Collagen plug vascular closure devices and reduced risk of bleeding with bivalirudin versus heparin plus abciximab in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for non st-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

In ISAR-REACT-4 (abciximab and heparin vs. bivalirudin for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI]), bivalirudin reduced the risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with unfractionated heparin plus abciximab (UFH + abciximab). Vascular closure devices (VCDs) may also prevent bleeding complications, and thus attenuate the benefit of bivalirudin. This analysis examined whether there exists an interaction on bleeding between VCDs and bivalirudin versus UFH + abciximab after PCI. Patients with NSTEMI were randomly assigned to either receive UFH + abciximab or bivalirudin for PCI. The use of a VCD after femoral access was left to the operator's discretion. The effect of randomized treatment in patients who received a VCD was compared to that in patients with manual compression of the femoral access site. The primary end-point of this analysis was the 30-day incidence of ISAR-REACT-4 major bleeding. A total of 1,711 patients were enrolled in this analysis. Among the 365 (21.3%) patients receiving a VCD, 188 (51.5%) were treated with UFH + abciximab and 177 (48.5%) with bivalirudin. ISAR- REACT-4 major bleeding was higher with UFH + abciximab than with bivalirudin, independent of whether a VCD was used (4.8% vs. 2.3% with VCD and 4.6% vs. 2.7% without VCD, Pint = 0.76). There were also no interactions between randomized treatment and VCDs with respect to any of the ischemic end-points or net clinical outcome (Pint > 0.56). In patients undergoing PCI for NSTEMI, the reduction of major bleeding by bivalirudin compared with UFH + abciximab was not affected whether a VCD was used.

Leibundgut G ，Pache J ，Schulz S ，Berger PB ，Ferenc M ，Gick M ，Mehilli J ，Kastrati A ，Neumann FJ ... -  《-》

Prognostic value of a high on-clopidogrel treatment platelet reactivity in bivalirudin versus abciximab treated non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients. ISAR-REACT 4 (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action fo

The ISAR-REACT 4 (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment-4) platelet substudy aimed to determine the relevance of high on-clopidogrel treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients that received abciximab with unfractionated heparin (UFH) or bivalirudin during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In patients undergoing PCI, HPR has been linked to a higher risk for ischemic events. The influence of HPR on clinical outcomes may differ with regard to the adjunctive antithrombotic treatment administered. In ISAR-REACT 4, bivalirudin treatment showed similar efficacy profiles as compared to abciximab with UFH. The impact of HPR on clinical outcomes in abciximab with UFH versus bivalirudin treated non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients has never been investigated specifically. A total of 564 patients (274 in abciximab/UFH group vs. 290 in bivalirudin group) were enrolled in this study. Presence or absence of HPR following clopidogrel loading was determined by platelet function testing on a Multiplate analyzer (Verum Diagnostica, Munich, Germany). Per study group and stratified in HPR and no-HPR patients, the 30-day incidence of a combined efficacy endpoint (death, myocardial infarction, urgent target vessel revascularization) was determined. For abciximab with UFH, the incidence of the efficacy endpoint was similar in HPR versus no-HPR patients (9.4% vs. 6.7%; odds ratio: 1.4; 95% confidence interval: 0.6 to 3.5; p = 0.43). For bivalirudin, the incidence of the efficacy endpoint was significantly higher in HPR versus no-HPR patients (22.0% vs. 5.0%; odds ratio: 5.4; 95% confidence interval: 2.4 to 12.1; p < 0.0001). For patients with a risk profile similar to the subjects enrolled in this platelet substudy, the impact of HPR on clinical outcomes may depend on the type of adjunctive antithrombotic therapy used during PCI. Further investigations are warranted to clarify whether assessment of platelet function may help tailoring antithrombotic therapy during PCI.

Sibbing D ，Bernlochner I ，Schulz S ，Massberg S ，Schömig A ，Mehilli J ，Kastrati A ... -  《-》

One-year outcomes with abciximab and unfractionated heparin versus bivalirudin during percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: updated results from the ISAR-REACT 4 trial.

Schulz S ，Kastrati A ，Ferenc M ，Massberg S ，Birkmeier KA ，Laugwitz KL ，Kufner S ，Gick M ，Dommasch M ，Schühlen H ，Schömig A ，Berger PB ，Mehilli J ，Neumann FJ ，Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment (ISAR-REACT) 4 Trial Investigators ... -  《-》

A randomized two-by-two comparison of high-dose bolus tirofiban versus abciximab and unfractionated heparin versus bivalirudin during percutaneous coronary revascularization and stent placement: the tirofiban evaluation of novel dosing versus abciximab wi

In the absence of high-dose thienopyridines, placebo-controlled trials have demonstrated a reduction in ischemic events with intravenous glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). One head-to-head trial comparing abciximab and tirofiban among PCI patients found tirofiban to be inferior, and laboratory evidence confirmed that the bolus dose of tirofiban tested in that trial to be less effective than abciximab. Whether a higher bolus dose of tirofiban would be as efficacious as abciximab during PCI is uncertain. Patients undergoing PCI were randomized equally to abciximab or to tirofiban, given as high-dose bolus (25 μg/kg) plus 12-hr infusion (0.15 μg/kg/min). All patients received aspirin and clopidogrel and were additionally randomized to unfractionated heparin or bivalirudin. Approximately 8,000 patients were to be studied, but after 383 were enrolled, the study sponsor discontinued the trial for financial reasons. The primary endpoint of 30-day death, myocardial infarction, or urgent target vessel revascularization occurred in 8.8% of patients randomized to abciximab and 6.9% of those randomized to tirofiban. The respective rates of major bleeding were 1.5 and 1.6%. Additionally, the primary endpoint occurred in 8.1% of patients randomized to unfractionated heparin and 7.6% of those randomized to bivalirudin. The respective rates of major bleeding were 2.5% and 0.5%. With limited assessment, this direct comparison of high-dose bolus tirofiban versus abciximab produced encouraging results and suggests that further study of this tirofiban dose regimen is warranted. The limited assessments comparing heparin and bivalirudin are consistent with prior observations.

Moliterno DJ ，TENACITY Steering Committee and Investigators 《-》

The hemorrhage of information to reduce bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary intervention.

Grines CL ，Schreiber T 《-》