Safety and efficacy of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during perioperative period of percutaneous coronary intervention.
10.3760/cma.j.cn112148-20200717-00566
- VernacularTitle:PCI围术期应用比伐芦定与肝素的安全性和有效性比较
- Author:
Jing LI
1
;
Long CHENG
1
;
He Yang WANG
1
;
Xin ZHAO
1
;
Zhen Yang LIANG
1
;
Ya Ling HAN
1
;
Yi LI
1
Author Information
1. Department of Cardiology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang 110016, China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Bivalirudin;
Heparin;
Percutaneous coronary intervention;
Real-world
- MeSH:
Aged;
Anticoagulants/therapeutic use*;
Female;
Heparin/therapeutic use*;
Hirudins;
Humans;
Middle Aged;
Peptide Fragments;
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention;
Perioperative Period;
Recombinant Proteins;
Treatment Outcome
- From:
Chinese Journal of Cardiology
2020;48(8):648-654
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during perioperative period of percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI) in real-world. Methods: A total of 13 097 serial patients who underwent PCI from January 2016 to November 2018 in the Northern Theater Command were enrolled in the present study. Patients were stratified as the bivalirudin group or the heparin group according to antithrombotic therapy during PCI. The primary efficiency endpoint was 30-day net adverse clinical event(NACE), defined as all-cause death, re-infarction, urgent target lesion revascularization (uTLR), stroke or any bleeding. The second efficiency endpoint was 30-day major cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE), defined as all-cause death, re-infarction, uTLR and stroke. Additional end points included the rates of stent thrombosis at 30 days. Propensity scores included clinical and demographic variables, with 1∶2 matching. Compared the incidence of events above between the two groups before and after matching. Results: Among the 13 097 included patients(age was (61±10) years old), 3 421 (26.1%) were female. And 2 734 patients were divided into the bivalirudin group, and 10 363 patients to the heparin group(5 468 after matching). Before propensity score matching, patients in bivalirudin group were older and received higher levels of CRUSADE score than heparin group. These patients were more likely to have hypertension and more with ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes（all P＜0.05）. After propensity score matching, the incidence of 30-day NACE(3.8%(103/2 734) vs.5.0%(271/5 468), P=0.015) and any bleeding (2.0%(54/2 734) vs. 2.8%(151/5 468), P=0.032) in the bivalirudin group were lower than that in the heparin group, but the incidence of MACCE (1.9%(51/2 734) vs. 2.3%(127/5 468), P=0.180) and stent thrombosis (0.1%(2/2 734) vs. 0.1%(3/5 468), P=1.000) were comparable between the two groups. Conclusion: The risk of bleeding and the incidence of NACE are significantly lower for patients using bivalirudin during perioperative period of PCI compared to heparin, without significant differences in ischemic events.
