Differential Use of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors with Bivalirudin in Patients with STEMI Undergoing PCI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIM: The efficacy and safety of bivalirudin when used concurrently with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) is uncertain. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to explore the impact of differential use (greater and balanced) of GPI. METHODS: Online databases were queried from inception to March 2023 to identify eight randomized controlled trials (n = 22,483) for inclusion. The primary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and net adverse clinical events (NACE). Secondary efficacy endpoints included cardiac death, reinfarction, stent thrombosis (ST), and stroke. Data were pooled using a random-effects model to derive risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: When compared to heparin, bivalirudin was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.83; 95% CI 0.72-0.97; P = 0.02), major bleeding (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.93; P = 0.01), cardiac death (RR 0.79; 95% CI 0.66-0.94; P = 0.01), and NACE (RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.72-0.89; P < 0.0001). However, while the bivalirudin arm showed an increased likelihood of ST in the greater GPI subgroup (RR 1.70; 95% CI 1.13-2.56; P = 0.01), it was associated with a decreased likelihood of ST in the balanced GPI subgroup (RR 0.40; 95% CI 0.24-0.65; P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Overall, our findings suggest that bivalirudin may be a more efficacious intervention than heparin for reducing certain adverse events in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI.

Bivalirudin as a substitute for heparin in neurointervention for patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.

OBJECTIVES: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is a known complication of heparin exposure with potentially life-threatening sequelae. Direct thrombin inhibitors can be substituted for heparin in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia that require anticoagulation. However, the use of direct thrombin inhibitors as a substitute for heparin has not been widely reported in the neuroendovascular literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Here we report the first use of the direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin in a neuroendovascular procedure as a substitute for heparin in a patient with a ruptured pseudoaneurysm and heparin-induced thrombocytopenia, and review the literature on the use of bivalirudin and argatroban for such patients. RESULTS: Bivalirudin was safely and effectively used in the case reported, with no thrombotic or hemorrhagic complications. Our literature review revealed a paucity of studies on the use of heparin alternatives, including bivalirudin, in neuroendovascular procedures in patients with heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is an important iatrogenic disease process in patients undergoing neuroendovascular procedures, and developing protocols to diagnose and manage heparin-induced thrombocytopenia is important for healthcare systems. While further research needs to be done to establish the full range of anticoagulation options to substitute for heparin, our case indicates bivalirudin as a potential candidate.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of primary thromboprophylaxis in acute lymphoblastic leukemia during early-phase therapy including asparaginase or its prolonged form.

Asparaginase is essential in the initial management of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) but frequently leads to venous thromboembolism (VTE). Using anticoagulants for primary VTE prevention has been studied with no consensus. We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of science and performed random-effect meta-analysis using Mantel-Haenszel method in RevMan 5.4 to analyze primary pharmacological thromboprophylaxis during asparaginase treatment in early-phase (induction, consolidation, or intensification phase) therapy in patients with ALL with all ages and followed with subgroup analysis by age. Meta-analysis of 13 articles describing the effect of antithrombin supplementation in 1375 patients showed that antithrombin prophylaxis decreases the risk of VTE by 43% (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.38 - 0.83; p=0.004), with mild heterogeneity (I2=35%, p=0.10) and moderate certainty by GRADE. 8 articles included for meta-analysis of low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) treatment in 612 patients showed that it decreased the risk of VTE by nearly 40% (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.45 - 0.81; p=0.00081), with minimal heterogeneity (I2=14%, p=0.31) but low certainty. Subgroup analysis showed that only prophylaxis with antithrombin supplementation significantly decreased the VTE rate in adult patients with moderate certainty. In pediatric patients, one nonrandomized prospective study showed that LMWH combined with antithrombin has a better thromboprophylaxis effect than antithrombin alone. In the PREVAPIX-ALL trial, prophylaxis with direct factor Xa inhibitor Apixaban did not benefit children younger than 18 years except for cases of obesity. We concluded that thromboprophylaxis with antithrombin is effective in ALL patients older than 18 years during the early phase of therapy, and LMWH combined with antithrombin supplementation might be effective for pediatric patients with ALL. Apixaban is effective in pediatric ALL patients with obesity and needs further study in other high-risk patients.

Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Bivalirudin is an alternative accepted therapy to unfractionated heparin for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed in this meta-analysis to compare bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with MI undergoing PCI. METHODS: We have screened PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception through January 8th, 2023) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in patients with MI undergoing PCI. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used for estimation of tau2 to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: Ten RCTs with a total of 40,069 participants were included in our analysis. Bivalirudin as compared with unfractionated heparin was associated with significant decrease in major bleeding (RR 0.64 [0.52 to 0.79]; p < 0.01; I2 = 69 %) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.79 [0.67 to 0.92]; p < 0.01; I2 = 0 %). There was no significant difference between bivalirudin and unfractionated heparin groups in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events (RR 1.02 [0.91 to 1.14]; p = 0.73; I2 = 52 %), all-cause mortality (RR 0.89 [0.77 to 1.04]; p = 0.15; I2 = 23 %), MI (RR 1.02 [0.87 to 1.19]; p = 0.80; I2 = 36 %), stent thrombosis (RR 1.12 [0.52 to 2.40]; p = 0.77; I2 = 82 %), or stroke (RR 0.97 [0.73 to 1.29]; p = 0.85; I2 = 0 %). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis suggests that bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin in patients with MI undergoing PCI was associated with lower rates of major bleeding and cardiovascular mortality without a significant difference in major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, or stent thrombosis.

Bivalirudin in acute coronary syndromes.

INTRODUCTION: Bivalirudin, a bivalent direct thrombin inhibitor, has been developed to reduce bleeding without any trade-off in thrombotic events in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). AREAS COVERED: Despite showing a superior safety profile compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH), bivalirudin is not considered the anticoagulant of choice in ACS patients undergoing PCI, mainly because of an increased rate of acute stent thrombosis (ST) shown by several randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in addition to limited availability in certain countries and increased costs. However, RCTs on bivalirudin have been characterized by several confounding factors hindering the interpretation of its safety and efficacy compared with UFH among the spectrum of ACS patients. Furthermore, a significant body of evidence has demonstrated that the risk of acute ST can be mitigated by a full-dose infusion regimen following PCI, without compromising the favorable safety profile compared to UFH. EXPERT OPINION: In light of the increased understanding of the prognostic relevance of bleeding events and the excellent safety profile of bivalirudin, recent trial evidence may allow for this anticoagulant agent to reemerge and have a more prominent role in the management of ACS patients undergoing PCI.

Bivalirudin vs heparin in cardiac-cerebral ischemic and bleeding events among Chinese STEMI patients during percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective cohort study.

Although bivalirudin has been recently made available for purchase in China, large-scale analyses on the safety profile of bivalirudin among Chinese patients is lacking. Thus, this study aimed to compare the safety profile of bivalirudin and heparin as anticoagulants in Chinese ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A total of 1063 STEMI patients undergoing PCI and receiving bivalirudin (n=424, bivalirudin group) or heparin (n=639, heparin group) as anticoagulants were retrospectively enrolled. The net adverse clinical events (NACEs) within 30 days after PCI were recorded, including major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCEs) and bleeding events (bleeding academic research consortium (BARC) grades 2-5 (BARC 2-5)). The incidences of NACEs (10.1 vs 15.6%) (P=0.010), BARC 2-5 bleeding events (5.2 vs 10.3%) (P=0.003), and BARC grades 3-5 (BARC 3-5) bleeding events (2.1 vs 5.5%) (P=0.007) were lower in the bivalirudin group compared to the heparin group, whereas general MACCEs incidence (8.9 vs 6.4%) (P=0.131) and each category of MACCEs (all P>0.05) did not differ between two groups. Furthermore, the multivariate logistic analyses showed that bivalirudin (vs heparin) was independently correlated with lower risk of NACEs (OR=0.508, P=0.002), BARC 2-5 bleeding events (OR=0.403, P=0.001), and BARC 3-5 bleeding events (OR=0.452, P=0.042); other independent risk factors for NACEs, MACCEs, or BARC bleeding events included history of diabetes mellitus, emergency operation, multiple lesional vessels, stent length >33.0 mm, and higher CRUSADE score (all P<0.05). Thus, bivalirudin presented a better safety profile than heparin among Chinese STEMI patients undergoing PCI.

