Why the study?
Does bivalirudin improve clinical outcomes and safety compared to heparin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with coronary artery disease requiring PCI?
Does bivalirudin improve clinical outcomes and safety compared to heparin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with coronary artery disease requiring PCI?
This review provides a practical overview of the clinical use, efficacy, and risks of bivalirudin compared to heparin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients undergoing PCI for coronary artery disease.
Offers clinicians a concise PCI anticoagulation reference; leaves open need for updated RCTs amid evolving therapies.
Periprocedural anticoagulation continues to be a vital aspect in the management of coronary artery disease. Bivalirudin is a relatively new drug that has caught much attention in the last decade, especially in the context of percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes. Multiple clinical trials have shown the efficacy, safety profile and limitations of bivalirudin in contrast to previously used heparin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. These trials have included patients with moderate to high-risk stable angina, unstable angina, non-ST-elevation and ST-elevation myocardial infarctions requiring PCI. The growing body of evidence on bivalirudin has also improved the understanding of its applicability and efficacy over other hirudin-based anticoagulants, however continual review of more recent evidence is important in order to integrate bivalirudin more widely across the various guidelines. This article aims to study the cross-section of the evidence base to date on the clinical use, efficacy and risks related to the use of bivalirudin and attempts to provide the clinician with a practical overview of the role of bivalirudin in the most recent guidelines.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jayasinghe et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: