Reduction in Cardiac Mortality With Bivalirudin in Patients With and Without Major Bleeding

Impact of Periprocedural Adverse Events After PCI and CABG on 5-Year Mortality: The EXCEL Trial

BACKGROUND

The relative risks for different periprocedural major adverse events (MAE) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on subsequent mortality have not been described.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the association between periprocedural MAE occurring within 30 days postprocedure and early and late mortality after left main coronary artery revascularization by PCI and CABG.

METHODS

In the EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, patients with left main disease were randomized to PCI vs CABG. The associations between 12 prespecified nonfatal MAE and subsequent 5-year all-cause and cardiovascular death in 1,858 patients were examined using logistic regression.

RESULTS

One or more nonfatal MAE occurred in 111 of 935 patients (11.9%) after PCI and 419 of 923 patients (45.4%) after CABG (P < 0.0001). Patients with MAE were older and had more baseline comorbidities. Within 5 years, all-cause death occurred in 117 and 87 patients after PCI and CABG, respectively. Experiencing an MAE was a strong independent predictor of 5-year mortality after both PCI (adjusted OR: 4.61; 95% CI: 2.71-7.82) and CABG (adjusted OR: 3.25; 95% CI: 1.95-5.41). These associations were present within the first 30 days and between 30 days and 5 years postprocedure. Major or minor bleeding with blood transfusion ≥2 U was an independent predictor of 5-year mortality after both procedures. Stroke, unplanned revascularization for ischemia, and renal failure were significantly associated with mortality only after CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

In the EXCEL trial, nonfatal periprocedural MAE were strongly associated with early and late mortality after both PCI and CABG for left main disease.

The Evolution of Anticoagulation for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A 40-Year Journey

The selection of antithrombotic strategies continue to be of utmost importance during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and have evolved over the past 40 years. Although the backbone of therapy during PCI continues to be a combination of oral antiplatelets and parenteral anticoagulants, a variety of different approaches have been tested over time. In particular, different choices of anticoagulation management have been tested in the stable ischemic heart disease and acute coronary syndrome setting. Evaluation of alternative regimens in the quest to balance ischemic and bleeding risk have undoubtedly improved patient care with PCI. In the current review we highlight the evolution of evidence-based therapeutic options over the past 40 years from the beginning of coronary angioplasty to contemporary PCI. We provide insight into future therapeutic options and provide a contemporary overview of anticoagulation choices for patients who require PCI on the basis of up-to-date evidence balancing ischemic and bleeding risk and according to clinical presentation.

Association of Ischemic and Bleeding Events With Mortality Among Patients in Sweden With Recent Acute Myocardial Infarction Receiving Antithrombotic Therapy

IMPORTANCE

Antithrombotic treatment after myocardial infarction (MI) should be individualized based on the patient's risk of ischemic and bleeding events. Uncertainty remains regarding the relative prognostic importance of the 2 types of events, and further study would be useful.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the association of ischemic vs bleeding events with mortality in patients with a recent MI and assess whether the relative mortality risk for the 2 types of events has changed over the past 2 decades.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A cohort study based on nationwide registers in Sweden, 2012-2017, was conducted. Data were analyzed between July 2021 and May 2022. Patients with MI who were discharged alive with antithrombotic therapy (antiplatelet therapy or oral anticoagulation) were included in the analysis.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The incidence of a first ischemic event (hospitalization for MI or ischemic stroke) or bleeding event (hospitalization with bleeding) up to 1 year after discharge and the mortality risk up to 1 year after each type of event were assessed. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for 1-year mortality after an ischemic and bleeding event vs no event, and after an ischemic vs bleeding event. Adjusted HRs for mortality after ischemic vs bleeding events were compared among patients discharged in 1997-2000, 2001-2011, and 2012-2017.

RESULTS

Of 86 736 patients discharged after MI in 2012-2017 (median age, 71 [IQR, 62-80] years; 57 287 [66.0%] men), 4039 individuals experienced a first ischemic event (5.7 per 100 person-years) and 3399 experienced a first bleeding event (4.8 per 100 person-years). The mortality rate was 46.2 per 100 person-years after an ischemic event and 27.1 per 100 person-years after a bleeding event. The aHR for 1-year mortality vs no event was 4.16 (95% CI, 3.91-4.43) after an ischemic event and 3.43 (95% CI, 3.17-3.71) after a bleeding event. When the 2 types of events were compared, the aHR was 1.27 (95% CI, 1.15-1.40) for an ischemic vs bleeding event. There was no statistically significant difference in the aHR of an ischemic vs bleeding event in 1997-2000, 2001-2011, and 2012-2017.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this nationwide cohort study of patients with a recent MI, postdischarge ischemic events were more common and associated with higher mortality risk compared with bleeding events.

Occurrence and Risk Factors of Adverse Drug Reactions in Patients Receiving Bivalirudin as Anticoagulant During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Prospective, Multi-Center, Intensive Monitoring Study

Background

Bivalirudin is a common anticoagulant during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, since its application in China, it still lacks comprehensive evaluation of adverse events (AEs) or adverse drug reactions (ADRs) under the real-clinical setting conditions with a large-sample-size population. Therefore, this prospective, multi-center, intensive monitoring study aimed to comprehensively investigate the occurrence and risk factors of AEs and ADRs during PCI with bivalirudin as an anticoagulant.

Methods

A total of 3,049 patients who underwent PCI with bivalirudin as anticoagulant from 27 Chinese medical centers were enrolled. Safety data (AEs/ADRs) were collected from hospital admission to 72 h after bivalirudin administration; then, patients were followed up at the 30th day with the safety data collected as well.

Results

A total of 414 (13.58%) patients occurred AEs, among which 31 (1.02%) cases suffered from severe AEs and 8 (0.26%) cases died due to AEs. Importantly, 118 (3.87%) patients occurred bivalirudin related ADRs, among which 7 (0.23%) cases suffered from severe ADRs while no case (0%) died due to ADRs. Of note, 7 (0.23%) patients showed new ADRs, 34 (1.12%) patients experienced bleeding, and 79 (2.59%) patients had thrombocytopenia. Furthermore, age, renal function impairment, CRUSADE high risk stratification independently correlated with total ADRs risk; CRUSADE high risk stratification, emergency operation, full dose bivalirudin independently associated with bleeding risk; age, renal function impairment independently related to thrombocytopenia risk.

