Abciximab In Patients Research Articles

Evaluate Short-Term Outcomes of abciximab in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Objectives This meta-analysis was to verify the short-time efficacy and safety of abciximab in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Background Abciximab has long-term efficacy in patients with STEMI undergoing PCI, but the short-term efficacy is still controversial. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis compared with or without abciximab in patients with STEMI undergoing PCI. The relevant randomized controlled trials were included by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases and other sources. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of outcomes were calculated by the fixed-effects model. Results Ten randomized controlled trials with 5008 patients met inclusion criteria. There were no significant differences in risk of all-cause death at 30-day (RR 0.79, CI 0.55–1.12, P=0.18), major bleeding (1.37, 0.93–2.03, P=0.11), and transfusion (1.23, 0.94–1.61, P=0.13) between the two groups. However, there were significant differences in risk of all-cause death at 6 months (0.57, 0.36–0.90, P=0.02), recurrent myocardial infarction (0.55, 0.33–0.92, P=0.02), repeat revascularization (0.58, 0.43–0.78, P=0.0004), final TIMI flow <3 (0.77, 0.62–0.96, P=0.02), minor bleeding (1.29, 1.02–1.63, P=0.04), and thrombocytopenia (2.04, 1.40–2.97, P=0.0002). Conclusions The application of abciximab can lead to a lower risk of reinfarction, revascularization, and all-cause death at 6 months, but a higher risk of minor bleeding, and thrombocytopenia.

Pooled Analysis Comparing the Efficacy of Intracoronary Versus Intravenous Abciximab in Smokers Versus Nonsmokers Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization for Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Cigarette smokers with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may present different response to potent antithrombotic therapy compared to nonsmokers. We assessed the impact of smoking status and intracoronary abciximab in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We pooled data from 5 randomized trials comparing intracoronary versus intravenous abciximab bolus in patients undergoing primary PCI. The primary end point was the composite of death or reinfarction at a mean follow-up of 292 ± 138days. Of 3,158 participants, 1,369 (43.3%) were smokers, and they had a lower risk of the primary end point in crude, but not in adjusted analyses (hazard ratio [HR] 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 1.21, p= 0.405). Intracoronary versus intravenous abciximab was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of primary end point among smokers (3.6% vs 8.0%; HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.72, p=0.001), but not in nonsmokers (10.2% vs 9.9%; HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.36, p=0.96), with a significant interaction (p= 0.009). Furthermore, intracoronary abciximab decreased the risk of reinfarction in smokers (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.62, p= 0.001), with no difference in nonsmokers (HR 1.20, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.01, p= 0.50). Stent thrombosis was lowered by intracoronary abciximab in smokers (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.66, p= 0.009), but was ineffective in nonsmokers (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.00, p=0.903). Interaction testing showed heterogeneity in treatment effect for reinfarction (p= 0.002) and stent thrombosis (p= 0.018) according to smoking status. In conclusion, among patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI, smoking status did not affect the adjusted risk of clinical events. Intracoronary abciximab bolus improved clinical outcomes by reducing the risk of death or reinfarction.

Collagen Plug Vascular Closure Devices and Reduced Risk of Bleeding with Bivalirudin Versus Heparin Plus Abciximab in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Non ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

In ISAR-REACT-4 (abciximab and heparin vs. bivalirudin for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI]), bivalirudin reduced the risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with unfractionated heparin plus abciximab (UFH + abciximab). Vascular closure devices (VCDs) may also prevent bleeding complications, and thus attenuate the benefit of bivalirudin. This analysis examined whether there exists an interaction on bleeding between VCDs and bivalirudin versus UFH + abciximab after PCI. Patients with NSTEMI were randomly assigned to either receive UFH + abciximab or bivalirudin for PCI. The use of a VCD after femoral access was left to the operator's discretion. The effect of randomized treatment in patients who received a VCD was compared to that in patients with manual compression of the femoral access site. The primary end-point of this analysis was the 30-day incidence of ISAR-REACT-4 major bleeding. A total of 1,711 patients were enrolled in this analysis. Among the 365 (21.3%) patients receiving a VCD, 188 (51.5%) were treated with UFH + abciximab and 177 (48.5%) with bivalirudin. ISAR- REACT-4 major bleeding was higher with UFH + abciximab than with bivalirudin, independent of whether a VCD was used (4.8% vs. 2.3% with VCD and 4.6% vs. 2.7% without VCD, Pint = 0.76). There were also no interactions between randomized treatment and VCDs with respect to any of the ischemic end-points or net clinical outcome (Pint > 0.56). In patients undergoing PCI for NSTEMI, the reduction of major bleeding by bivalirudin compared with UFH + abciximab was not affected whether a VCD was used.

