Heparin Monotherapy or Bivalirudin During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Non–ST-Segment–Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes or Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: Results From the Evaluation of Drug-Eluting Stents and Ischemic Events Registry

Background—The use of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin monotherapy in patients without ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction is not well defined. Methods and Results—The study population consisted of patients enrolled in the Evaluation of Drug-Eluting Stents and Ischemic Events (EVENT) registry with either non–ST-segment–elevation acute coronary syndromes or stable ischemic heart disease, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with either unfractionated heparin or bivalirudin monotherapy. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for baseline characteristics. The primary bleeding (in-hospital composite bleeding—access site bleeding, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major/minor bleeding, or transfusion) and primary (in-hospital death/myocardial infarction) and secondary ischemic outcomes (death/myocardial infarction/unplanned repeat revascularization at 12 months) were evaluated. Propensity score matching yielded 1036 patients with non–ST-segment–elevation acute coronary syndromes and 2062 patients with stable ischemic heart disease. For the non–ST-segment–elevation acute coronary syndrome cohort, bivalirudin use was associated with lower bleeding (difference, −3.3% [−0.8% to −5.8%]; P=0.01; number need to treat=30) without increase in either primary (difference, 1.2% [4.1% to −1.8%]; P=0.45) or secondary ischemic outcomes, including stent thrombosis (difference, 0.0% [1.3% to −1.3%]; P=1.00). Similarly, in the stable ischemic heart disease cohort, bivalirudin use was associated with lower bleeding (difference, −1.8% [−0.4% to −3.3%]; P=0.01; number need to treat=53) without increase in either primary (difference, 0.4% [2.3% to −1.5%]; P=0.70) or secondary ischemic outcomes, including stent thrombosis (difference, 0.0% [0.7% to −0.7%]; P=1.00) when compared with unfractionated heparin monotherapy. Conclusions—Among patients with non–ST-segment–elevation acute coronary syndromes or stable ischemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, bivalirudin use during percutaneous coronary intervention when compared with unfractionated heparin monotherapy was associated with lower bleeding without significant increase in ischemic outcomes or stent thrombosis.

[1]  Jane A. Linderbaum,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[2]  Harlan M Krumholz,et al.  2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. , 2013, Circulation.

[3]  M. Pencina,et al.  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 , 2011, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

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

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

[6]  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.

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

[8]  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.

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

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

[11]  E. Braunwald,et al.  A randomized trial to evaluate the relative protection against post-percutaneous coronary intervention microvascular dysfunction, ischemia, and inflammation among antiplatelet and antithrombotic agents: the PROTECT-TIMI-30 trial. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  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.

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

[14]  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.

[15]  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.

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

[17]  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.

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

[19]  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.

[20]  G. Lamas,et al.  ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction--executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1999 Guidelines for the Management of Patients Wi , 2004, The Canadian journal of cardiology.