Meta-Analysis of Prospective Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Intracoronary Versus Intravenous Abciximab in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Abstract

Abciximab is a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor that has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). An earlier study reported better efficacy with intracoronary (IC) compared to intravenous (IV) administration, but this finding has not been duplicated in other studies, thus leaving a great deal of uncertainty as to the most efficacious route of administration. To investigate if IC abciximab compared to IV administration decreases mortality and major adverse cardiac events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who undergo pPCI, a meta-analysis was performed consisting only of prospective randomized controlled trials. Subgroup analysis was performed to investigate the source of difference in efficacy between the 2 strategies. A meta-analysis of 4 trials including 1,148 subjects revealed that IC abciximab significantly reduced mortality compared to IV administration (1.5% vs 3.6%, odds ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.95, p = 0.04). Major adverse cardiac events were also reduced in a subgroup in which <30% of patients received aspiration thrombectomy (6.1% vs 16.2%, odds ratio 0.33, 95% confidence interval 0.18 to 0.61, p = 0.0004). In conclusion, the totality of the data available from relatively small but high-quality studies shows a significant mortality reduction associated using IC abciximab for pPCI compared to IV abciximab. IC abciximab in the setting of pPCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction may be beneficial for patients with higher risk profiles.