Intra-arterial tissue plasminogen activator and abciximab in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion

Acute basilar artery occlusion has a poor prognosis and best treatment has not been assessed yet; as for intra-arterial treatment, no "gold standard" exists. We evaluated a series of ten patients treated with intra-arterial combination of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) and abciximab. Partial/complete recanalisation was achieved in all patients and good outcome (1 month Modified Rankin Scale 0-2) in eight cases, while one patient had symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage and died. Such outcome appears significantly better if compared with the results of Basilar Artery International Cooperation Study, suggesting that intra-arterial administration of rtPA and abciximab may be a promising option in patients with acute basilar artery occlusion undergoing endovascular treatment.

Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions Editors’ Picks

<i>Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions</i> Editors’ Picks

Lack of Peri-Procedural Myocardial Necrosis Reduction from Abciximab in Patients on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Revascularized with Rotational Atherectomy

Rotational atherectomy allows plaque remodeling in severely calcified lesions and, prior to the adoption of clopidogrel as standard therapy, small trials showed that abciximab reduces transient hypoperfusion associated with the procedure. However, no studies have evaluated it among patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. This study aimed to evaluate whether abciximab reduces procedure-related myocardial injury in a non-selected population of patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. The study comprised a retrospective review of a nonselected cohort of 139 consecutive procedures of rotational atherectomy performed in patients pre-treated with dual antiplatelet therapy. Abciximab was administered in 48 (34.5%) patients, whereas 91 (65.5%) did not receive it. The only difference between groups was a higher rate of diabetes mellitus in the abciximab group (89% vs. 51%, p=0.001). The rate of procedural complications was 10.5% for patients with abciximab vs. 6.2% for patients without (p=0.537). After 24 hours, the peak of biomarkers of myocardial damage (CKmb and TnT) did not differ, and the rate of procedure-related myocardial injury was 23.9% with abciximab and 20.7% without (p=0.664). In a restricted analysis to diabetic patients (n=84), the rate of myocardial injury was 27.5% with abciximab vs. 18.6% without, (p=0.435). After adjusting by clinical and procedural parameters in a logistic regression model, abciximab use did not confer any significant reduction on procedure-related myocardial injury. In conclusion, in a non-selected cohort of patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy, the administration of abciximab in the setting of rotational atherectomy did not reduce the incidence of procedure related myocardial injury.

Prehospital Abciximab in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

The value of prehospital initiation of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors remains a controversial issue. We sought to investigate whether in-ambulance initiation of abciximab in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) improves ST-segment elevation resolution (STR) after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). MISTRAL (Myocardial Infarction with ST-elevation Treated by Primary Percutaneous Intervention Facilitated by Early Reopro Administration in Alsace) is a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Two hundred and fifty-six patients with acute STEMI were allocated to receive abciximab either in the ambulance (ambulance group, n=127) or in the catheterization laboratory (hospital group, n=129). The primary end point was complete (>70%) STR after PCI. Complete STR was not significantly different between the 2 groups (before PCI, 21.6% versus 15.5%, P=0.28; after PCI, 70.3% versus 65.8%, P=0.49). Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 2 to 3 flow rates before PCI tended to be higher in the ambulance group (46.8% versus 35%, P=0.08) but not after PCI (70.3% versus 65.8%, P=0.49). Slow flow tended to be lower (5.6% versus 13.4%, P=0.07), and distal embolization occurred significantly less often in the ambulance group (8.1% versus 21.1%, P=0.008). One- and 6-month major adverse cardiac event rates were low and similar in both groups. Early ambulance administration of abciximab in STEMI did not improve either STR or TIMI flow rate after PCI. However, it tended to improve TIMI flow pre-PCI and decreased distal embolization during procedure. Larger studies are needed to confirm these results.

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

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.

Early glycoprotein IIb‐IIIa inhibitors in primary angioplasty‐abciximab long‐term results (EGYPT‐ALT) cooperation: individual patient’s data meta‐analysis

Even although time to treatment has been shown to be a determinant of mortality in primary angioplasty, the potential benefits are still unclear from early pharmacological reperfusion by glycoprotein (Gp) IIb-IIIa inhibitors. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to combine individual data from all randomized trials conducted on upstream as compared with late peri-procedural abciximab administration in primary angioplasty. The literature was scanned using formal searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE) from January 1990 to December 2010. All randomized trials on upstream abciximab administration in primary angioplasty were examined. No language restrictions were enforced. We included a total of seven randomized trials enrolling 722 patients, who were randomized to early (n = 357, 49.4%) or late (n = 365, 50.6%) peri-procedural abciximab administration. No difference in baseline characteristics was observed between the two groups. Follow-up data were collected at a median (25th-75th percentiles) of 1095 days (720-1967). Early abciximab was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (primary endpoint) [20% vs. 24.6%; hazard ratio (HR) 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.65 (0.42-0.98) P = 0.02, P(het) = 0.6]. Furthermore, early abciximab administration was associated with a significant improvement in pre-procedural thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 3 flow (21.6% vs. 10.1%, P < 0.0001), post-procedural TIMI 3 flow (90% vs. 84.8%, P = 0.04), an improvement in myocardial perfusion as evaluated by post-procedural myocardial blush grade (MBG) 3 (52.0% vs. 43.2%, P = 0.03) and ST-segment resolution (58.4% vs. 43.5%, P < 0.0001) and significantly less distal embolization (10.1% vs. 16.2%, P = 0.02). No difference was observed in terms of major bleeding complications between early and late abciximab administration (3.3% vs. 2.3%, P = 0.4). This meta-analysis shows that early upstream administration of abciximab in patients undergoing primary angioplasty for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is associated with significant benefits in terms of pre-procedural epicardial re-canalization and ST-segment resolution, which translates in to significant mortality benefits at long-term follow-up.

Intracoronary Compared to Intravenous Abciximab in Patients with ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Reduces Mortality, Target Vessel Revascularization and Reinfarction after 1 Year

Objectives: Administration of the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor abciximab to patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) improves outcome. Data have suggested that an intracoronary (IC) bolus might be superior to the standard intravenous (IV) administration. We have previously reported reduced short-term mortality and need for target vessel revascularization (TVR) with the IC route. We now present long-term data from our randomized trial on IC versus IV abciximab in pPCI-treated STEMI patients. Methods: A total of 355 pPCI-treated STEMI patients were randomized to either IC or IV bolus abciximab followed by a 12-hour IV infusion. Patients were followed for 1 year to observe mortality, TVR or myocardial infarction (MI) and the combination of these. Results: The two treatment arms (IV, n = 170; IC, n = 185) were similar with regard to baseline characteristics. Mortality was reduced from 10% in the IV group to 2.7% in the IC group (p = 0.004). TVR and MI were also reduced with IC administration (TVR: 14.1 vs. 7.6%, p = 0.04; MI: 11.8 vs. 5.4%, p = 0.03). Consequently, patients in the IC treatment arm had a relative risk reduction of 55% for the combined endpoint after 1 year (p = 0.002) compared to the IV treatment arm. Conclusions: In pPCI-treated STEMI patients treated with abciximab, IC bolus administration resulted in a significant reduction in mortality, TVR and MI compared to IV bolus administration.

Platelet inhibition and GP IIb/IIIa receptor occupancy by intracoronary versus intravenous bolus administration of abciximab in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), direct intracoronary bolus administration of the glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist abciximab is associated with a reduction in infarct size, better myocardial salvage, less microvascular obstruction and improved myocardial blush grade as compared to intravenous bolus injection, presumably caused by higher local drug concentrations leading to a more pronounced inhibition of platelet aggregation. We investigated whether there are differences in the degree of GP IIb/IIIa receptor occupancy and platelet inhibition in blood drawn from the coronary sinus (CS) shortly after intracoronary versus intravenous abciximab bolus administration. A total of 16 patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention within 12h of symptom onset underwent blood sampling from the CS before, immediately after and 30min after abciximab bolus administration (intracoronary bolus: n=8 patients; intravenous bolus: n=8 patients). Immediately after bolus application, GP IIb/IIIa receptor occupancy in CS blood was significantly higher in patients who received direct intracoronary bolus injection compared to administration via a peripheral vein (intracoronary bolus: 93.5% [IQR 92.7-95.4]; intravenous bolus: 74.0% [IQR 17.6-94.0], p=0.04). The degree of platelet inhibition was also markedly higher with intracoronary compared to intravenous dosing. At late sampling after 30min no significant differences were found between groups for both platelet reactivity and GP IIb/IIIa receptor occupancy. Acutely, direct intracoronary bolus injection resulted in a more pronounced local inhibition of platelet function and a higher degree of GP IIb/IIIa receptor occupancy as compared to standard intravenous bolus injection.

Intracoronary Compared to Intravenous Bolus Abciximab during Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) Patients Reduces 30-day Mortality and Target Vessel Revascularization: A Randomized Trial

Abciximab is beneficial in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). However, the optimal administration route of the initial bolus of abciximab, that is, intravenous (IV) versus intracoronary (IC), has been questioned. Preliminary studies suggest that IC-bolus is superior, probably due to high local concentration. In this study, we assess the short-term efficacy and safety of IC compared to IV bolus of abciximab in patients with STEMI during pPCI. In 2006-2008, we randomized 355 STEMI patients who underwent pPCI and had indication for abciximab to either IV or IC bolus followed by a 12-hour IV infusion. Primary end-points at 30 days were target vessel revascularization (TVR), recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) or death, and the composite of the three. Secondary end-points were bleeding complications. The two groups (IV n = 170;IC n = 185) were similar with respect to baseline characteristics. Mortality at 30 days was 5.3% in the IV group compared to only 1.1% in the IC group (P = 0.02). TVR was performed in 9.4% in the IV group compared to 3.8% in the IC group (P = 0.03). No significant difference in MI rates was seen (IV 4.7% vs. IC 2.7%; P = 0.32). We found a significant reduction in the composite end-point (IV 19.4% vs. IC 7.6%; P = 0.001) in favor of IC use. Major bleeding complications were similar (IV 2.4% vs. IC 1.6%; P = 0.62). Neither difference was observed in minor bleedings (IV 14.1% vs. IC 9.7%; P = 0.20). IC administration of bolus abciximab in STEMI patients undergoing pPCI reduces 30-day mortality and TVR and tends to reduce MI, compared to IV-bolus.

Prehospital treatment of patients with acute myocardial infarction with bivalirudin

Objectives Patients with acute myocardial infarction are at high risk of dying within the first hours after onset of coronary ischemia. Therefore, pharmacological intervention should be started in the prehospital setting. This study investigates the effect of the prehospital administration of bivalirudin on short-term morbidity and mortality compared to heparin plus abciximab in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods One hundred ninety-eight patients with STEMI treated with bivalirudin in the prehospital setting were prospectively collected. Coronary angiography was performed to identify the infarct-related artery. In case of a percutaneous coronary intervention, bivalirudin was given according to the guidelines. The historic control group consisted of 171 consecutive patients from the same myocardial infarction network treated with unfractioned heparin and abciximab administration before the admission to the emergency department of the percutaneous coronary intervention center. The primary outcome parameter was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, death, target vessel revascularization for ischemia) within 30 days after the primary event. Results The overall rate of major adverse cardiac events was significantly lower in the bivalirudin group compared to the abciximab group (7.6% vs 14.6%; P = .04). The number of major bleedings was significantly higher in the abciximab group compared to the bivalirudin group (11.8% vs 3.8%; P = .03). Conclusions The use of bivalirudin in the prehospital setting leads to a reduced rate of major cardiovascular events compared to a standard treatment with abciximab plus heparin. Bivalirudin is a reasonable choice of treatment in the prehospital setting for patients with STEMI.

TCT-83: Two-Year Clinical Follow-up Comparing Eptifibatide and Abciximab in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Revascularization for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Results from the HORIZONS-AMI Trial

TCT-83: Two-Year Clinical Follow-up Comparing Eptifibatide and Abciximab in Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Revascularization for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Results from the HORIZONS-AMI Trial

Eptifibatide Is Noninferior to Abciximab in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Results From the SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry)

The aim of this study was to test the noninferiority of eptifibatide relative to abciximab in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors are recommended by international guidelines in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing PCI. Abciximab is recommended with a higher level of evidence than eptifibatide in patients with STEMI. No large, prospective, randomized trial comparing abciximab and eptifibatide has been published. All (n = 11,479) STEMI patients in Sweden who underwent primary PCI and received either eptifibatide or abciximab from 2004 to 2007 were derived from the SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry). The primary end point was death or myocardial infarction (MI) during 1-year follow-up, with adjustment for baseline differences with a multivariate logistic regression analysis including propensity score. The pre-specified noninferiority margin was set to 1.29. The combined end point occurred in 353 of 2,355 patients (15.0%) treated with eptifibatide and in 1,432 of 9,124 patients (15.7%) treated with abciximab. The unadjusted odds ratio (OR) for eptifibatide versus abciximab was 0.95 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.08). Multivariate adjustment (n = 11,317) confirmed noninferiority, with an OR of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.09). The adjusted secondary end points of death and MI separately also showed noninferiority, with ORs of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.82 to 1.19) and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.73 to 1.05), respectively. This large registry study suggests that eptifibatide is noninferior to abciximab in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI with respect to death or MI during 1 year, thereby supporting the use of either drug in clinical practice.