Conclusion

Bivalirudin is well-tolerated as an anticoagulant for PCI procedure; meanwhile, older age, renal function impairment, and CRUSADE high risk stratification serve as independent risk factors of bivalirudin related ADRs.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

Mortality after bleeding versus myocardial infarction in coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bleeding is the principal safety concern of antithrombotic therapy and occurs frequently among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of bleeding on mortality compared with that of myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with CAD.

METHODS

We searched Medline and Embase for studies that included patients with CAD and that reported both the association between the occurrence of bleeding and mortality, and between the occurrence of MI and mortality within the same population. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality associated with bleeding and MI were extracted and ratios of hazard ratios (rHRs) were pooled by using inverse variance weighted random effects meta-analyses. Early events included periprocedural or within 30-day events after revascularisation or acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Late events included spontaneous or beyond 30-day events after revascularisation or ACS.

RESULTS

A total of 141,059 patients were included across 16 studies; 128,660 (91%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Major bleeding increased the risk of mortality to the same extent as MI (rHRsbleedingvsMI 1.10, 95% CI: 0.71-1.71, p=0.668). Early bleeding was associated with a higher risk of mortality than early MI (rHRsbleedingvsMI 1.46, 95% CI: 1.13-1.89, p=0.004), although this finding was not present when only randomised trials were included. Late bleeding was prognostically comparable to late MI (rHRsbleedingvsMI 1.14, 95% CI: 0.87-1.49, p=0.358).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with MI, major and late bleeding is associated with a similar increase in mortality, whereas early bleeding might have a stronger association with mortality.

Antithrombotic regimens for percutaneous coronary intervention of the left main coronary artery: The EXCEL trial

OBJECTIVES

We compared the effect of bivalirudin or heparin and use or nonuse of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) on the outcome of left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the randomized EXCEL trial.

BACKGROUND

The optimal antithrombotic regimen to support PCI of the LMCA remains controversial because of low representation of this subset in clinical trials.

METHODS

The PCI cohort (n = 928) in EXCEL was divided according to bivalirudin versus heparin antithrombin treatment and compared for the primary composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke at 30 days and 5 years.

RESULTS

Bivalirudin was used in 319 patients (34.4%). The composite endpoint at 30 days occurred in 7.2% versus 3.8% bivalirudin and heparin patients, respectively, p = .02; at 5 years, the composite endpoint occurred in 26.3% versus 19.9% bivalirudin and heparin patients, respectively, p = .02. Major bleeding was more frequent in bivalirudin patients (4.1% versus 1.3%, p = .008). There were no differences in stent thrombosis between the groups. Bivalirudin use was an independent predictor of the 30-day composite endpoint (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.28-6.48, p = .01) but not of the 5-year composite endpoint (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.84-2.02, p = .23). GPI use was infrequent (n = 67, 7.2%) and was not associated with adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Among patients undergoing LMCA PCI in the EXCEL trial, procedural use of bivalirudin was associated with greater rates of periprocedural MI and the 30-day composite endpoint without reducing bleeding complications. Five-year outcomes were similar. GPIs were used infrequently and were not associated with clinical outcomes.

Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of recurrent acute myocardial infarction in China

BACKGROUND

Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of recurrent acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after initial AMI remain poorly understood. Data on recurrent AMI in China is unknown.

METHODS

Using the China Patient-centred Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events (PEACE)-Prospective AMI Study, we studied 3387 patients admitted to 53 hospitals for AMI and discharged alive. The association of recurrent AMI with 1-year mortality was evaluated using time-dependent Cox regression. Recurrent AMI events were classified as early (1-30 days), late (31-180 days), and very late (181-365 days). Their impacts on 1-year mortality were estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology and compared by the log-rank test. Multivariable modelling was used to identify factors associated with recurrent AMI.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age was 60.7 (11.9) years and 783 (23.1%) were women. The observed 1-year recurrent AMI rate was 2.5% (95% CI 2.00 to 3.07) with 35.7% events occurring within the first 30 days. Recurrent AMI was associated with 1-year mortality with an adjusted HR of 25.42 (95% CI 15.27 to 42.34). Early recurrent AMI was associated with the highest 1-year mortality rate of 53.3% (log-rank p<0.001). Predictors of recurrent AMI included age 75-84, in-hospital percutaneous coronary intervention, heart rate >90 min/beats at initial admission, renal dysfunction, and not being prescribed any of guideline-based medications at discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

One-third of recurrent AMI events occurred early. Recurrent AMI is strongly associated with 1-year mortality, particularly if early. Heightened surveillance during this early period and improving prescription of recommended discharge medications may reduce recurrent AMI in China.

Underweight Predicts Greater Risk of Cardiac Mortality Post Acute Myocardial Infarction

Increased body mass index (BMI) is a well-established risk factor for cardiovascular disease; however, patients with elevated BMI, in comparison to those with low BMI, seem to have better survival, a phenomenon reported as "obesity paradox," which remains controversial. We investigated the effect of BMI on cardiac mortality post acute myocardial infarction (AMI).In this analysis, 3562 AMI patients were included and classified into four groups based on BMI values. The primary endpoint was cardiac death. Compared to normoweight group, overweight and obese group subjects were younger, mostly men, and more likely to receive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and had higher levels of glucose and lipids, but lower level of NTproBNP. Subjects in the underweight group were older, were mostly women, had lower Barthel index (BI), were less likely to receive PCI, and had lower levels of glucose and lipids, but higher level of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) and higher rates of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) < 50%. During a median follow-up period of 1.9 years, cardiac death occurred significantly more in the underweight group (30.0%, 10.6%, 7.0%, and 5.0% among the four groups from underweight to obese; P < 0.001 for trend). The Cox analysis revealed that underweight was an independent predictor of subsequent cardiac death (odds ratio (OR), 1.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.07-3.25) and identified that older age, BI < 60, higher levels of cardiac troponin I (cTnI), LVEF < 50%, and not receiving PCI were independently associated with increased risk of cardiac death.Patients who were underweight were at greater risk of cardiac death post AMI. In addition, older age, frail, higher levels of cTnI, LVEF < 50%, and not receiving PCI also independently predicted cardiac mortality post AMI.

