Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Bivalirudin Versus Unfractionated Heparin in Acute Coronary Syndromes: An Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

  • Monica Verdoia
  • , Alon Schaffer
  • , Lucia Barbieri
  • , Harry Suryapranata
  • , Giuseppe De Luca

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Introduction and objectives Contrasting data have been reported on bivalirudin as an anticoagulation strategy during percutaneous coronary interventions, offering theoretical benefits on bleeding complications but raising concerns on a potential increase in the risk of stent thrombosis. We performed an updated meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous interventions for acute coronary syndromes. Methods Literature archives and main scientific sessions were scanned. The primary efficacy endpoint was 30-day overall mortality. Secondary endpoints were stent thrombosis and major bleeding. A prespecified analysis was conducted according to clinical presentation. Results Twelve randomized trials were included, involving 32 746 patients (52.5% randomized to bivalirudin). Death occurred in 1.8% of the patients, with no differences between bivalirudin and heparin (odds ratio = 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.08; P = .28; P for heterogeneity = .41). Similar results were obtained for patients with non—ST-segment elevation and in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A significantly higher rate of stent thrombosis was observed with bivalirudin (odds ratio = 1.42; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.83; P = .008; P for heterogeneity = .09). Bivalirudin was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of major bleeding (odds ratio = 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.54-0.75; P < .00001; P for heterogeneity < .0001), which, however, was related to the differential use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (r = −0.02 [−0.033 to –0.0032]; P = .02) and did not translate into survival benefits. Conclusions In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions, bivalirudin is not associated with a reduction in mortality compared with heparin but does increase stent thrombosis. The reduction in bleeding complications observed with bivalirudin does not translate into survival benefits but is rather influenced by a differential use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Full English text available from: www.revespcardiol.org/en

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)732-745
Number of pages14
JournalRevista Espanola de Cardiologia
Volume69
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2016
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Bivalirudin
  • Heparin
  • Meta-analysis
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Bivalirudin Versus Unfractionated Heparin in Acute Coronary Syndromes: An Updated Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this