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.

Scoring Central Nervous System Inflammation, Demyelination, and Axon Injury in Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis.

Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) is a common immune-based model of multiple sclerosis (MS). This disease can be induced in rodents by active immunization with protein components of the myelin sheath and Complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) or by the transfer of myelin-specific T effector cells from rodents primed with myelin protein/CFA into naïve rodents. The severity of EAE is typically scored on a 5-point clinical scale that measures the degree of ascending paralysis, but this scale is not optimal for assessing the extent of recovery from EAE. For example, clinical scores remain high in some EAE models (e.g., myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein [MOG] peptide-induced model of EAE) despite the resolution of inflammation. Thus, it is important to complement clinical scoring with histological scoring of EAE, which also provides a means to study the underlying mechanisms of cellular injury in the central nervous system (CNS). Here, a simple protocol is presented to prepare and stain spinal cord and brain sections from mice and to score inflammation, demyelination, and axonal injury in the spinal cord. The method for scoring leukocyte infiltration in the spinal cord can also be applied to score brain inflammation in EAE. A protocol for measuring soluble neurofilament light (sNF-L) in the serum of mice using a Small Molecule Assay (SIMOA) assay is also described, which provides feedback on the extent of overall CNS injury in live mice.

Futoquinol improves Aß25-35-induced memory impairment in mice by inhibiting the activation of p38MAPK through the glycolysis pathway and regulating the composition of the gut microbiota.

Futoquinol (Fut) is a compound extracted from Piper kadsura that has a nerve cell protection effect. However, it is unclear whether Fut has protective effects in Alzheimer's disease (AD). In this study, we aimed to explore the therapeutic effect of Fut in AD and its underlying mechanism. UPLC-MS/MS method was performed to quantify Fut in the hippocampus of mice brain. The cognition ability, neuronal and mitochondria damage, and levels of Aß1-42, Aß1-40, p-Tau, oxidative stress, apoptosis, immune cells, and inflammatory factors were measured in Aß25-35-induced mice. The content of bacterial meta-geometry was predicted in the microbial composition based on 16S rDNA. The protein levels of HK II, p-p38MAPK, and p38MAPK were detected. PC-12 cells were cultured in vitro, and glucose was added to activate glycolysis to further explore the mechanism of action of Fut intervention in AD. Fut improved the memory and learning ability of Aß25-35 mice, and reduced neuronal damage and the deposition of Aß and Tau proteins. Moreover, Fut reduced mitochondrial damage, the levels of oxidative stress, apoptosis, and inflammatory factors. Fut significantly inhibited the expression of HK II and p-p38MAPK proteins. The in vitro experiment showed that p38MAPK was activated and Fut action inhibited after adding 10 mM glucose. Fut might inhibit the activation of p38MAPK through the glycolysis pathway, thereby reducing oxidative stress, apoptosis, and inflammatory factors and improving Aß25-35-induced memory impairment in mice. These data provide pharmacological rationale for Fut in the treatment of AD.

Postprocedural Anticoagulation After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postprocedural anticoagulation (PPA) is frequently administered after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, although no conclusive data support this practice. METHODS: The RIGHT trial (Comparison of Anticoagulation Prolongation vs no Anticoagulation in STEMI Patients After Primary PCI) was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority trial conducted at 53 centers in China. Patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly assigned by center to receive low-dose PPA or matching placebo for at least 48 hours. Before trial initiation, each center selected 1 of 3 PPA regimens (40 mg of enoxaparin once daily subcutaneously; 10 U·kg·h of unfractionated heparin intravenously, adjusted to maintain activated clotting time between 150 and 220 seconds; or 0.2 mg·kg·h of bivalirudin intravenously). The primary efficacy objective was to demonstrate superiority of PPA to reduce the primary efficacy end point of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, stent thrombosis (definite), or urgent revascularization (any vessel) within 30 days. The key secondary objective was to evaluate the effect of each specific anticoagulation regimen (enoxaparin, unfractionated heparin, or bivalirudin) on the primary efficacy end point. The primary safety end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 to 5 bleeding at 30 days. RESULTS: Between January 10, 2019, and September 18, 2021, a total of 2989 patients were randomized. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 37 patients (2.5%) in both the PPA and placebo groups (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.63 to 1.57]). The incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 to 5 bleeding did not differ between the PPA and placebo groups (8 [0.5%] vs 11 [0.7%] patients; hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.30 to 1.83]). CONCLUSIONS: Routine PPA after primary percutaneous coronary intervention was safe but did not reduce 30-day ischemic events. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03664180.

Comparison of bleeding and thrombotic outcomes in veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: Heparin versus bivalirudin.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications with heparin versus bivalirudin use in veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients placed on V-V ECMO with intravenous anticoagulation with either heparin or bivalirudin. Time to thrombotic event and major bleed were analyzed in addition to related outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 95 patients placed on V-V ECMO: 61 receiving heparin, 34 bivalirudin. The bivalirudin group had a higher rate of severe COVID-19, higher BMI, and longer ECMO duration. Despite this, bivalirudin was associated with reduced risk of thrombotic event (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.06-0.32, p < .001) and increased average lifespan of the circuit membrane lung (16 vs. 10 days, p = 0.004). While there was no difference in major bleeding, the bivalirudin group required fewer transfusions of packed red blood cells and platelets per 100 ECMO days (means of 13 vs. 39, p = 0.004; 5 vs. 19, p = .014, respectively). Lastly, the bivalirudin group had improved survival to ECMO decannulation in univariate analysis (median OS 53 vs. 26 days, p = .015). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world analysis of bivalirudin versus heparin, bivalirudin is a viable option for V-V ECMO and associated with lower risk of thrombotic complications and fewer transfusion requirements.

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 versus Heparin on Net Adverse Clinical Events, Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebral Events, and Bleeding in Elderly Chinese Patients Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Bivalirudin as an anticoagulant reduces bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), while its impact in elderly Chinese patients treated with PCI needs more evidence. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between bivalirudin and heparin in elderly Chinese patients treated with PCI. This cohort study retrieved data of 1,286 elderly patients treated with PCI who used bivalirudin (bivalirudin group, N = 493) or heparin (heparin group, N = 793) as anticoagulants. Net adverse clinical events (NACEs) (primary endpoint), major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCEs), bleeding, and major bleeding within 30 days after PCI treatment were recorded for analysis. Our study illustrated that NACEs (12.4% vs. 17.4%, P = 0.015), bleeding (6.7% vs. 12.1%, P = 0.002), and major bleeding (2.2% vs. 6.6%, P < 0.001) were fewer in bivalirudin group compared to heparin group. No difference was found in MACCEs (7.5% vs. 9.6%,P = 0.200), and incidences of all-cause mortality (P = 0.257), cardiac mortality (P = 0.504), recurrent myocardial infarction (P = 0.423), ischemia-driven revascularization (P = 0.509), and stroke (P = 0.467), between bivalirudin group and heparin group. According to univariate logistic regression analyses, bivalirudin (vs. heparin) correlated with fewer NACEs (P = 0.016), bleeding (P = 0.002), and major bleeding (P = 0.001) in elderly patients treated with PCI, but not MACCEs (P = 0.202). After adjustment, bivalirudin (vs. heparin) was an independent factor for fewer NACEs [odds ratio (OR): 0.619, P = 0.009], bleeding (OR: 0.499, P = 0.003), and major bleeding (OR: 0.342, P = 0.003) in these patients. In summary, bivalirudin achieves fewer NACEs, bleeding, and major bleeding, but not MACCEs, versus heparin in elderly patients treated with PCI, which is verified in the multivariate model.

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.

Modeling Multiple Sclerosis in the Two Sexes: MOG35-55-Induced Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis.

Multiple Sclerosis (MS) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory disease affecting the central nervous system (CNS). It is characterized by different prevalence in the sexes, affecting more women than men, and different outcomes, showing more aggressive forms in men than in women. Furthermore, MS is highly heterogeneous in terms of clinical aspects, radiological, and pathological features. Thus, it is necessary to take advantage of experimental animal models that allow the investigation of as many aspects of the pathology as possible. Experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) represents one of the most used models of MS in mice, modeling different disease features, from the activation of the immune system to CNS damage. Here we describe a protocol for the induction of EAE in both male and female C57BL/6J mice using myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein peptide 35-55 (MOG35-55) immunization, which leads to the development of a chronic form of the disease. We also report the evaluation of the daily clinical score and motor performance of these mice for 28 days post immunization (28 dpi). Lastly, we illustrate some basic histological analysis at the CNS level, focusing on the spinal cord as the primary site of disease-induced damage.

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.

Bivalirudin Versus Heparin During PCI in NSTEMI: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Large Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: The benefit:risk profile of bivalirudin versus heparin anticoagulation in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is uncertain. Study-level meta-analyses lack granularity to provide conclusive answers. We sought to compare the outcomes of bivalirudin and heparin in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing PCI. METHODS: We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis of patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in all 5 trials that randomized ≥1000 patients with any myocardial infarction undergoing PCI to bivalirudin versus heparin (MATRIX [Minimizing Adverse Hemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox], VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART [Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies Registry Trial], ISAR-REACT 4 [Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 4], ACUITY [Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy], and BRIGHT [Bivalirudin in Acute Myocardial Infarction vs Heparin and GPI Plus Heparin Trial]). The primary effectiveness and safety end points were 30-day all-cause mortality and serious bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 12 155 patients were randomized: 6040 to bivalirudin (52.3% with a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion), and 6115 to heparin (53.2% with planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use). Thirty-day mortality was not significantly different between bivalirudin and heparin (1.2% versus 1.1%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.24 [95% CI, 0.86-1.79]; P=0.25). Cardiac mortality, reinfarction, and stent thrombosis rates were also not significantly different. Bivalirudin reduced serious bleeding (both access site-related and non-access site-related) compared with heparin (3.3% versus 5.5%; adjusted odds ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48-0.72; P<0.0001). Outcomes were consistent regardless of use of a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion or routine lycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use with heparin and during 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing PCI, procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin and heparin did not result in significantly different rates of mortality or ischemic events, including stent thrombosis and reinfarction. Bivalirudin reduced serious bleeding compared with heparin arising both from the access site and nonaccess sites.

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.

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.

Prolonged infusion of bivalirudin after elective percutaneous coronary intervention protects against procedural myocardial injury (a COBER study)-a randomized trial.

Procedural myocardial injury (PMI), which is the most common complication of elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ePCI), is associated with future adverse cardiac events. In this randomized pilot trial, we assessed the effects of prolonged use of the anti-coagulant bivalirudin on PMI after ePCI. Patients undergoing ePCI were randomized into the following two groups: the bivalirudin use during operation group (BUDO, 0.75 mg/kg bolus plus 1.75 mg/kg/h) and the bivalirudin use during and after operation for 4 h (BUDAO, 0.75 mg/kg bolus plus 1.75 mg/kg/h). Blood samples were collected before and 24 h after ePCI (per 8 h). The primary outcome, PMI, was defined as an increase in post-ePCI cardiac troponin I (cTnI) levels of > 1 × 99th% upper reference limit (URL) when the pre-PCI cTnI was normal or a rise in cTnI of > 20% of the baseline value when it was above the 99th percentile URL, but it was stable or falling. Major PMI (MPMI) was defined as a post-ePCI cTnI increase of > 5 × 99th% URL. A total of 330 patients were included (n = 165 per group). The incidences of PMI and MPMI were not significantly higher in the BUDO group than in the BUDAO group (PMI: 115 [69.70%] vs. 102 [61.82%], P = 0.164; MPMI: 81 [49.09%] vs. 70 [42.42%], P = 0.269). However, the absolute change in cTnI levels (calculated as the peak value 24 h post-PCI minus the pre-PCI value) was notably larger in the BUDO group (0.13 [0.03, 1.95]) than in the BUDAO group (0.07 [0.01, 0.61]) (P = 0.045). Moreover, the incidence of bleeding events was similar between the two groups (BUDO: 0 [0.00%]; BUDAO: 2 [1.21%], P = 0.498). Prolonged infusion of bivalirudin for 4 h after ePCI reduces PMI severity without increasing the risk of bleeding.ClinicalTrials.gov.Number: NCT04120961, 09/10/2019.

Comparison of bivalirudin versus heparin in adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation anticoagulant therapy: A retrospective case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: There were controversial opinions on the use of bivalirudin versus heparin for anticoagulant therapy in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The aim of our present study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin versus heparin for the maintenance of systemic anticoagulation during adult veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-V ECMO). METHODS: Adult patients who received V-V ECMO support in our center between February 2018and February 2022 were retrospectively recruited. We analyzed their ECMO support time, platelet count, coagulation indicators, blood product infusion volume, the incidence of thrombosis and bleeding, probability of successful weaning of ECMO, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients received V-V ECMO support. Thirty-four patients were finally included according to the exclusion and inclusion criteria, 14 and 20 accepted bivalirudin and heparin for anticoagulant therapy, respectively. The Minimum platelet value (98.50 × 109/L (85.50, 123.75) vs 49.50 × 109/L (31.25, 83.00), p = 0.002) and mean platelet value (149.90 × 109/L (127.40, 164.80) vs 74.55 × 109/L (62.45, 131.60), p = 0.03) and the ratio of successful weaning of ECMO (92.8% vs 60.0%, p = 0.033) in bivalirudin group were significantly higher than those in heparin group. The red blood cell infusion volume (7.00 U (3.00, 13.25) vs 13.75 U (7.25, 22.63), p = 0.039), platelet infusion volume (0.00 mL (0.00, 75.00) vs 300 mL (0.00, 825.00), p = 0.027), and the incidence of major bleeding (0.00% vs 30%, p = 0.024) in bivalirudin group were significantly lower than those in heparin group. CONCLUSIONS: In V-V ECMO-supported adult patients, systemic anticoagulation with bivalirudin has achieved the same anticoagulation targets as heparin with less frequency of major bleeding events and lower requirement for blood products without significantly increased risk of thrombosis. Bivalirudin most likely is a safe and effective anticoagulation method for adult patients supported by V-V ECMO.

Cell therapy procedure using anti-inflammatory macrophage M2 can potentially reduce Clinical Score in animals with Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis: A preclinical systematic review and meta-analysis study.

Macrophage M2 (MP2)-based cell therapy is a novel medicinal treatment for animals with Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis (EAE) as an experimental model of multiple sclerosis (MS). This systematic review and meta-analysis study was designed to assess the overall therapeutic effects of MP2 cell therapy on Clinical Score and motor impairment in EAE-induced animals. All experiments on MP2 cell therapy in animals with EAE were gathered (by October 2, 2022) from English (PubMed, Scopus, WoS, Science Direct, and ISC) and Persian (MagIran and SID) databases. The searching strategy was designed using "Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis," "Multiple Sclerosis," and "Macrophage M2" keywords. Following primary and secondary screenings, eligible papers were selected based on the PRISMA 2020 guideline, and the study quality was assessed using the Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments (ARRIVE) checklist. The difference in means of Clinical Score (score 0-5) as the effect size (ES) was analyzed based on the random effect model (CMA software, v.2). Subgrouping (EAE phases of Onset, Peak, and Recovery) was applied, and I2 index was used to assess the heterogeneity index. Publication bias and sensitivity indices were also evaluated. P < 0.05 was considered significant, and the confidence interval (CI) was determined 95%. Among 22 gathered papers, medium to high quality studies were selected for meta-analysis. Difference in means, P value, and I2 for Onset, Peak, and Recovery phases were 0.082 (CI95%: -0.323-0.159, P value: 0.504, I2 : 67.961%), -0.606 (CI95%: -1.518 to -0.305, P value: 0.192, I2 : 96.070%), and -1.103 (CI95%: -1.390 to -0.816, P value: 0.000, I2 : 30.880%), respectively and Overall Effect was found -0.509 (CI95%: -0.689 to -0.328, P value < 0.001). Also, P value (two-tailed) indices for publication bias were 0.366 and 0.583 for Egger's regression intercept and Begg rank correlation, respectively. The P value for sensitivity was detected 0.003. Cell therapy procedure using MP2 can potentially alleviate the Clinical Scores Index and correct the motor defects in Recovery phase of EAE animals. In healthy mice, the brain and myelin surrounding neurons are in a healthy and physiological state (1). To evaluate MS in humans, it is necessary to model this type of disease in animals using EAE procedure through subcutaneous injection of CFA, MOG35-55 , MT, and Pert. Thus, inflammation and autoimmunity occur, which finally lead to myelin destruction and motor symptoms (2). By aspiration of progenitor cells available in bone marrow, the MP2 can be isolated and cultured. By activation of these types of cells, a rich collection of MP2 can be prepared for the cell-therapy process (3). After injection through the tail vein or intra-peritoneal procedure, these cells can be located in CNS through crossing from the BBB. They begin their anti-inflammatory activities and help repair the damaged myelin (4). Eventually, the clinical symptoms can be modified considerably, and the animal motor function improves (5). CFA, complete Freund's adjuvant; MOG35-55 , myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein; MT, Mycobacterium tuberculosis; Pert, pertussis; EAE, Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis; BM, bone marrow; MP2, macrophage M2; and BBB, blood brain barrier.

Outcomes of systemic bivalirudin and sodium bicarbonate purge solution for Impella 5.5.

BACKGROUND: Impella 5.5 (Abiomed; Danvers, MA) (IMP5) is a commonly used, surgically implanted, tMCS device that requires systemic anticoagulation and purge solution to avoid pump failure. To avoid heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) from unfractionated heparin (UFH) use, our program has explored the utility of bivalirudin (BIV) for systemic anticoagulation and sodium bicarbonate-dextrose purge solution (SBPS) in IMP5.5. METHODS: This single center, retrospective study included 34 patients supported on IMP5.5 with BIV based AC and SBPS between December 1st 2020 to December 1st 2021.The efficacy and safety end points were incidence of development of HIT, Tissue Plasminogen Activator (tPA) use for suspected pump thrombosis, stroke, and device failure as well as clinically significant bleeding. RESULTS: The median duration of IMP5.5 support was 9.8 days (IQR: 6-15). Most patients were bridged to HTX (58%) followed by recovery (27%) and LVAD implantation (15%). Patients were therapeutic on bivalirudin for 64% of their IMP5.5 support. One patient (2.9%) suffered from ischemic stroke and 26.5% (9) patients developed clinically significant bleeding. tPA was administered to 7(21%) patients. One patient in the entire cohort developed HIT. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience supports the use of systemic BIV and SBPS as a method to avoid heparin exposure in a patient population predisposed to the development of HIT.