Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Whether bivalirudin is superior to unfractionated heparin in patients with stable or unstable angina who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after pretreatment with clopidogrel is unknown. METHODS: We enrolled 4570 patients with stable or unstable angina (with normal levels of troponin T and creatine kinase MB) who were undergoing PCI after pretreatment with a 600-mg dose of clopidogrel at least 2 hours before the procedure; 2289 patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner to receive bivalirudin, and 2281 to receive unfractionated heparin. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target-vessel revascularization due to myocardial ischemia within 30 days after randomization, or major bleeding during the index hospitalization (with a net clinical benefit defined as a reduction in the incidence of the end point). The secondary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent target-vessel revascularization. RESULTS: The incidence of the primary end point was 8.3% (190 patients) in the bivalirudin group as compared with 8.7% (199 patients) in the unfractionated-heparin group (relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.15; P=0.57). The secondary end point occurred in 134 patients (5.9%) in the bivalirudin group and 115 patients (5.0%) in the unfractionated-heparin group (relative risk, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.49; P=0.23). The incidence of major bleeding was 3.1% (70 patients) in the bivalirudin group and 4.6% (104 patients) in the unfractionated-heparin group (relative risk, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.90; P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable and unstable angina who underwent PCI after pretreatment with clopidogrel, bivalirudin did not provide a net clinical benefit (i.e., it did not reduce the incidence of the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target-vessel revascularization, or major bleeding) as compared with unfractionated heparin, but it did significantly reduce the incidence of major bleeding. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00262054.)

Abciximab in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention after clopidogrel pretreatment: the ISAR-REACT 2 randomized trial.

CONTEXT: No specifically designed studies have addressed the role of the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor abciximab in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after pretreatment with 600 mg of clopidogrel. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether abciximab is associated with clinical benefit in high-risk patients with ACS undergoing PCI after pretreatment with 600 mg of clopidogrel. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: International, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted from March 2003 through December 2005, enrolling 2022 patients (mean age, 66 years) with non-ST-segment elevation ACS undergoing PCI. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were assigned to receive either abciximab (0.25 mg/kg of body weight bolus, followed by a 0.125-microg/kg per minute [maximum, 10 microg/min] infusion for 12 hours, plus heparin, 70 U/kg of body weight) or placebo (placebo bolus and infusion of 12 hours, plus heparin bolus, 140 U/kg). All patients received clopidogrel, 600 mg, at least 2 hours prior to the procedure, as well as 500 mg of oral or intravenous aspirin. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent target vessel revascularization occurring within 30 days after randomization; secondary end points were rates of in-hospital major and minor bleeding. RESULTS: Of 2022 patients enrolled, 1012 were assigned to abciximab and 1010 to placebo. The primary end point was reached in 90 patients (8.9%) assigned to abciximab vs 120 patients (11.9%) assigned to placebo, a 25% reduction in risk with abciximab (relative risk [RR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.97; P = .03). Among patients without an elevated troponin level, there was no difference in the incidence of primary end point events between the abciximab group (23/499 patients [4.6%]) and the placebo group (22/474 patients [4.6%]) (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.56-1.76; P = .98), whereas among patients with an elevated troponin level, the incidence of events was significantly lower in the abciximab group (67/513 patients [13.1%]) compared with the placebo group (98/536 patients [18.3%]), which corresponds to an RR of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.54-0.95; P = .02) (P = .07 for interaction). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding the risk of major and minor bleeding as well as need for transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Abciximab reduces the risk of adverse events in patients with non-ST-segment elevation ACS undergoing PCI after pretreatment with 600 mg of clopidogrel. The benefits provided by abciximab appear to be confined to patients presenting with an elevated troponin level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00133003.

A double-blind, randomized study on platelet aggregation in patients treated with a daily dose of 150 or 75 mg of clopidogrel for 30 days.

AIMS: We sought to test whether an increase in the clopidogrel maintenance dose results in increased inhibition of platelet aggregation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty patients after pre-treatment with 600 mg of clopidogrel and within 12 h after successful PCI were included in this trial. They were allocated to receive one of two clopidogrel daily maintenance doses (75 or 150 mg) for 30 days in a double-blind randomized manner. Platelet function was evaluated 30 days after the intervention with optical aggregometry and with a new point-of-care test (VerifyNowtrade mark P2Y12 assay). Maximal 5 microM ADP-induced platelet aggregation 30 days after PCI in the group treated with 150 mg/day clopidogrel (45.1 +/- 20.9%) was significantly lower than in the group treated with 75 mg/day (65.3 +/- 12.1%; P < 0.001). The VerifyNowtrade mark P2Y12 assay also indicated a higher degree of platelet function inhibition in the group treated with 150 mg/day (60.0 +/- 72.0 P2Y12 Reaction Units) than in the group treated with 75 mg/day (117.0 +/- 64.3 P2Y12 Reaction Units; P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: Administration of a 150 mg oral maintenance dose of clopidogrel results in more intense inhibition of platelet aggregation than administration of the currently recommended 75 mg maintenance dose.

Prevention of restenosis by a novel drug-eluting stent system with a dose-adjustable, polymer-free, on-site stent coating.

AIMS: Drug-eluting stents (DES) represent a major advance in interventional cardiology. Along with the success shown, current DES also present limitations related to the presence of polymer-coating, fixed drug, and dose used. With the ISAR (Individualized Drug-Eluting Stent System to Abrogate Restenosis) project, a DES system has been developed that permits individualized choice of the drug and dose to use for the given patient. The objective of this prospective dose finding study was to assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a polymer-free on-site stent coating with increasing rapamycin doses. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this dose finding study, 602 patients were sequentially enrolled in four groups: microporous bare metal stent (BMS), DES stents coated with a 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0% rapamycin solution. The angiographic in-segment restenosis rate at follow-up angiography was the primary study endpoint. In-segment restenosis was significantly reduced from 25.9% with BMS to 18.9, 17.2, and 14.7% with 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0% rapamycin-eluting stents, respectively (P=0.024). Similarly, the need for target lesion revascularization at 1 year follow-up was reduced from 21.5% with BMS to 16.4, 12.6, and 8.8% with 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0% rapamycin-eluting stents, respectively (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: The placement of polymer-free stents coated on-site with rapamycin is feasible and safe. Furthermore, a dose-dependent efficacy in restenosis prevention is achievable with this new DES concept.