Key result
High-dose tirofiban reduced 1-year composite ischemic events compared to double-bolus eptifibatide in PCI patients (9.1% vs 12.2%; adjusted HR for eptifibatide 1.85, 95% CI 1.04-3.29, P=0.04).
Why the study?
Does high-dose tirofiban reduce composite ischemic events within 1 year compared to double-bolus eptifibatide in patients undergoing PCI?
RCT (n=666)
block randomized
Does high-dose tirofiban reduce composite ischemic events within 1 year compared to double-bolus eptifibatide in patients undergoing PCI?
Hazard Ratio: 1.85 (95% CI 1.04–3.29)
Absolute Event Rate: 9.1% vs 12.2%
p-value: p=0.04
High-dose tirofiban may be more effective than double-bolus eptifibatide in reducing 1-year composite ischemic events in patients undergoing PCI.
Favors high-dose tirofiban over eptifibatide in PCI; extends head-to-head RCT data on GP IIb/IIIa selection.
BACKGROUND: There is no head-to-head comparison between tirofiban versus eptifibatide in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) when added to standard antiaggregating drugs (AAD) to prevent ischemic events within 1 year. METHODS: We compared real-world patients undergoing PCI who were on oral single AAD and were block randomized to receive, immediately preintervention, high-dose tirofiban (n = 519) or double-bolus eptifibatide (n = 147) and a second oral antiplatelet agent. The incidence of composite ischemic events within 1 year, including death, acute myocardial infarction, angina, stent thrombosis or repeat PCI or coronary bypass surgery (primary end-point) was modelled by forced Cox's regression. RESULTS: There were overall 65 composite ischemic events: 47 (9.1%) in the tirofiban group and 18 (12.2%) in the eptifibatide group (univariate log-rank test: P = 0.22). On the basis of 21 potential covariates fitted simultaneously, multivariable adjusted hazard ratios showed that age [hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.07, P = 0.01], chronic renal failure (hazard ratio 3.21, 95% CI 1.02-10.10, P = 0.05), pre-PCI values of creatine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB) (hazard ratio 1.002, 95% CI 1.0002-1.0054, P = 0.04), intra-aortic balloon pump (hazard ratio 5.88, 95% CI 12.33-14.85, P = 0.0002) and the presence of eptifibatide (hazard ratio 1.85, 95% CI 1.04-3.29, P = 0.04) were significant risk factors whereas thrombolysis by tenecteplase (hazard ratio 0.19, 95% CI 0.05-0.69, P = 0.01) was a significant protector. Interestingly, eptifibatide versus tirofiban efficacy was explained based on pre-PCI values of CK-MB. CONCLUSION: Head-to-head comparison between eptifibatide and tirofiban in patients undergoing PCI while on double AAD showed that eptifibatide had a lower efficacy on the incidence of composite ischemic events within 1 year, which might be explained by a reduced action on CK-MB pre-PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schiariti et al. (2010) conducted an RCT in percutaneous coronary intervention (n=666). High-dose tirofiban vs. Double-bolus eptifibatide was evaluated on Composite ischemic events within 1 year (death, acute myocardial infarction, angina, stent thrombosis, repeat PCI, or coronary bypass surgery) (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.04-3.29, p=0.04). High-dose tirofiban reduced 1-year composite ischemic events compared to double-bolus eptifibatide in PCI patients (9.1% vs 12.2%; adjusted HR for eptifibatide 1.85, 95% CI 1.04-3.29, P=0.04).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: