Bivalirudin versus heparin with primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract Background Optimal adjunctive therapy in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated with primary PCI (PPCI) remains a matter of debate. Our aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin to unfractionated heparin (UFH), with or without glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) in a large real-world population, using data from the Swedish national registry, SWEDEHEART. Method From 2008 to 2014 we identified 23,800 STEMI patients presenting within 12 hours from symptom onset treated with PPCI and UFH ± GPI or bivalirudin±GPI. Primary outcomes included 30-day all-cause mortality and major in-hospital bleeding. Multivariable regression models and propensity score modelling were utilized to study adjusted association between treatment and outcome. Results Treatment with UFH ± GPI was associated with similar risk of 30-day mortality compared to bivalirudin±GPI (5.3% vs 5.5%, adjusted HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.82–1.07). The adjusted risk for 1-year mortality, 30-day and 1-year stent thrombosis and re-infarction did not differ significantly between UFH ± GPI and bivalirudin±GPI. In contrast, treatment with UFH ± GPI was associated with a significant higher risk of major in-hospital bleeding (adjusted OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.30–2.03). When including GPI use in the multivariable analysis, the difference was attenuated and no longer significant (adjusted OR 1.25; 95% CI 0.92–1.70). Conclusion Bivalirudin±GPI was associated with significantly lower risk for major inhospital bleeding but no significant difference in 30-day or one year mortality, stent thrombosis or re-infarction compared with UFH ± GPI. The bleeding reduction associated with bivalirudin could be explained by the greater GPI use with UFH.