Impact of Baseline Anemia in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Prespecified Analysis From the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART Trial

Background

The impact of baseline anemia in a contemporary acute coronary syndrome (ACS) population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of predominant radial artery access, potent P2Y12 inhibition, and rare use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors has not been adequately studied.

Methods and Results

ACS patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between 2014 and 2016 in the VALIDATE‐SWEDEHEART (Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in ST‐Segment and Non–ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence‐Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies Registry) trial without missing values for hemoglobin were included (n=5482). Mortality, myocardial reinfarction, and major bleeding at 180 days were assessed using Cox regression models and propensity score matching. All studied comorbidities were more common in ACS patients who had anemia (n=792). ACS patients with anemia had higher rates of 180‐day mortality (6.9% versus 2.1%; hazard ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3–2.7; P<0.001), myocardial reinfarction (4.3% versus 1.9%; hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1–2.7; P=0.013), and major bleeding (13.4% versus 8.2%; hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0–1.6; P=0.041). The results were most evident in patients with a hemoglobin value <100 g/L, who had a nearly 10 times higher mortality rate.

Conclusions

Baseline anemia in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, treated according to current practice including routine radial artery access, constitutes a high‐risk feature for both ischemic events, bleeding events, and mortality. A multidisciplinary approach is warranted to maximize benefit and minimize patient risk.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02311231.

Bivalirudin Versus Heparin During Intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

INTRODUCTION

Bivalirudin and heparin are the two most commonly used anticoagulants used during Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). The results of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy in the era of radial access are controversial, questioning the positive impact of bivalirudin on bleeding. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarize the results of RCTs comparing the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin versus heparin with or without Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors (GPI).

METHODS

This systematic review was performed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses PRISMA statements for reporting systematic reviews. We searched the National Library of Medicine PubMed, Clinicaltrial.gov and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to include clinical studies comparing bivalirudin with heparin in patients undergoing PCI. Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria and were reviewed for the summary.

FINDINGS

Several RCTs and meta-analyses have demonstrated the superiority of bivalirudin over heparin plus routine GPI use in terms of preventing bleeding complications but at the expense of increased risk of ischemic complications such as stent thrombosis. The hypothesis of post- PCI bivalirudin infusion to mitigate the risk of acute stent thrombosis has been tested in various RCTs with conflicting results. In comparison, heparin offers the advantage of having a reversible agent, of lower cost and reduced incidence of ischemic complications.

CONCLUSION

Bivalirudin demonstrates its superiority over heparin plus GPI with better clinical outcomes in terms of less bleeding complications, thus making it as anticoagulation of choice particularly in patients at high risk of bleeding. Further studies are warranted for head to head comparison of bivalirudin to heparin monotherapy to establish an optimal heparin dosing regimen and post-PCI bivalirudin infusion to affirm its beneficial effect in reducing acute stent thrombosis.

Bivalirudin versus heparin with primary percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Optimal adjunctive therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated with primary PCI (PPCI) remains a matter of debate. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin to unfractionated heparin (UFH), with or without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in a large real-world population, using data from the Swedish national registry, SWEDEHEART.

METHOD

From 2008 to 2014 we identified 23,800 STEMI patients presenting within 12 hours from symptom onset treated with PPCI and UFH ± GPI or bivalirudin±GPI. Primary outcomes included 30-day all-cause mortality and major in-hospital bleeding. Multivariable regression models and propensity score modelling were utilized to study adjusted association between treatment and outcome.

RESULTS

Treatment with UFH ± GPI was associated with similar risk of 30-day mortality compared to bivalirudin±GPI (5.3% vs 5.5%, adjusted HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.82-1.07). The adjusted risk for 1-year mortality, 30-day and 1-year stent thrombosis and re-infarction did not differ significantly between UFH ± GPI and bivalirudin±GPI. In contrast, treatment with UFH ± GPI was associated with a significant higher risk of major in-hospital bleeding (adjusted OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.30-2.03). When including GPI use in the multivariable analysis, the difference was attenuated and no longer significant (adjusted OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.92-1.70).

CONCLUSION

Bivalirudin±GPI was associated with significantly lower risk for major inhospital bleeding but no significant difference in 30-day or one year mortality, stent thrombosis or re-infarction compared with UFH ± GPI. The bleeding reduction associated with bivalirudin could be explained by the greater GPI use with UFH.

Individualized antithrombotic therapy in high-risk cardiovascular patients

Recent guidelines suggest dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after 'drug-eluting' stent (DES) implantation for 6 months in stable patients and for 12 months in patients after acute coronary syndrome. Serious complications after stent implantation include stent thrombosis, recurrent myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death and bleeding. These complications also occur beyond 1 year after coronary intervention. Thus, it is important to consider whether a prolonged DAPT (>12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention) is of benefit to lower thrombo-ischemic events in high-risk patients. This review addresses the results of recent randomized clinical studies (DAPT, ITALIC, OPTIDUAL and PEGASUS) and meta-analyses to support the author's view of which patient collectives might benefit from prolonged DAPT.

Anticoagulant Therapy for Acute Coronary Syndromes

Anticoagulation in conjunction with antiplatelet therapy is central to the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS). When used effectively it is associated with a reduction in recurrent ischaemic events including myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis as well as a reduction in death. Effective ischaemic risk reduction whilst balancing bleeding risk remains a clinical challenge. This article reviews the current available evidence for anticoagulation in ACS and recommendations from the European Society of Cardiology.

