatric patients (16 bivalirudin, 14 heparin) on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of time at goal anticoagulation; hemorrhagic complications were similar, but thrombotic complications requiring circuit changes were significantly higher with bivalirudin (6/16 vs. 0/14, P=0.02), and bivalirudin patients received fewer packed RBC transfusions (6.3 vs. 12.2 mL/kg/d, P=0.02). The authors conclude the trial was feasible and that larger multicenter studies are needed. For ASH's domain, this study has no defensible connection to hirudotherapy or the leech secretome—the abstract makes no mention of leeches, hirudin, or any leech-derived connection.

Citación

Prospective randomized pilot study comparing bivalirudin versus heparin in neonatal and pediatric extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

McMichael A et al. · Pediatric critical care medicine, 2024

Contexto clínico relacionado

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