Bivalirudin versus heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Review published in Journal of interventional cardiology (2017)
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bivalirudin may be an effective anticoagulation alternative to heparin as anticoagulant agent in percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve interventions (PAVI). We aimed to compare safety and efficacy of bivalirudin versus heparin as the procedural anticoagulant agent in patients undergoing PAVI. METHODS: We conducted an electronic database search of all published data. The primary efficacy endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Safety endpoints include major and life-threatening bleed according to VARC and BARC bleeding, blood transfusion, vascular complications, and acute kidney injury. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) computed using the Mantel-Haenszel method. RESULTS: Three studies (n = 1690 patients) were included, one randomized trial and two observational studies. There was a significant difference favoring bivalirudin over heparin for myocardial infarction (OR 0.41, 95%CI 0.20-0.87). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days (OR 0.97, 95%CI 0.62-1.52), cardiovascular mortality (OR 1.03, 95%CI 0.52-2.05), stroke (OR 1.23, 95%CI 0.62-2.46), vascular complications (OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.70-1.32), acute kidney injury (OR 1.03, 95%CI 0.53-2.00), blood transfusion (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45-1.01), major and life-threatening bleed (OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.37-1.49), and BARC bleeding (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.23-1.18). CONCLUSIONS: In patient undergoing aortic valve interventions, no difference was seen between the use of bivalirudin and heparin as the procedural anticoagulant agent, except for a significant lower myocardial infarction events when bivalirudin was used. Further large randomized trials are needed to confirm current results.
Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.
Resumen
Bivalirudin may be an effective anticoagulation alternative to heparin as anticoagulant agent in percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve interventions (PAVI).
Por qué esto importa para la hirudoterapia
Esta revisión sistemática y metanálisis (tipos de publicación: revisión sistemática, metanálisis; 3 estudios; 1.690 pacientes —un ensayo aleatorizado y dos observacionales) comparó la seguridad y la eficacia de la bivalirudina frente a la heparina como anticoagulantes del procedimiento en intervenciones percutáneas con válvula aórtica transcatéter. La bivalirudina mostró tasas de infarto de miocardio significativamente menores (OR 0,41) sin diferencias significativas en mortalidad por todas las causas, mortalidad cardiovascular, accidente cerebrovascular, complicaciones vasculares, lesión renal aguda, transfusión sanguínea ni desenlaces hemorrágicos. Los autores concluyen que la bivalirudina y la heparina son ampliamente comparables para la anticoagulación en PAVI e instan a realizar ensayos aleatorizados de mayor tamaño para confirmar los resultados. El resumen no menciona sanguijuelas, hirudina ni hirudoterapia; por tanto, su relevancia para el ámbito de la ASH no queda establecida por el texto fuente.
Citación
Bivalirudin versus heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Villablanca PA et al. · Journal of interventional cardiology, 2017
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