Американское общество гирудотерапии

Retrospective, Single-Center Cohort Study of Bivalirudin Compared to Unfractionated Heparin in Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation

Clinical research published in Ann Pharmacother (2025)

Последнее обновление: June 18, 2026Рецензент: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Observational studyРазработка лекарственных препаратовБезопасность и инфекционный контрольLofy T et al. · The Annals of pharmacotherapy, 2025

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), a form of temporary mechanical circulatory support, causes a prothrombotic state due to activation of inflammatory processes via exposure of blood to the circuit. Systemic anticoagulation is recommended to prevent thrombosis. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) and direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) are anticoagulant agents that inactivate thrombin; however, UFH requires antithrombin III (ATIII) for its activity, and patients supported by ECMO are at risk for acquired ATIII deficiency. In addition, heparin may cause heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, complicating therapy. Guidelines on anticoagulant use in ECMO reference UFH as a recommended agent with DTIs as an alternative option. Meta-analyses comparing the 2 agents in ECMO have evaluated efficacy and safety; however, discordant results prompt the need for additional research. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate differences in bleeding and thrombotic events between UFH and bivalirudin for anticoagulation during ECMO support. METHODS: This study is a retrospective, single-center cohort study conducted at a primary ECMO center and a tertiary academic medical center. RESULTS: Bleeding and systemic thrombosis rates were not different between bivalirudin and UFH (30 vs 33 events, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.55-1.47, P = 0.7; 12 vs 17 events, HR = 0.68; 95% CI = 0.32-1.42, P = 0.3); however, when controlled for covariates, device thrombosis was lower with bivalirudin (30.2% vs 43.4%, P = 0.017). Time in therapeutic range (TTR) was higher with bivalirudin (69.98% vs 55.5%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: When compared to heparin, bivalirudin for anticoagulation in ECMO was associated with a decreased rate of device thrombosis and greater TTR.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleComparative Study
Indexed MeSH termsHumansHirudinsExtracorporeal Membrane OxygenationHeparinPeptide FragmentsRecombinant ProteinsRetrospective StudiesMaleFemaleMiddle AgedThrombosisAnticoagulants

Резюме

Single-center retrospective cohort comparing bivalirudin to unfractionated heparin for anticoagulation during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Documents bleeding, thrombotic events, and circuit complications.

Почему это важно для гирудотерапии

This retrospective, single-center cohort study compared bivalirudin with unfractionated heparin for systemic anticoagulation during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), reporting that bivalirudin was associated with lower device thrombosis rates (30.2% vs. 43.4%, P=0.017) and a higher time in therapeutic range (69.98% vs. 55.5%, P<0.001), with no significant difference in overall bleeding or systemic thrombosis. The abstract identifies bivalirudin as a direct thrombin inhibitor but does not mention hirudin, leeches, or leech therapy. No defensible connection to hirudotherapy or the leech secretome can be drawn from this abstract alone, as it contains no reference to any leech-derived compound. The study is therefore not directly relevant to ASH's domain.

Цитирование

Retrospective, Single-Center Cohort Study of Bivalirudin Compared to Unfractionated Heparin in Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Lofy T et al. · The Annals of pharmacotherapy, 2025

Связанный клинический контекст

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.