Is routine post-procedural anticoagulation warranted after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction? Insights from the HORIZONS-AMI trial
Research article published in European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care (2015)
Abstract
AIM: Post-procedural anticoagulation (AC) for routine prophylaxis may be administered after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but the risks and benefits of this practice are uncertain. We therefore sought to assess the utility of routine post-procedural AC after primary PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients undergoing primary PCI in the Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction (HORIZONS-AMI) trial were grouped according to whether they received post-PCI AC for routine prophylaxis. Outcomes were assessed using propensity-adjusted multivariable analysis. Among 2932 patients in whom primary PCI for STEMI was performed, 869 (29.6%) received post-PCI AC for routine prophylaxis (median duration four days) and 2063 (70.4%) received no post-PCI AC. Time from PCI to ambulation was similar in both groups (median 0.9 vs 1.0 days, p=0.40), although hospitalization was prolonged in patients receiving AC for routine prophylaxis (median 6.0 vs 4.0 days, p<0.0001). After propensity-adjustment, patients who received and did not receive AC for routine prophylaxis after PCI experienced similar rates of 30-day adverse ischemic and major bleeding events. Deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary emboli developed rarely (0.3%) within 30 days, and were not significantly reduced by use of post-PCI AC for routine prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: In this large-scale prospective study, use of post-procedural AC for routine prophylaxis was relatively common, and was not associated with improved clinical outcomes, although the duration of hospitalization was prolonged. These data suggest that post-PCI AC for routine prophylaxis may not provide benefit after successful primary PCI in patients in whom early ambulation is likely.
Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.
Resumen
Is routine post-procedural anticoagulation warranted after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction? Insights from the HORIZONS-AMI trial.
Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia
Este estudio examinó la utilidad de la anticoagulación rutinaria posprocedimiento para profilaxis después de la intervención coronaria percutánea primaria en pacientes con infarto de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST, utilizando una comparación multivariable ajustada por propensión dentro de la población del ensayo HORIZONS-AMI. Los autores reportan que la anticoagulación rutinaria posprocedimiento no se asoció con mejores desenlaces clínicos, incluyendo eventos isquémicos adversos, sangrado mayor o trombosis venosa profunda/embolia pulmonar, mientras que la duración de la hospitalización se prolongó. El tema de la anticoagulación sistémica es farmacológicamente adyacente al secretoma de la sanguijuela, pero el estudio evalúa terapias farmacológicas cardiovasculares estándar en lugar de sustancias derivadas de sanguijuelas. Por lo tanto, este trabajo no tiene relevancia directa para la hirudoterapia o el secretoma de la sanguijuela.
Citación
Is routine post-procedural anticoagulation warranted after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction? Insights from the HORIZONS-AMI trial
Madhavan MV et al. · European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care, 2015
Contexto clínico relacionado
Explore cómo esta investigación se conecta con la práctica clínica
Añadido a la biblioteca ASH: May 27, 2026 · Última actualización del sitio: 18 de junio de 2026