Bivalirudin infusion to reduce ventricular infarction: the open-label, randomised Bivalirudin Infusion for Ventricular InfArction Limitation (BIVAL) study

AIMS

The aim of the study was to investigate whether bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) reduces infarct size (IS) for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) in large acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This multicentre open-label trial randomised 78 patients undergoing PPCI for large AMI to bivalirudin or UFH. The primary endpoint was IS, assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) five days after PPCI. Secondary endpoints included index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR), CMR-assessed microvascular obstruction (MVO) and ejection fraction, and biomarkers for thrombin activity and cell injury. No difference was observed in mean IS at five days (25.0±19.7 g for bivalirudin vs. 27.1±20.7 g for UFH; p=0.75). Early MVO was numerically lower with bivalirudin (5.3±5.8 g vs. 7.7±6.3 g; p=0.17), with no significant difference in ejection fraction at 90 days (54.6±12.0% vs. 49.1±12.1%; p=0.11). In the biomarkers, thrombin-antithrombin complexes were reduced by 4.8 ug/L over the first day for bivalirudin versus an increase of 1.9 ug/L in the heparin arm (p=0.0003). Acute IMR was lower (43.5±21.6 vs. 68.7±35.8 mmHg×s, respectively; p=0.014). In a planned interim analysis, an approximate 11% reduction in IS was observed with bivalirudin; the trial was discontinued for futility.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not achieve its primary endpoint of significant infarct size reduction in PPCI by prolonged bivalirudin infusion compared to UFH, even though complete thrombin inhibition was achieved in the acute phase, with a lower myocardial microcirculation resistance at the end of the procedure.

Controversies in the Management of ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Thrombin Inhibition

Anticoagulation is essential in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) to prevent further thrombosis and to maintain patency of the infarct-related artery after reperfusion. The various anticoagulant medications available for use in patients with STEMI include unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparin, fondaparinux, and bivalirudin, a direct thrombin inhibitor. The authors review the current anticoagulation strategies for patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), fibrinolysis, or no reperfusion. The authors present the latest evidence and controversies on this topic, with a focus on bivalirudin versus UFH in the setting of primary PCI for STEMI.

Gender-based outcomes of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to perform a gender-based meta-analysis of the outcome of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI).

BACKGROUND

Bivalirudin has been shown to decrease major bleeding when compared to heparin ± glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in patients undergoing PCI. It is unclear, however, if those differences in outcomes are the same for men and women.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared bivalirudin to heparin with or without GPI in patients undergoing PCI and reported outcome data that were stratified by gender. Random effect model was used to pool odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

We included 9 trials with 33,224 patients. Bivalirudin decreased major bleeding when compared to heparin plus routine GPI in both men (OR: 0.51, P < 0.001) and women (OR: 0.55, P < 0.001). However, when GPI were used selectively with heparin, the bleeding lowering effect of bivalirudin was statistically significant in men (OR: 0.69, P = 0.02) but not in women (OR: 0.71, P = 0.21). When compared to heparin ± GPI, there was a nonstatistically significant trend toward lower all-cause mortality with bivalirudin in both men (OR: 0.76, P = 0.055) and women (OR: 0.79, P = 0.21). There were no significant differences in major adverse cardiovascular events between heparin and bivalirudin in both men and women.

CONCLUSION

Bivalirudin decreases major bleeding in both men and women when compared to heparin plus routine GPI. However, when compared to heparin alone, the bleeding lowering benefit of bivalirudin is less evident in women. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The Rise and Fall of Anticoagulation with Bivalirudin During Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Review Article

Bivalirudin is a direct thrombin inhibitor used during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Treatment with bivalirudin compared to heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) reduced bleeding complications, but resulted in higher rates of ischemic events, including acute stent thrombosis in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Thus, it may be considered a reasonable alternative antithrombotic agent in patients at high risk of bleeding undergoing PCI. However its superiority over heparin alone is questioned particularly in the era of novel antiplatelet agents and transradial PCI.

Intracoronary Bivalirudin Bolus in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Treated with Primary Angioplasty: Theoretical Bases, Clinical Experience, and Future Applications

Intracoronary thrombus is a common finding in acute coronary syndromes and often correlates with adverse prognosis and complications during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). Bivalirudin, a direct thrombin inhibitor, is one of the recommended antithrombotic treatments for PCI in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The intracoronary administration of a bivalirudin loading dose, even if off-label, offers theoretical advantages over the standard intravenous route, providing a very high drug concentration in the infarct-related artery without increasing the total dose of the drug administered. After the description in case reports of such an approach, a larger scale experience was recently reported in a large cohort of patients with STEMI treated during primary PCI with a bivalirudin intracoronary loading dose followed by the standard intravenous maintenance infusion. As a control group, a propensity score-matched cohort of patients undergoing primary PCI treated with intravenous bivalirudin in the same institution was selected. Compared with the intravenous bolus, the intracoronary administration of bivalirudin was associated with improved ST-segment resolution, lower post-procedural peak CK-MB levels, and better Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) frame count values, without difference in bleeding rates. Thus, this new promising antithrombotic strategy, based on the intracoronary administration of a bivalirudin loading dose during primary PCI, appeared safe, improved myocardial reperfusion, and mitigated enzymatic myocardial infarct size compared with the standard intravenous protocol. Randomized trials are warranted to confirm these results and evaluate the possible long-term clinical benefits.

Impact of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors Use on Outcomes After Lower Extremity Endovascular Interventions From Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2006-2011)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to study the impact of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) on in-hospital outcomes.

BACKGROUND

There is paucity of data regarding the impact of GPI on the outcomes following peripheral endovascular interventions.

METHODS

The study cohort was derived from Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between the years 2006 and 2011. Peripheral endovascular interventions and GPI utilization were identified using appropriate ICD-9 Diagnostic and procedural codes. Two-level hierarchical multivariate mixed models were created. The study outcomes were: primary (in-hospital mortality and amputation studied separately) and secondary (composite of in-hospital mortality and postprocedural complications). Hospitalization costs were also assessed.

RESULTS

GPI utilization (OR, 95% CI, P-value) was independently predictive of lower amputation rates (0.36, 0.27-0.49, <0.001). There was no significant difference in terms of in-hospital mortality (0.59, 0.31-1.14, P 0.117), although GPI use predicted worse secondary outcomes (1.23, 1.03-1.47, 0.023). Following propensity matching, the amputation rate was lower (3.2% vs. 8%, P < 0.001), while hospitalization costs were higher in the cohort that received GPI ($21,091 ± 404 vs. 19,407 ± 133, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Multivariate analysis revealed GPI use in peripheral endovascular interventions to be suggestive of an increase in composite end-point of in-hospital mortality and postprocedural complications, no impact on in-hospital mortality alone, significantly lower rate of amputation, and increase in hospitalization costs. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Antithrombotic therapy before, during and after emergency angioplasty for ST elevation myocardial infarction

The first three hours after symptom onset hold the maximum potential for myocardial reperfusion and salvage in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. During this period timely primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) or, when PPCI is not promptly feasible, pre-hospital administration of fibrinolyis or a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa-inhibitor (GPI) have been shown to restore coronary patency and reperfusion and even result in myocardial infarction (MI) abortion. On the other hand, oral antiplatelet therapy may not yet guarantee sufficient platelet inhibition. Patients presenting after this golden time have less, if any, benefit from an aggressive antithrombotic treatment prior to PPCI. Antithrombotic treatment during primary angioplasty should be tailored on the basis of the coronary thrombotic burden, vascular approach and the patient's risk of bleeding complications. A GPI-based approach may be favourable in patients presenting early with large MI and high thrombus burden, whereas a bivalirudin-based approach without GPI may be preferred in patients with higher bleeding risk. There are no data to support the use of GPI in bailout conditions. The powerful oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitors, prasugrel and ticagrelor, have been clearly shown to prevent stent thrombosis and recurrent ischaemic events after emergency percutaneous coronary intervention in STEMI patients. Open issues remaining are the treatment of patients with high bleeding risk, such as the elderly and those requiring anticoagulation, as well as the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after STEMI.

Comparative Efficacy of Transradial Versus Transfemoral Approach for Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Transradial artery (TRA) approach is associated with fewer vascular complications and reduced mortality in patients at high risk compared with transfemoral approach (TFA). The objective of our study was to compare the characteristics and outcomes of patients who had coronary angiography by TRA and TFA over the course of hospital implementation of this approach. We included 12,928 patients from Baylor University Medical Center and Baylor Heart and Vascular Hospital, Dallas, Texas, who underwent a coronary angiography from January 2008 to March 2015. To control for selection bias and the learning curve, a nested matched study design was used for patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with TRA patients matched with TFA by age (±2 years) and calendar year of the procedure in a ratio of 1:3. TRA for PCI increased from nearly 0% in 2008 to 9% in 2014. Including patients from 2011 to 2015 for the analysis, patients with TFA were older (65 ± 12 vs 64 ± 11) and had lower mean body mass index (30 ± 7 vs 33 ± 9 kg/m(2)) than patients with TRA. Patients with TRA had less bleeding, dialysis, pseudoaneurysm, and access site hematomas than the patients with TRA (0.7% vs 0%; p = 0.02). By a conditional logistic regression, we observed fewer complications, readmissions, and in-hospital deaths among TRA patients than the matched TFA patients. In conclusion, patients undergoing angiography with/without PCI through TRA had fewer complications, readmissions, and a shorter length of hospital stay after procedure versus TFA at our hospital.

Prolonged High-Dose Bivalirudin Infusion Reduces Major Bleeding Without Increasing Stent Thrombosis in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Novel Insights From an Updated Meta-Analysis

Background

The optimal antithrombotic therapy in patients with ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains a matter of debate. This updated meta‐analysis investigated the impact of (1) bivalirudin (with and without prolonged infusion) and (2) prolonged PCI‐dose (1.75 mg/hg per hour) bivalirudin infusion compared with conventional antithrombotic therapy on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary PCI.

Methods and Results

Eligible randomized trials were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane database, and proceedings of major congresses. Prespecified outcomes were major bleeding (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3–5), acute stent thrombosis, as well as all‐cause and cardiac mortality at 30 days. Six randomized trials (n=17 294) were included. Bivalirudin compared with heparin (+/− glycoprotein‐IIb/IIIa inhibitor) was associated with reduction in major bleeding (odds ratio [OR]: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.48–0.88, P=0.006, derived from all 6 trials), increase in acute stent thrombosis (OR: 2.75, 95% CI: 1.46–5.18, P=0.002, 5 trials), and lower rate of all‐cause mortality (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67–0.98, P=0.03, 6 trials) as well as cardiac mortality (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.55–0.87, P=0.001, 5 trials). The incidence of acute stent thrombosis did not differ between the prolonged PCI‐dose bivalirudin and comparator group (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.27–2.46, P=0.71, 3 trials), whereas the risk of bleeding was reduced despite treatment with high‐dose bivalirudin infusion (OR: 0.28, 95% CI: 0.13–0.60, P=0.001, 3 trials).

Conclusions

Bivalirudin (with and without prolonged infusion) compared with conventional antithrombotic therapy in ST‐segment‐elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary PCI reduces major bleeding and death, but increases the rate of acute stent thrombosis. However, prolonging the bivalirudin infusion at PCI‐dose (1.75 mg/kg per hour) for 3 hours eliminates the excess risk of acute stent thrombosis, while maintaining the bleeding benefits.

The Impact of Timing of Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Events on Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The ADAPT-DES Study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to understand the impact of the timing of ischemic and hemorrhagic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents on subsequent mortality.

BACKGROUND

These events have been strongly associated with subsequent death.

METHODS

In the multicenter, prospective ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug Eluting Stents) study, patients at 11 clinical sites with successful PCI with drug-eluting stents underwent assessment of platelet function and were followed for 2 years. Events occurring after PCI-definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI) not related to ST, and clinically relevant bleeding (CB)-were classified as early (≤30 days), late (31 to 365 days), or very late (>365 days). Mortality within 30 days of each event was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methodology. Cox regression multivariate modeling was used to analyze the relationship between each event (as a time-updated variable) and mortality over the entire study period.

