Vol 31, No 2 (2024)
Original Article
Published online: 2023-11-09

open access

Page views 973
Article views/downloads 240
Get Citation

Connect on Social Media

Connect on Social Media

Bivalirudin versus heparin in contemporary percutaneous coronary interventions for patients with acute coronary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Junyan Zhang1, Zhongxiu Chen1, Duolao Wang2, Chen Li1, Fangbo Luo3, Yong He1
Pubmed: 37964648
Cardiol J 2024;31(2):309-320.

Abstract

Background: Bivalirudin is associated with fewer major bleeding events than heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but confounding effects of concomitant glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, routine femoral artery access, and less potent effects of clopidogrel limits meaningful comparisons. The present study is a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare bivalirudin to heparin in contemporary practice.

Methods: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE databases were searched for relevant studies, including comparisons between bivalirudin and heparin in the current medical era from inception to December 23, 2021. Studies reporting incidences of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and net adverse clinical events (NACE) in patients undergoing PCI and meeting the inclusion criteria were retained. Data extraction was performed by three independent reviewers.

Results: The meta-analysis included 8 studies. Compared to heparin, bivalirudin during PCI was associated with a lower NACE risk, lower all-cause death, and similar MACE risk, with a pooled risk ratio of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69–0.97, p = 0.02), 0.83 (95% CI 0.74–0.94, p = 0.002), and 0.93 (95% CI 0.78–1.10, p = 0.38), respectively. Moreover, the reduction in NACE was mainly attributed to reduced bleeding (22% reduction in the risk of major bleeding, 95% CI 0.63–0.97, p = 0.03).

Conclusions: These findings suggest that bivalirudin use during PCI reduced the risk of NACE and all-cause death but did not reduce the risk of MACE compared with heparin use in PCI. More studies specifically designed for anticoagulation strategies and a personalized anticoagulation regimen to comprehensively balance bleeding and ischemia risks are required.

Article available in PDF format

View PDF Download PDF file

References

  1. Garberich RF, Traverse JH, Claussen MT, et al. ST-elevation myocardial infarction diagnosed after hospital admission. Circulation. 2014; 129(11): 1225–1232.
  2. Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2018; 39(2): 119–177.
  3. Mavrakanas TA, Chatzizisis YS. Bivalirudin in stable angina and acute coronary syndromes. Pharmacol Ther. 2015; 152: 1–10.
  4. Fiedler KA, Ndrepepa G, Schulz S, et al. Impact of bivalirudin on post-procedural epicardial blood flow, risk of stent thrombosis and mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention. EuroIntervention. 2016; 11(11): e1275–e1282.
  5. Mehran R, Lansky AJ, Witzenbichler B, et al. Bivalirudin in patients undergoing primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction (HORIZONS-AMI): 1-year results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2009; 374(9696): 1149–1159.
  6. Zeymer U, van 't Hof A, Adgey J, et al. Bivalirudin is superior to heparins alone with bailout GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction transported emergently for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a pre-specified analysis from the EUROMAX trial. Eur Heart J. 2014; 35(36): 2460–2467.
  7. Blake SR, Shahzad A, Kemp I, et al. Twelve-month mortality from the "How Effective are Antithrombotic Therapies in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (HEAT-PPCI) Trial". Int J Cardiol. 2020; 310: 37–42.
  8. Han Y, Guo J, Zheng Y, et al. Bivalirudin vs heparin with or without tirofiban during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2015; 313(13): 1336.
  9. MacHaalany J, Abdelaal E, Bataille Y, et al. Benefit of bivalirudin versus heparin after transradial and transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol. 2012; 110(12): 1742–1748.
  10. Wang H, Li Yi, Cong H, et al. Efficiency and safety of bivalirudin in patients undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention via radial access: A subgroup analysis from the bivalirudin in acute myocardial infarction versus heparin and GPI plus heparin trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017; 89(7): 1157–1165.
  11. Anantha-Narayanan M, Anugula D, Gujjula NR, et al. Bivalirudin versus heparin in percutaneous coronary intervention-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials stratified by adjunctive glycoprotein IIb/IIIa strategy. J Thorac Dis. 2018; 10(6): 3341–3360.
  12. Bangalore S, Toklu B, Kotwal A, et al. Anticoagulant therapy during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials in the era of stents and P2Y12 inhibitors. BMJ. 2014; 349: g6419.
  13. Rafique AM, Nayyar P, Wang TY, et al. Optimal P2Y12 Inhibitor in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Network Meta-Analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016; 9(10): 1036–1046.
  14. Mehran R, Baber U, Sharma SK, et al. Ticagrelor with or without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients after PCI. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381(21): 2032–2042.
  15. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62(10): e1–34.
  16. Chen Z, Li N, Wang J, et al. Association between mean platelet volume and major adverse cardiac events in percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Coron Artery Dis. 2020; 31(8): 722–732.
  17. Erlinge D, Omerovic E, Fröbert O, et al. Bivalirudin versus Heparin Monotherapy in Myocardial Infarction. N Engl J Med. 2017; 377(12): 1132–1142.
  18. Zhang Y, Zhang Y, Liu Z, et al. Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention in high-bleeding-risk patients with acute coronary syndrome in contemporary practice. Biomed Pharmacother. 2020; 130: 110758.
  19. Chen H, Yu X, Kong X, et al. Efficacy and safety of bivalirudin application during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in older patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J Int Med Res. 2020; 48(9): 300060520947942.
  20. Jovin IS, Shah RM, Patel DB, et al. Outcomes in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for st-segment elevation myocardial infarction via radial access anticoagulated with bivalirudin versus heparin: a report from the national cardiovascular data registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017; 10(11): 1102–1111.
  21. Valgimigli M, Frigoli E, Leonardi S, et al. Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018; 392(10150): 835–848.
  22. Grimfjärd P, Erlinge D, Koul S, et al. Unfractionated heparin versus bivalirudin in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a SWEDEHEART study. EuroIntervention. 2017; 12(16): 2009–2017.
  23. Anantha-Narayanan M, Anugula D, Gujjula NR, et al. Bivalirudin versus heparin in percutaneous coronary intervention: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials stratified by adjunctive glycoprotein IIb/IIIa strategy. J Thorac Dis. 2018; 10(6): 3341–3360.
  24. Gutierrez A, Bhatt DL. Balancing the risks of stent thrombosis and major bleeding during primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Eur Heart J. 2014; 35(36): 2448–2451.
  25. Perdoncin E, Seth M, Dixon S, et al. The comparative efficacy of bivalirudin is markedly attenuated by use of radial access: insights from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium. Eur Heart J. 2016; 37(24): 1902–1909.
  26. Kheiri B, Rao SV, Osman M, et al. Meta-analysis of bivalirudin versus heparin in transradial coronary interventions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020; 96(6): 1240–1248.
  27. Frere C, Laine M, Lemesle G, et al. Antithrombotic efficacy of bivalirudin compared to unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome. Platelets. 2019; 30(1): 105–111.
  28. Hamon M, Bonello L, Marso S, et al. Comparison of bivalirudin versus heparin(s) during percutaneous coronary interventions in patients receiving prasugrel: a propensity-matched study. Clin Cardiol. 2014; 37(1): 14–20.
  29. Fahrni G, Wolfrum M, De Maria GL, et al. 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. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016; 5(7).
  30. Li Yi, Liang Z, Qin L, et al. Bivalirudin plus a high-dose infusion versus heparin monotherapy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomised trial. Lancet. 2022; 400(10366): 1847–1857.