Key result
In 1,592 elderly patients with myocardial infarction, bivalirudin monotherapy showed no difference compared to heparin for the 180-day composite of death, reinfarction, or major bleeding.
Why the study?
Elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention face heightened ischemic and bleeding risks, leaving the optimal anticoagulation strategy uncertain.
Does bivalirudin monotherapy reduce the composite of death, reinfarction, or major bleeding compared to heparin monotherapy in elderly patients with myocardial infarction undergoing PCI?
RCT (n=1,592)
Yes
Does bivalirudin monotherapy reduce the composite of death, reinfarction, or major bleeding compared to heparin monotherapy in elderly patients with myocardial infarction undergoing PCI?
In elderly patients with myocardial infarction undergoing PCI, bivalirudin and heparin monotherapy demonstrate similar efficacy and safety profiles.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports equipoise between bivalirudin and heparin in elderly MI; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are at increased risk of both ischemic and bleeding complications. The optimal anticoagulation strategy in these patients is uncertain. Therefore, we compared bivalirudin to heparin monotherapy in a contemporary cohort of such patients. METHODS: A prespecified subgroup analysis of elderly patients with myocardial infarction (≥75 years) from the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial (Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies Registry Trial) was performed. In the trial, patients were randomized to either bivalirudin or heparin monotherapy during percutaneous coronary intervention, with mandatory potent P2Y12 inhibition, routine radial artery access, and only bail-out glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition. Kaplan-Meier event rates were assessed for the primary end point, consisting of a composite of all-cause death, myocardial reinfarction, or major bleeding, within 180 days. RESULTS: The elderly (n=1592) had more than twice the risk of all events compared with younger patients (n=4406). Baseline and periprocedural characteristics were equal between bivalirudin (n=799) and heparin (n=793) treated patients ≥75 years. No differences were found in the elderly between bivalirudin and heparin monotherapy regarding the primary end point (180-day all-cause death, myocardial reinfarction, or major bleeding), the individual components of the primary end point, definite stent thrombosis, or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In this prespecified subgroup analysis of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial, elderly patients with myocardial infarction had a highly increased risk of all events. However, no difference in outcomes could be observed with an anticoagulation strategy with either bivalirudin or heparin as monotherapy in this patient group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wester et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Myocardial Infarction (n=1,592). Bivalirudin vs. Heparin monotherapy was evaluated on Composite of all-cause death, myocardial reinfarction, or major bleeding within 180 days. In 1,592 elderly patients with myocardial infarction, bivalirudin monotherapy showed no difference compared to heparin for the 180-day composite of death, reinfarction, or major bleeding.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: