Bleeding Risk Comparing Targeted Low-Dose Heparin With Bivalirudin in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Results From a Propensity Score–Matched Analysis of the Evaluation of Drug-Eluting Stents and Ischemic Events (EVENT) Registry

Background— Prior randomized trials have shown reduced bleeding with bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, it is not known if this benefit is also present when UFH doses are more tightly controlled (as measured by activated clotting time, ACT). Methods and Results— Patients enrolled in the EVENT (Evaluation of Drug-Eluting Stents and Ischemic Events) registry, were divided into 3 groups, based on the antithrombotic drug used during PCI (UFH monotherapy, UFH+glycoprotein IIb-IIIa receptor inhibitor [GPI], or bivalirudin alone). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for measured covariates (89 variables) and to compare bivalirudin versus UFH monotherapy and bivalirudin versus UFH+GPI groups. The UFH groups were stratified based on ACT achieved (optimal ACT defined as 250–300 for UFH monotherapy and 200–250 when GPI was also used). The primary bleeding outcome was in-hospital composite bleeding, defined as events of access site bleeding, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction major/minor bleeding, or transfusion. Primary (in-hospital death/myocardial infarction) and secondary ischemic outcomes (death/MI/unplanned repeat revascularization at 12 months) were also evaluated. Propensity score matching yielded 3022 patients for the UFH monotherapy versus bivalirudin comparison and 3520 patients for the UFH+GPI versus bivalirudin comparison. Bivalirudin use was associated with numerically lower bleeding rates at all categories of achieved ACT when compared with UFH (low, optimal, high ACT: 2.5% versus 4.7%, 1.9% versus 6.0%, 3.1% versus 4.8%, respectively) or heparin+GPI groups (low, optimal, high ACT: 0.0% versus 2.7%, 2.7% versus 5.2%, 2.4% versus 6.1%, respectively) and was not associated with any statistically significant increase in either primary or secondary ischemic outcomes. Conclusions— Among unselected patients undergoing PCI, bivalirudin use during PCI was associated with a lower risk of bleeding at all comparator ACT levels without an increase in ischemic outcomes.

[1]  Rio de la Plata Expert Panel Antithrombotic Therapy in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes , 2012 .

[2]  J. Ornato,et al.  2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST‐Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) , 2009, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[3]  G. Stone,et al.  Role of clopidogrel loading dose in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty: results from the HORIZONS-AMI (harmonizing outcomes with revascularization and stents in acute myocardial infarction) trial. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  A. Kastrati,et al.  Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  K. Kent,et al.  Bleeding risk and outcomes of Bivalirudin versus Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors with targeted low-dose unfractionated Heparin in patients having percutaneous coronary intervention for either stable or unstable angina pectoris. , 2008, The American journal of cardiology.

[6]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Antithrombotic therapy for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). , 2008, Chest.

[7]  B. Gersh,et al.  Bivalirudin during primary PCI in acute myocardial infarction. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  A. Kastrati,et al.  Periprocedural bleeding and 1-year outcome after percutaneous coronary interventions: appropriateness of including bleeding as a component of a quadruple end point. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  J. Ornato,et al.  ACC/AHA 2007 guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-Elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patie , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[10]  William Wijns,et al.  [Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes]. , 2007, Revista portuguesa de cardiologia : orgao oficial da Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia = Portuguese journal of cardiology : an official journal of the Portuguese Society of Cardiology.

[11]  P. Serruys,et al.  Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials: A Case for Standardized Definitions , 2007, Circulation.

[12]  H. White,et al.  Impact of major bleeding on 30-day mortality and clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the ACUITY Trial. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[13]  Adelaide,et al.  Bivalirudin for patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Adverse Impact of Bleeding on Prognosis in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes , 2006, Circulation.

[15]  M. Gheorghiade,et al.  Heart failure, chronic diuretic use, and increase in mortality and hospitalization: an observational study using propensity score methods. , 2006, European heart journal.

[16]  Joseph P Ornato,et al.  ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2006, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[17]  J. Ornato,et al.  ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention—summary article: A report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on practice guidelines(ACC/AHA/SCAI writing committee to update the 2001 guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention) , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  David J Cohen,et al.  Design of a registry to characterize "real-world" outcomes of percutaneous coronary revascularization in the drug-eluting stent era. , 2005, American heart journal.

[19]  R. Califf,et al.  Impact of bleeding severity on clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2005, The American journal of cardiology.

[20]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. , 2005, European heart journal.

[21]  F. Laduca,et al.  Optimizing management of hirudin anticoagulation. , 2005, The journal of extra-corporeal technology.

[22]  E. Topol,et al.  Economic evaluation of bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein IIB/IIIA inhibition versus heparin with routine glycoprotein IIB/IIIA inhibition for percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the REPLACE-2 trial. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[23]  E. Topol,et al.  Bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary intervention: REPLACE-2 randomized trial. , 2003, JAMA.

[24]  G. Levine,et al.  Relationship between heparin anticoagulation and clinical outcomes in coronary stent intervention: observations from the ESPRIT trial. , 2003, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[25]  M. Nauck,et al.  Methods for the monitoring of direct thrombin inhibitors. , 2002, Seminars in thrombosis and hemostasis.

[26]  Carl J Pepine,et al.  ACC/AHA guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction--2002: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients , 2002, Circulation.

[27]  D. Rubin Using Propensity Scores to Help Design Observational Studies: Application to the Tobacco Litigation , 2001, Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology.

[28]  E. Topol,et al.  Bivalirudin versus heparin during coronary angioplasty for unstable or postinfarction angina: Final report reanalysis of the Bivalirudin Angioplasty Study. , 2001, American heart journal.

[29]  David O. Williams,et al.  ACC/AHA Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Revision of the 1993 PTCA Guidelines)—Executive Summary , 2001 .

[30]  K A Eagle,et al.  ACC/AHA guidelines of percutaneous coronary interventions (revision of the 1993 PTCA guidelines)--executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (committee to revise the 1993 guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coro , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[31]  P D Cleary,et al.  Validating recommendations for coronary angiography following acute myocardial infarction in the elderly: a matched analysis using propensity scores. , 2001, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[32]  D. Rubin,et al.  The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects , 1983 .

[33]  W. Gray,et al.  Point-of-care ecarin clotting time versus activated clotting time in correlation with bivalirudin concentration. , 2004, Thrombosis research.