Reversing dabigatran effect with idarucizumab to enable intravenous thrombolysis in patients with acute ischaemic stroke - a single centre experience.

INTRODUCTION: Our study analysed the safety and effectiveness of idarucizumab in enabling intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) in dabigatran-treated patients with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS). CLINICAL RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY: New oral anticoagulants (NOAC), including dabigatran, are the first-choice treatment option for preventing ischaemic stroke in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). However, a significant percentage of AF patients develops AIS despite NOAC treatment. According to current guidelines, treatment with IVT is contraindicated in patients who have received NOAC within the last 48 hours. Idarucizumab is a fragment of a monoclonal antibody that reverses the anticoagulation effect of dabigatran. The latest research shows that it can enable safe and successful IVT in patients with recent dabigatran intake, but more data is needed to confirm the safety and effectiveness of such treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Our study included dabigatran-treated patients who received idarucizumab to allow AIS treatment with IVT in the University Hospital in Kraków (Poland) from December 2018 to June 2023. We gathered data on their past medical history, stroke severity, course of treatment and outcomes as defined by modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) scores at discharge. A good functional outcome was defined as mRS 0-2 points at discharge. RESULTS: This observational study included 19 patients (13 male and six female) with a median age of 74 (IQR = 13) years. In all patients (100%), the reason for dabigatran treatment was AF. A good functional outcome after treatment (mRS 0-2) was achieved in 68.4% of patients, but mRS was already ≥ 3 points before stroke onset in three (15.8%) patients. Haemorrhagic transformation of stroke occurred in three (15.8%) patients, including symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage in two (10.5%). The mortality rate was 5.3%. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our study results are in line with previous research on this topic, showing that IVT after idarucizumab can be successfully administered and is reasonably safe in dabigatran-treated patients with AIS.

Bivalirudin versus heparin in STEMI after BRIGHT-4 trial: an updated meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of bivalirudin-based anticoagulation over heparin-based anticoagulation for coronary percutaneous intervention has been debated for a long time. Multiple trials have shown promising benefits of bivalirudin over heparin therapy with the most recent addition being the BRIGHT-4 trial. We performed a meta-analysis to assess evidence from these trials, focusing on the coronary intervention of the STEMI population. METHODS: This meta-analysis was performed based on PRISMA guidelines after registering in PROSPERO (CRD42023394701). Databases were searched for relevant articles published before January 2023. Pertinent data from the included studies were extracted and analyzed using RevMan v5.4. RESULTS: Out of 2375 studies evaluated, 13 randomized control trials with 24 360 acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients were included for analysis. The bivalirudin-based anticoagulation reduced the net clinical events (OR 0.75, CI 0.61-0.92), major adverse cardiac or cerebral events (OR 0.85, CI 0.74-0.98), any bleeding (OR 0.61, CI 0.45-0.83), major bleeding (OR 0.54, CI 0.39-0.75), all-cause mortality (OR 0.79, CI 0.67-0.92) and cardiac mortality (OR 0.78, CI 0.65-0.93) significantly without increasing the risk of any stent thrombosis (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.52-1.61), definite stent thrombosis (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.62-2.22) and acute stent thrombosis (OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.69-6.09) significantly at 30 days. CONCLUSION: Based on this meta-analysis, bivalirudin plus a post-PCI high-dose infusion-based anticoagulation during STEMI PCI has significant benefits over heparin therapy for cardiovascular outcomes without a significant increase in the risk of thrombotic outcomes.

In DVT, oral DTIs and factor Xa inhibitors reduce major bleeding but not recurrent VTE vs. conventional anticoagulants.

SOURCE CITATION: Wang X, Ma Y, Hui X, et al. Oral direct thrombin inhibitors or oral factor Xa inhibitors versus conventional anticoagulants for the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023;4:CD010956. 37058421.

Prevalence and risk factors for cerebral microbleeds in elderly Chinese patients with arteriosclerotic cardiovascular diseases: A single-center study.

