Key result
Enoxaparin was associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital death or recurrent MI compared to unfractionated heparin in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI (adjusted OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.12-0.68).
Why the study?
Does enoxaparin reduce ischemic complications compared to unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI?
Cohort (n=580)
Does enoxaparin reduce ischemic complications compared to unfractionated heparin in patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI?
Odds Ratio: 0.28 (95% CI 0.12–0.68)
In patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI, enoxaparin was associated with reduced ischemic complications and mortality without increasing major bleeding compared to unfractionated heparin.
Enoxaparin associated with better STEMI PCI outcomes in registry data; hypothesis-generating and should not change practice without RCTs.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare efficacy and safety outcomes among patients receiving enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) while undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: Primary PCI (pPCI) for ST elevation has traditionally been supported by UFH. The low molecular weight heparin enoxaparin may provide better outcomes when used for pPCI. METHODS: Consecutive eligible patients (580) undergoing pPCI enrolled in the prospective electronic Pitié-Salpêtrière registry of ischemic coronary syndromes (e-PARIS) registry were grouped according to whether they received UFH or enoxaparin as the sole anticoagulant. Logistic regression modeling, propensity-weighted adjustment, and sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate efficacy and safety endpoints for enoxaparin vs. UFH. RESULTS: Enoxaparin was administered to 346 patients and UFH to 234 without ACT or anti-Xa guided dose adjustment. PCI was performed through the radial artery in 90%, with frequent (75%) use of GPIIb/IIIa antagonists. Patients receiving enoxaparin were more likely to be therapeutically anticoagulated during the procedure (68% vs. 50%, P < 0.0001) and were less likely to experience death or recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) in hospital (adjusted OR 0.28 95% CI (0.12-0.68) or by 30 days (adjusted OR 0.35 95% CI 0.16-0.81). All cause mortality was also reduced in hospital (adjusted OR 0.32, 95% CI (0.12-0.85) and to 30 days (adjusted OR 0.40 95% CI 0.17-0.99). Other ischemic endpoints were similarly reduced with enoxaparin. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding events were numerically fewer among patients receiving enoxaparin (1.2% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI presenting for PCI, enoxaparin was associated with a reduction in all ischemic complications, more frequent therapeutic anticoagulation, and no increase in major bleeding when compared against unfractionated heparin.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brieger et al. (2010) conducted a cohort in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=580). Enoxaparin vs. Unfractionated heparin (UFH) was evaluated on death or recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) in hospital (adjusted OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12-0.68). Enoxaparin was associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital death or recurrent MI compared to unfractionated heparin in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI (adjusted OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.12-0.68).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: