RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of switching to bivalirudin during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients who received preprocedure unfractionated heparin (UFH). BACKGROUND: Current guidelines favor bivalirudin for primary PCI in patients at high risk of bleeding, particularly when femoral access is used. However, patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction frequently receive UFH before arrival in the catheterization laboratory. METHODS: Scientific databases and websites were searched for randomized controlled trials. Patients were divided into those who received heparin with or without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (heparin group); those switched to bivalirudin during primary PCI from preprocedure UFH (switch group); and those who received bivalirudin without preprocedure UFH (Biv-alone group). Both traditional pairwise meta-analyses using moderator analyses and network meta-analyses using mixed-treatment comparison models were performed. RESULTS: Data from five trials including13,547 patients were analyzed. In mixed-comparison models, switching to bivalirudin during primary PCI was associated with lower rates for all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) compared to the other strategies. Rates for all-cause mortality, MACEs, and net adverse clinical events (NACEs) were similar for the heparin and Biv-alone groups. Switching strategies was also associated with lower major bleeding rates compared to heparin alone. Similarly, in a standard pairwise model, both the switch and Biv-alone groups were associated with decreased bleeding risk compared to the heparin group. However, only the switch strategy was associated with decreased all-cause mortality (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30-0.75; P = 0.001), MACE (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.49-0.91; P = 0.012), and NACE (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41-0.92; P = 0.019) compared with heparin alone. CONCLUSIONS: During primary PCI, use of bivalirudin for those receiving preprocedure UFH was associated decreased rates for major bleeding, NACEs, MACEs, and all-cause mortality compared to heparin +/- GPI. This strategy was also associated with decreased rates for MACEs and all-cause mortality compared to bivalirudin alone without preprocedure UFH.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Antitrombinas/administración & dosificación , Sustitución de Medicamentos , Heparina/administración & dosificación , Hirudinas/administración & dosificación , Fragmentos de Péptidos/administración & dosificación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Antitrombinas/efectos adversos , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Heparina/efectos adversos , Hirudinas/efectos adversos , Humanos , Metaanálisis en Red , Fragmentos de Péptidos/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Proteínas Recombinantes/administración & dosificación , Proteínas Recombinantes/efectos adversos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
GUIDELINE TITLE: Anaphylaxis-A 2020 practice parameter update, systematic review, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) analysis RELEASE DATE: April 2020 PRIOR VERSION: Anaphylaxis - a 2019 practice parameter and GRADE analysis DEVELOPER: American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) and the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology (ACAAI) FUNDING SOURCE: None TARGET POPULATION: Adult and pediatric patients with anaphylaxis.