OBJECTIVES: People with arteriosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) frequently use antithrombotic agents and statins. The objective of the study was to explore the prevalence and risk factors of cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) in elderly (≥ 65 years old) Chinese people with ASCVD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We prospectively included 755 eligible participants with complete MRI data, and CMBs were discerned on the SWI sequence. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to analyze risk factors associated with CMBs. RESULTS: The average age was 74.9 ± 9.5 years, and the prevalence of CMBs was 37.9% (286/755). Of those with CMBs, 65.0% (186/286) had strictly lobar CMBs, 35.0% (100/286) had deep or infratentorial CMBs with or without lobar CMBs. We divided CMBs into two groups according to their locations, lobar CMBs group (strictly lobar CMBs) and deep CMBs group (with or without lobar CMBs). Age per 10 years (odds ratio (OR) 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17-1.72, p < 0.001), statin use (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.05-2.26, p = 0.03), and lacunes (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.09-2.68, p = 0.02) were associated with any CMBs. Age per 10 years (OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.10-1.63, p < 0.001), statin use (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.12-2.50, p = 0.01), and white matter hyperintensities (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.17-2.51, p < 0.01) were associated with lobar CMBs. Only lacunes were associated with deep CMBs (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.85-5.87, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In elderly people with risk factors of ASCVD, antithrombotic drug use was not associated with any CMBs, lobar CMBs, or deep CMBs. Statin use was correlated with lobar CMBs but not deep CMBs.

Idarucizumab for dabigatran reversal: A systematic review and meta-analysis of indications and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Idarucizumab has been approved to reverse the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran. However, there is little knowledge of the effectiveness and safety of idarucizumab in daily practice. AIMS: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the use, effectiveness and outcomes of idarucizumab. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed up to September 8th 2022. Original studies including patients prescribed idarucizumab, evaluating prescription indications, prescription appropriateness, haemostatic efficacy and/or the occurrence of adverse events were eligible. Case-reports and studies performed in patients ≤18 years or in healthy volunteers were excluded. Study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent reviewers. Pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effects model, after Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation. RESULTS: Thirty studies comprising 3602 patients were included. Idarucizumab was prescribed for bleeding (63.1 %, 95%CI 57.0 %-69.0 %), invasive procedures (30.5 %, 95%CI: 24.1 %-37.2 %), to enable thrombolysis (range: 2.0 %-27.3 %), dabigatran intoxication without bleeding (range: 3.6 %-7.0 %) or unspecified reasons (range: 0.4 %-18.8 %). Overall, 2.8 % (95%CI 0.5 %-6.2 %) of prescription indications were reported to be inappropriate upon post-hoc evaluation. Hemostatic effectiveness was achieved in 77.7 % (95%CI 66.7 %-87.2 %) and peri-procedural haemostasis was normal in 98.5 % (95%CI 86.6 %-100 %) of patients. The pooled incidences of all-cause mortality and thromboembolic events at any follow-up duration were 13.6 % (95%CI 9.6 %-17.9 %) and 2.0 % (95%CI 0.8 %-3.4 %), respectively. CONCLUSION: Idarucizumab was mainly prescribed in the setting of bleeding. The reported hemostatic effectiveness was good, especially perioperatively, and the incidence of thromboembolic events was low. Patients with dabigatran-associated bleeding or requiring an urgent procedure nonetheless face a high mortality risk.

Periprocedural antithrombotic strategies in acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Have we discarded bivalirudin too soon?

BACKGROUND: Publication of the BRIGHT-4 trial results has restimulated discussion about the optimal periprocedural antithrombotic strategy for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). It is possible that variation in the infusion duration, may contribute to observed differences in safety-efficacy profiles of bivalirudin in this clinical setting. METHODS: Up to December 2022, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing bivalirudin (either administered peri-procedurally or accompanied by postprocedural infusion) and heparin, both with or without GPI, were searched and entered in a frequentist network meta-analysis. Co-primary endpoints were trial-defined major adverse composite events (MACE) and major bleeding. Incident rate ratios (IRR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were estimated. RESULTS: 10 RCTs (N = 57,137 patients/month) were included. As compared to heparin, prolonged bivalirudin infusion resulted in lower rates of major bleeding (IRR 0.58, 95 % CI 0.36-0.91), but there was no differences in MACE rates between these strategies. With regard to NACE, prolonged bivalirudin infusion yielded lower risk (IRR 0.86, 95 % CI 0.77-0.96), whereas both bivalirudin and heparin increased risk when coupled with GPI (IRR 1.24, 95 % CI 1.01-1.51 and IRR 1.24, 95 % CI 1.06-1.44, respectively). Both these combination strategies also increased minor bleeding rates (IRR 1.49, 95 % CI 1.16-1.93 and IRR 1.58, 95 % CI 1.29-1.95, respectively, for bivalirudin and heparin). Results were consistent across several sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, procedural bivalirudin administration followed by prolonged infusion results in lower major bleeding rates, but there does not appear to be a difference in observed MACE.

