Abstract

There are limited data on the use of bivalirudin for chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We compared CTO-PCIs performed using bivalirudin vs unfractionated heparin in the Prospective Global Registry for the Study of Chronic Total Occlusion Intervention (PROGRESS-CTO; NCT02061436). The primary endpoint was net adverse cardiac events (NACE), defined as major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and vascular complications. Between 2012 and 2022, a total of 73 of 9723 procedures (0.75%) were performed using bivalirudin. The J-CTO score (2.4 ± 1.2 vs 2.4 ± 1.3; P=.73) and the PROGRESS-CTO score (1.4 ± 0.9 vs 1.2 ± 1.0; P=.31) were similar in both groups, and the retrograde approach was used less often in the bivalirudin group (15% vs 30%; P<.01). Procedural success (89% vs 85%; P=.35), in-hospital NACE (1.4% vs 2.1%; P>.99), incidence of MACE (0% vs 0.76%; P=.64), and vascular access complications (1.4% vs 0.9%; P=.48) were not different between the 2 groups. On multivariable analysis, use of bivalirudin was not associated with an increased risk of NACE (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.13-7.27). Bivalirudin is infrequently used during retrograde CTO-PCI. While the incidence of adverse events was similar with unfractionated heparin, larger studies are needed to assess the safety of bivalirudin.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.