RESULTS

Among 8,582 patients, 1,060 (12.4%) had events-691 (8.1%) had CB, 294 (3.4%) had MI, and 75 (0.9%) had ST-and 7,522 (87.6%) had no events. The highest risk was associated with early ST (38.5% mortality at 30 days after the event), whereas very late MI (7.5%) and late CB (7.3%) were less dangerous. By multivariate analysis, each event was independently predictive of death, with hazard ratios of 2.4, 1.8, and 11.4, respectively (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 1 in 8 patients successfully undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents had CB, MI, or ST during the ensuing 2 years. These events are associated with an increased hazard of mortality, particularly within the first 30 days following the event, warranting efforts to prevent their occurrence.

Which long-term antiplatelet regimen for patients with acute coronary syndromes?

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT ) is recommended up to 12 months in patients with acute coronary syndromes, but the risk of cardiovascular events in this group of subjects remains high, also in the long-term follow-up. The potential benefit of a prolonged period of DAPT has recently been assessed in three large-volume randomized clinical trials (PEGASUS, DAPT-MI, TRA2P-TIMI 50) but final results are quite difficult to interpret and clear indications for the clinical practice are so far lacking. A direct comparison of the three studies is challenging since relevant differences exist as to clinical features and risk profile of the study populations. Different anti-platelet drugs have been tested in addition to aspirin making it difficult to understand which antithrombotic regimen guarantees the best balance between thrombotic and haemorragic events. Finally, specific designs of these trials, evaluating complex composite end-points, may generate further difficulties in the interpretation of data. We believe that the use of total mortality rather than cardiovascular death as end-point, would better describe the long-term outcome incorporating the catastrophic consequences of bleeding. This review seeks to highlight strengths and weaknesses of these three large-volume trials and tries to establish whether or not prolonging DAPT beyond 12 months in patients with acute coronary syndromes is useful and which anti-thrombotic regimen would offer the best balance between thrombotic and bleeding risk.

Re-infarction after primary percutaneous coronary intervention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Thrombus formation, usually on a ruptured atherosclerotic plaque, is pivotal in the pathogenesis of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This thrombus formation provides the milieu for re-occlusion of the infarct-related artery, the main location of re-infarction post-STEMI. Although rates of re-infarction are lower after reperfusion by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than after fibrinolytic therapy, re-infarction remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality.

RECENT FINDINGS

The predominant cause of re-infarction after primary PCI is stent thrombosis. Two recent trials [A Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ambulance Initiation of Bivalirudin vs. Heparin ± Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors in Patients with STEMI Undergoing Primary PCI (EUROMAX) and Unfractionated heparin versus bivalirudin in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (HEAT-PPCI)] have each reported higher rates of stent thrombosis in the first 24 h after primary PCI in patients assigned to receive bivalirudin, which affects the balance of risks and benefit of bivalirudin post-STEMI. Also, in a subanalysis of the Platelet Inhibition And Patient Outcomes trial, ticagrelor reduces re-infarction compared with clopidogrel in patients with STEMI after primary PCI. Other nonpharmacological or mechanical interventions during primary PCI, with the exception of newer-generation drug-eluting stents in the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry, have not affected rates of re-infarction.

SUMMARY

Re-infarction remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Re-infarction rates are altered by pharmacological strategy and stent selection in primary PCI. The design of future trials to detect possible treatment differences in relatively low event rates will provide challenges, and may require more novel strategies such as administrative data collection for patient characteristics and key outcomes.

Bivalirudin Is Associated With Improved In-Hospital Outcomes Compared With Heparin in Percutaneous Vascular Interventions

Background—

Peripheral vascular interventions are increasingly preferred for the treatment of patients with symptomatic peripheral arterial disease because they are associated with similar clinical outcomes and lower morbidity than open surgical procedures. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative effectiveness of procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing peripheral vascular interventions.

Methods and Results—

This was a retrospective, observational study using the Premier Hospital administrative database. We examined 23 934 consecutive patients undergoing lower extremity peripheral vascular interventions between January 2008 and December 2012 who were treated with either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. In-hospital end points included death, myocardial infarction, transfusion, stroke, amputation, and the composite end points of major adverse cardiovascular events, and net adverse clinical events. Propensity score matching was performed to control for baseline imbalances and yielded 3649 matched pairs. After propensity score matching, patients treated with bivalirudin had lower in-hospital event rates with significantly lower mortality (odds ratio, 0.40; P =0.017), need for blood product transfusion (odds ratio, 0.74; P =0.009), major adverse cardiovascular events (odds ratio, 0.64; P =0.003), and net adverse clinical events (odds ratio, 0.72; P <0.001). These associations were observed consistently across clinically relevant subgroups.

Conclusions—

In patients undergoing peripheral vascular interventions, procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin may result in more favorable in-hospital outcomes compared with unfractionated heparin, the current standard of care. These observations will require prospective confirmation in a randomized, controlled trial.

An updated comprehensive meta-analysis of bivalirudin vs heparin use in primary percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Despite several randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, the ideal anticoagulant for patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial. We performed an updated meta-analysis including recently reported randomized clinical trials that compare bivalirudin and heparin with or without provisional administration of a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI) for primary PCI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Scientific databases and Web sites were searched for randomized clinical trials. Data from 6 trials involving 14,095 patients were included. The pooled risk ratios (RRs) were calculated using random-effects models. Moderator analyses examined the impact of routine use of GPI, radial access, and P2Y12 inhibitors on safety outcomes. At 30 days, patients receiving bivalirudin had rates of major adverse cardiac events similar to those receiving heparin with or without provisional GPI (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87-1.19, P = .800), myocardial infarction (RR 1.41, 95% CI 0.94-2.11, P = .089), target vessel revascularization (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.91-2.04, P = .122), and net adverse clinical events (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.64-1.01, P = .069). However, bivalirudin use decreased the risk of all-cause mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67-0.99, P = .041) and cardiac mortality (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.51-0.91, P = .009) at 30 days, There were higher rates of acute stent thrombosis (RR 3.31, 95% CI 1.79-6.10, P < .001) in patients receiving bivalirudin. Bivalirudin use also decreased the risk of major bleeding at 30 days by 37% (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.90, P = .012), but bleeding risk varied depending on routine GPI use with heparin (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.23-0.81, P = .009) vs bailout (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.42-1.25, P = .252), predominantly radial access (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.25-1.15, P = .114) vs non-radial access (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.36-0.99, P = .049), and second-generation P2Y12 inhibitor use with bivalirudin (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40-1.24, P = .226) vs clopidogrel use (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.18-0.85, P = .018).

