Американское общество гирудотерапии

A systematic review and meta-analysis of bivalirudin application in peripheral endovascular procedures

Meta-analysis published in Journal of vascular surgery (2019)

Последнее обновление: June 18, 2026Рецензент: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Meta-analysisРазработка лекарственных препаратовHu Y et al. · Journal of vascular surgery, 2019

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin (BIV) was shown to be superior to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions for reducing procedural blood loss. The aim of this study was to compare outcome profiles of BIV and UFH in peripheral endovascular procedures (PEPs) by synthesizing the currently available data. METHODS: Following the PRISMA statement, we conducted a comprehensive literature search using Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL Google scholar, and clinicaltrials.gov. We recruited randomized, controlled trials and well-conducted observational studies that compared UFH and BIV in PEPs requiring anticoagulation, excluding endovascular cardiac procedures and coronary interventions. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to compare the outcome profiles of these two agents. RESULTS: Thirteen articles containing 14 studies involving a total of 21,057 patients were enrolled. Of these, 2 were randomized controlled trials, 2 were prospective cohort studies, and 10 were retrospective studies. There were no significant differences between BIV and UFH in terms of procedural success rates, major and minor perioperative bleeding, transfusion, perioperative transient ischemic attack, or hemorrhagic strokes. However, compared with UFH, BIV had significantly lower odds ratios (OR) of perioperative mortality (OR, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.86), major adverse cardiovascular events (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.51-0.83), net adverse clinical events (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.88), perioperative myocardial infarction (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55-0.98), major vascular complications (OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.91), and minor vascular complications (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.40-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with UFH, PEPs using BIV had comparable procedural success rates and odds of perioperative transient ischemic attack and hemorrhagic stroke. However, procedures with BIV had a lower but nonsignificant odds of perioperative bleeding and transfusion. Depending on the procedures conducted, the patients who received BIV will have reduced or comparable odds of perioperative mortality, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, net adverse clinical events, and major and minor vascular complications. Therefore, BIV may be chosen solely as an alternative procedural anticoagulant to UFH for PEPs.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleMeta-AnalysisResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsAnticoagulantsAntithrombinsEndovascular ProceduresHemorrhageHeparinHirudinsHumansIschemic Attack, TransientMyocardial InfarctionObservational Studies as TopicPatient SafetyPeptide Fragments

Резюме

The direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin (BIV) was shown to be superior to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions for reducing procedural blood loss.

Почему это важно для гирудотерапии

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared bivalirudin with unfractionated heparin in peripheral endovascular procedures across 14 studies and 21,057 patients, finding comparable procedural success, bleeding, transfusion, transient ischemic attack, and hemorrhagic stroke outcomes, but lower odds of perioperative mortality, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, net adverse clinical events, and major and minor vascular complications with bivalirudin. The abstract does not mention hirudin, leeches, or any connection to hirudotherapy or leech-derived pharmacology. Therefore, from the abstract alone, a defensible link to ASH's domain cannot be established, and any such relevance would rest on external knowledge not present in the article.

Цитирование

A systematic review and meta-analysis of bivalirudin application in peripheral endovascular procedures

Hu Y et al. · Journal of vascular surgery, 2019

Связанный клинический контекст

Узнайте, как это исследование связано с клинической практикой

Добавлено в библиотеку ASH: May 27, 2026 · Последнее обновление сайта: June 18, 2026

Этот сайт предоставляет образовательную информацию и не является медицинской консультацией, диагнозом или рекомендацией по лечению. Гирудотерапия сопряжена с клинически значимыми рисками и должна проводиться только квалифицированными клиницистами в рамках институционально утверждённых протоколов. Разрешение FDA 510(k) для медицинских пиявок ограничено определёнными показаниями; обсуждения исследовательского и нелицензионного применения отмечены соответствующим образом. Для индивидуальных медицинских рекомендаций обратитесь к квалифицированному медицинскому специалисту.