We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Heparin versus bivalirudin for non-primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A post-Hoc analysis of the CPORT-E trial.
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2017 September 2
OBJECTIVES: To compare bivalirudin to heparin during non-primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
BACKGROUND: The optimal anticoagulant to support PCI remains uncertain.
METHODS: We performed a propensity score-based analysis comparing clinical outcomes of patients receiving heparin to those receiving bivalirudin during non-primary PCI.
RESULTS: Of 18,867 patients in the Cardiovascular Patient Outcomes Research Team Non-Primary PCI (CPORT-E) trial, we selected 7,913 patients undergoing non-staged PCI of whom 57.3% received heparin and 42.7% received bivalirudin. In-hospital myocardial infarction occurred in 4.4% of patients receiving bivalirudin and 3.0% of patients receiving heparin (relative risk [RR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-2.1, P = 0.022); this difference persisted at 6 weeks (5.0% vs. 3.6%, RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-1.8, P = 0.041). There was no difference in all-cause mortality either in-hospital (0.2% vs. 0.1% for heparin vs. bivalirudin, P = 0.887) or at 6 weeks (0.5% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.567). In-hospital bleeding requiring transfusion occurred in 0.9% of patients receiving bivalirudin and 1.9% of patients receiving heparin (RR 0.4, 95% CI 0.3-0.7, P <0.001), but there was no difference at 6 weeks (2.7% for heparin vs. 1.9% for bivalirudin, RR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0, P = 0.062).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing non-primary PCI at hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery, bivalirudin was associated with a decreased risk of in-hospital bleeding requiring transfusion and an increased risk of in-hospital MI compared to heparin. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
BACKGROUND: The optimal anticoagulant to support PCI remains uncertain.
METHODS: We performed a propensity score-based analysis comparing clinical outcomes of patients receiving heparin to those receiving bivalirudin during non-primary PCI.
RESULTS: Of 18,867 patients in the Cardiovascular Patient Outcomes Research Team Non-Primary PCI (CPORT-E) trial, we selected 7,913 patients undergoing non-staged PCI of whom 57.3% received heparin and 42.7% received bivalirudin. In-hospital myocardial infarction occurred in 4.4% of patients receiving bivalirudin and 3.0% of patients receiving heparin (relative risk [RR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-2.1, P = 0.022); this difference persisted at 6 weeks (5.0% vs. 3.6%, RR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0-1.8, P = 0.041). There was no difference in all-cause mortality either in-hospital (0.2% vs. 0.1% for heparin vs. bivalirudin, P = 0.887) or at 6 weeks (0.5% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.567). In-hospital bleeding requiring transfusion occurred in 0.9% of patients receiving bivalirudin and 1.9% of patients receiving heparin (RR 0.4, 95% CI 0.3-0.7, P <0.001), but there was no difference at 6 weeks (2.7% for heparin vs. 1.9% for bivalirudin, RR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5-1.0, P = 0.062).
CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing non-primary PCI at hospitals without on-site cardiac surgery, bivalirudin was associated with a decreased risk of in-hospital bleeding requiring transfusion and an increased risk of in-hospital MI compared to heparin. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app