Effectiveness and Safety of Dabigatran Reversal with Idarucizumab in the Taiwanese Population: A Comparison Based on Eligibility for Inclusion in Clinical Trials.

Background and Objectives: The effectiveness and safety of idarucizumab for the reversal of the effects of dabigatran have been proven. However, there remains a paucity of literature comprehensively investigating outcomes in real-world patients. This is especially true when comparing patients who were eligible for inclusion in the RE-VERSE AD trial with patients who were ineligible. As the prescription of dabigatran has become increasingly popular, the generalizability of the results to real-world populations has come into question due to the broad variability of real-world patients receiving dabigatran. Our study aimed to identify all patients who were prescribed idarucizumab and examined how effectiveness and safety varied among those patients who were eligible and ineligible for the trial. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed the largest medical database in Taiwan. We enrolled all patients who were prescribed and received idarucizumab from when it became available in Taiwan up until May 2021. A Total of 32 patients were included and analyzed, and they were further divided into subgroups based on their eligibility for inclusion in the RE-VERSE AD trial. Multiple outcomes were evaluated, including successful hemostasis rate, complete reversal efficacy of idarucizumab, 90-day thromboembolic events, intra-hospital mortality, and adverse event rate. Results: In our study, we found that 34.4% of real-world cases of idarucizumab use were ineligible for the RE-VERSE AD trials. The eligible group had higher successful hemostasis rates (95.2% vs. 80%) and anticoagulant effect reversal rates compared to the ineligible group (73.3% vs. 0%). The mortality rates were 9.5%, compared to 27.3% in the ineligible group. Few adverse effects (n = 3) and 90-day thromboembolic events (n = 1) were observed in either group. Among the ineligible cases, all acute ischemic stroke patients (n = 5) received definite, timely treatments without complications. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated the real-world effectiveness and safety of idarucizumab infusion for trial-eligible patients and all acute ischemic stroke patients. However, although it seems to be effective and safe, idarucizumab appears to be less effective in other trial-ineligible patients. Despite this result, our study provides further evidence for extending the applicability of idarucizumab in real-world scenarios. Our study suggests that idarucizumab can be a safe and effective option for reversing the anticoagulant effect of dabigatran, particularly for eligible patients.

Impact of coronary artery disease on clinical outcomes after TAVR: Insights from the BRAVO-3 randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prognostic impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients randomized to bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: CAD is a common comorbidity among patients undergoing TAVR and studies provide conflicting data on its prognostic impact. METHODS: The Bivalirudin on Aortic Valve Intervention Outcomes-3 (BRAVO-3) randomized trial compared the use of bivalirudin versus UFH in 802 high-surgical risk patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of history of CAD as well as periprocedural anticoagulation. The coprimary endpoints were net adverse cardiac events (NACE; a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or major bleeding) and major Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding ≥3b at 30 days postprocedure. RESULTS: Among 801 patients, 437 (54.6%) had history of CAD of whom 223 (51.0%) received bivalirudin. There were no significant differences in NACE (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69-1.58) or BARC ≥ 3b bleeding (adjusted OR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.51-1.39) in patients with vs without CAD at 30 days. Among CAD patients, periprocedural use of bivalirudin was associated with similar NACE (OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.47-1.35) and BARC ≥ 3b bleeding (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.33-1.25) compared with UFH, irrespective of history of CAD (p-interaction = 0.959 for NACE; p-interaction = 0.479 for major bleeding). CONCLUSION: CAD was not associated with a higher short-term risk of NACE or major bleeding after TAVR. Periprocedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin did not show any advantage over UFH in patients with and without CAD.