CONCLUSIONS

In primary PCI, relative to heparin, bivalirudin reduces the risk for all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and major bleeding but yields similar rates of major adverse cardiac event and net adverse clinical event at 30 days. However, the benefit of a reduction in bleeding with bivalirudin appears to be modulated by the concurrent administration of second-generation P2Y12 inhibitors with bivalirudin, using radial access, and avoiding routine GPI use with heparin.

Bivalirudin, glycoprotein inhibitor, and heparin use and association with outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the United Kingdom

AIMS

The HORIZONS trial reported a survival advantage for bivalirudin over heparin-with-glycoprotein inhibitors (GPIs) in primary PCI for ST elevation myocardial infarction. This drove an international shift in clinical practice. Subsequent studies have produced divergent findings on mortality benefits with bivalirudin. We investigated this issue in a larger population than studied in any of these trials, using the United Kingdom national PCI registry.

METHODS AND RESULTS

61 136 primary PCI procedures were performed between January 2008 and January 2012. Demographic and procedural data were obtained from the registry. Mortality information was obtained through the UK Office of National Statistics. Multivariable logistic regression and propensity analysis modelling were utilized to study the association of different anti-thrombotic strategies with outcomes. Unadjusted data demonstrated near-identical survival curves for bivalirudin and heparin-plus-GPI groups. Significantly higher early and late mortality was found in patients treated with heparin alone ( ITALIC! P < 0.0001) but this group had a markedly higher baseline risk. After propensity matching, the bivalirudin vs. heparin-plus-GPI groups still demonstrated very similar adjusted mortality (odds ratio 1.00 at 30 days, and 0.96 at 1 year). Patients treated with heparin alone continued to show higher mortality after adjustment, although effect size was considerably diminished (odds ratio vs. other groups 1.17-1.24 at 30 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of recent UK data showed no significant difference in short- or medium-term mortality between ST elevation myocardial infarction patients treated with bivalirudin vs. heparin-plus-GPI at primary PCI.

Current State of ST-Segment Myocardial Infarction: Evidence-based Therapies and Optimal Patient Outcomes in Advanced Systems of Care

Advances in reperfusion therapy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) provide optimal patient outcomes. Reperfusion therapies, including contemporary primary percutaneous coronary intervention, represent decades of clinical evidence development in large clinical trials and national databases. However, rapid identification of STEMI and guideline-directed management of patients across broad populations have been best achieved in advanced systems of care. Current outcomes in STEMI reflect the evolution of both clinical data and idealized health care delivery networks.

Therapeutic Hypothermia and the Risk of Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Current guidelines recommend a period of moderate therapeutic hypothermia (TH) for comatose patients after cardiac arrest to improve clinical outcomes. However, in-vitro studies have reported platelet dysfunction, thrombocytopenia, and coagulopathy, results that might discourage clinicians from applying TH in clinical practice. We aimed to quantify the risks of hemorrhage observed in clinical studies.Medline and Embase were searched from inception to October 2015.Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing patients undergoing TH with controls were selected, irrespective of the indications for TH. There were no restrictions for language, population, or publication year.Data on study characteristics, which included patients, details of intervention, and outcome measures, were extracted.Forty-three trials that included 7528 patients were identified from 2692 potentially relevant references. Any hemorrhage was designated as the primary outcome and was reported in 28 studies. The pooled results showed no significant increase in hemorrhage risk associated with TH (risk difference [RD] 0.005; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.001-0.011; I, 0%). Among secondary outcomes, patients undergoing TH were found to have increased risk of thrombocytopenia (RD 0.109; 95% CI 0.038-0.179; I 57.3%) and transfusion requirements (RD 0.021; 95% CI 0.003-0.040; I 0%). The meta-regression analysis indicated that prolonged duration of cooling may be associated with increased risk of hemorrhage.TH was not associated with increased risk of hemorrhage despite the increased risk of thrombocytopenia and transfusion requirements. Clinicians should cautiously assess each patient's risk-benefit profile before applying TH.

Investigational new drugs for the treatment of acute coronary syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Ischemic heart disease is the most common cause of death worldwide. Despite improvements in interventional and pharmacological therapy for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the risk of recurrent myocardial ischemia and mortality early after ACS remains high. Our improved understanding of the increasing role of inflammation in the pathogenesis of ACS and its relationship to atherosclerotic plaque rupture and thrombosis has led to the development of more potent anti-thrombotic and novel anti-inflammatory therapies for the treatment of ACS.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors explore: the developing pharmacotherapy in the field of cardiology for ACS; antiplatelet agents (both further development of classical modalities together with pioneering agents); evolving use of anticoagulation in its treatment, and exploration in the use of novel anti-inflammatories and biological agents.

EXPERT OPINION

Data from trials involving the use of immunological and cellular-based treatments show promising results and herald further possible reduction in infarct burden in ACS alongside the possibility of recovery in cardiac function following infarction.

Mortality in patients treated with extended duration dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation: a pairwise and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Despite recent studies, the optimum duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary drug-eluting stent placement remains uncertain. We performed a meta-analysis with several analytical approaches to investigate mortality and other clinical outcomes with different DAPT strategies.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane databases, and proceedings of international meetings on Nov 20, 2014, for randomised controlled trials comparing different DAPT durations after drug-eluting stent implantation. We extracted study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes. DAPT duration was categorised in each study as shorter versus longer, and as 6 months or shorter versus 1 year versus longer than 1 year. Analyses were done by both frequentist and Bayesian approaches.

FINDINGS

We identified ten trials published between Dec 16, 2011, and Nov 16, 2014, including 31,666 randomly assigned patients. By frequentist pairwise meta-analysis, shorter DAPT was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality compared with longer DAPT (HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·69-0·98; p=0·02; number needed to treat [NNT]=325), with no significant heterogeneity apparent across trials. The reduced mortality with shorter compared with longer DAPT was attributable to lower non-cardiac mortality (0·67, 0·51-0·89; p=0·006; NNT=347), with similar cardiac mortality (0·93, 0·73-1·17; p=0.52). Shorter DAPT was also associated with a lower risk of major bleeding, but a higher risk of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis. We noted similar results in a Bayesian framework with non-informative priors. By network meta-analysis, patients treated with 6-month or shorter DAPT and 1-year DAPT had higher risk of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis but lower risk of mortality compared with patients treated with DAPT for longer than 1 year. Patients treated with DAPT for 6 months or shorter had similar rates of mortality, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, but lower rates of major bleeding than did patients treated with 1-year DAPT.

INTERPRETATION

Although treatment with DAPT beyond 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation reduces myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis, it is associated with increased mortality because of an increased risk of non-cardiovascular mortality not offset by a reduction in cardiac mortality.

FUNDING

None.

Short- and long-term outcomes in diabetes patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with bivalirudin compared with heparin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIA inhibitors: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Diabetes patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have more complications than nondiabetes patients, including increased long-term mortality. Use of bivalirudin versus heparin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in diabetes patients undergoing PCI and its effect on long-term mortality were evaluated in few randomized trials, but with conflicting results.

METHODS

We searched the literature for randomized controlled trials that compared heparin and GPI therapy with bivalirudin in diabetes patients undergoing PCI. The incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), death from any cause, myocardial infarction (MI), urgent revascularization, major and minor bleeding (at 30 days), as well as all-cause mortality at 1 year were included, and meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 5,137 patients with diabetes were included in four randomized trials. At 30 days, bivalirudin, compared with heparin and GPI, caused less major bleeding (odds ratio (OR), 0.68; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.52-0.89; P = 0.005) and less minor bleeding (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.41-0.57; P < 0.00001) and similar rates of MACE (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.70-1.08; P = 0.21), MI (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.68-1.10; P = 0.25), and urgent revascularization (OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.76-1.65; P = 0.57). Death from any cause at 30 day was numerically lower with bivalirudin use but not statistically significant (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.46-1.13; P = 0.15). Mortality at 1 year was significantly lower in diabetes patients treated with bivalirudin compared with heparin and GPI (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.52-0.99; P = 0.04). A secondary analysis suggests that the major bleeding benefit with bivalirudin may be driven by mandated use of GPI in heparin arm.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with diabetes undergoing PCI, bivalirudin caused less major and minor bleeding compared with heparin and GPI, with similar rates of MACE, death, MI, and urgent revascularization at 30 days, but significantly lower mortality rates at 1 year.

Bivalirudin in stable angina and acute coronary syndromes

A parenteral anticoagulant is indicated in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Which anticoagulant should be preferred in each setting is not clearly established. Bivalirudin administration was considered in acute coronary syndromes after several clinical trials showed decreased bleeding risk with its use compared with the association of unfractionated heparin (UFH) with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs). Most recent data demonstrate that the bleeding benefit identified in the previous studies was not due to bivalirudin's properties but to higher bleeding incidence in the comparator arm due to the disproportional use of GPIs with heparin. This paper reviews clinical evidence on bivalirudin as anticoagulant in stable angina and acute coronary syndromes.

Bivalirudin as compared to unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization: A meta-analysis of 22 randomized trials

Bivalirudin has gained ground against unfractionated heparin (UFH) in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), due to a reported better safety profile. However, whether bivalirudin may provide also advantages in clinical outcome beyond the known benefits in major bleedings, is still a debated matter and was, therefore, the aim of present meta-analysis of randomized trials, evaluating efficacy and safety of bivalirudin as compared with UFH in PCI.

METHODS AND STUDY OUTCOMES

Literature archives (Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane) and main scientific sessions were scanned. Primary endpoint was overall mortality. Secondary endpoints were: 1) mortality within 30-days; 2) overall and within 30-days non fatal myocardial infarction; 3) overall and within 30-days stent thrombosis. Safety endpoints were major bleedings (per protocol definition or TIMI classification). A prespecified analysis was conducted according to clinical presentation (Elective, ACS, STEMI).

RESULTS

A total of 22 randomized clinical were finally included, involving 40156 patients randomized to bivalirudin (52.9%) or to UFH (47.1%). Death occurred in 1100 (2.8%) of patients, with no difference between bivalirudin and UFH (2.7% vs 2.8% OR[95%C]=0.94[0.83,-.06], p=0.32, phet=0.48). The results did not change according to clinical presentation. By meta-regression analysis, the effects on mortality were not related to patients risk profile (r=-0.38(-0.89-0.14), p=0.15) or the reduction in bleeding complications (r=-0.008(-0.86-0.85), p=0.98). A significant increase in short-term stent thrombosis was observed with bivalirudin (OR[95%CI]=1.42 [1.10-1.83], p=0.006). However, Bivalirudin significantly reduced bleedings according to both study protocol definition (OR[95%CI]=0.62[0.56-0.69],p<0.00001; phet=0.0003) or TIMI major criteria (OR[95%CI]=0.65[0.53-0.79],p<0.0001, phet=0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

In present meta-analysis, among patients undergoing PCI, bivalirudin, as compared with UFH, is associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding complications that, however, does not translate into mortality benefits. Furthermore, bivalirudin is associated with higher rate of 30-days stent thrombosis and recurrent MI among STEMI patients.

Predicting and preventing vascular complications following percutaneous coronary intervention in women

The development of vascular complications is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. While the incidence of percutaneous coronary intervention-related vascular complications has greatly improved over time, female sex still persists as a significant and independent predictor of periprocedural vascular complications, which in turn is associated with a greater risk of short- and long-term mortality. This review provides a contemporary overview of the data on the important issues regarding the risk of percutaneous coronary intervention in women. It examines the intrinsic sex-related factors that may be contributing to women's heightened bleeding risk while also examining the various pharmacologic and procedural bleeding avoidance strategies currently in the literature, with a focus on their potential role and benefit in women specifically.