Comparison by Meta-Analysis of Eptifibatide and Tirofiban to Abciximab in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Adjunctive therapy with abciximab during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) determines a better short-term outcome compared to placebo. Tirofiban and eptifibatide represent a valid option with lower cost, but these have been less studied. The aim of the present study was to combine all randomized trials and registries to demonstrate the noninferiority of tirofiban and eptifibatide compared to abciximab in patients with STEMI treated with PPCI. We identified 6 randomized trials and 4 registries. Overall, 4,653 received small molecules and 2,696 abciximab, and the rate of combined death and nonfatal reinfarction did not differ (4.6% vs 4.5%, odds ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78 to 1.27, p = 0.95) up to 30 days of follow-up, with an absolute difference of 0.1% (95% CI -1.06 to 0.8). Because the noninferiority limit was set at +1.5%, and because the upper point estimate (0.8%) of the 95% CI did not cross the prespecified limit, the noninferiority of the small molecules was documented. In-hospital major bleeding was also similar (8.8% vs 6.1%, odds ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.13, p = 0.43). Sensitivity analysis comparing randomized trials to registries and tirofiban or eptifibatide to abciximab did not show any significant differences. In conclusion, our results documented noninferiority of "small molecules" compared to abciximab and, therefore, support their alternative use as adjunctive therapy during PPCI for patients with STEMI.

Comparison between fixed-dose, intracoronary bolus-only versus standard weight-adjusted dose, intravenous bolus and infusion administration of abciximab in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention

We studied the safety and effectiveness of fixed-dose, intracoronary bolus-only abciximab in 195 patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The patients were divided into 2 groups: Group A (n=120, 61.5%) received fixed-dose, intracoronary bolus-only, abciximab 10 mg; and Group B (n=75, 38.5%) received standard intravenous bolus (0.25 mg/kg) and maintenance abciximab infusion of 0.125 μg/kg/min for 12 h. There was no statistically significant difference in the baseline and post-procedure TIMI flow between Groups A and B. Final TIMI 3 flow was achieved in 90.0% and 89.3% of the patients in Groups A and B, respectively (p=0.14). Final TIMI myocardial perfusion grade 2/3 was achieved in 92.5% and 96.0% of the patients in Groups A and B, respectively (p=0.45). The six-month clinical outcomes were similar between Groups A and B (8.3% versus 5.3%, p=0.62).

Safety and efficacy of abciximab as an adjunct to percutaneous coronary intervention.

Abciximab is a widely studied glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, specifically in the setting of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The populations studied have included patients with non-ST-segment acute coronary syndromes, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and elective PCI. This large amount of information provides a clear efficacy and safety profile of the drug, although a few questions on the use of abciximab still exist, particularly on its use and preference in the setting of newer antiplatelet and antithrombotic medications. In this article we review the most relevant data from randomized clinical trials with abciximab in patients undergoing PCI and discuss the recent guideline recommendation on use during PCI.

Delivery of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitor Therapy for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

A major goal of any antithrombotic regimen administered during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preservation of coronary microvascular perfusion, which is critical for myocardial survival. In addition to macrovascular thrombosis, microembolization into the downstream coronary artery bed that occurs during spontaneous plaque rupture and PCI plays a prominent role in the development of microvascular dysfunction that leads to myocardial infarction. In addition to physical obstruction of the lumen by the embolus, vasoconstriction and edema due to inflammation also impair microvascular flow.1 These events likely occur more frequently during PCI performed in the setting of unstable coronary syndromes.2 With Doppler guidewire technology, it was estimated that an average of 25 embolic events occurred during primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.3 Article see p 784 Platelet aggregates are important components of coronary microemboli, along with leukocytes, erythrocytes, platelet-leukocyte aggregates, cholesterol crystals, and hyalin. Platelets and leukocytes within microemboli play a particularly important role in the pathophysiological changes of blood flow by promoting in situ microvascular thrombosis, vasoconstriction, and inflammation. Interestingly, the composition of the embolized material is similar in the settings of spontaneous and catheter-induced plaque rupture.1 In animal models, distal microembolization of inert microspheres is associated with an immediate reduction in flow due to vessel occlusion, followed by enhanced blood flow due to the effects of adenosine released from the embolized myocardium into the adjacent noninvolved myocardium.4 Microembolization results in overall reduced flow reserve and the progressive loss of contractile function, which often reverses within weeks. The degree of myocardial contractile dysfunction is disproportionate to the degree of infarction and is the result of inflammation.5 However, in the clinical condition, a more complex pathophysiology exists due to the influence of multiple components of the emboli. Platelets aggregate when fibrinogen binds to the active …

Impact of abciximab on mortality and reinfarction in patients with acute ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary stenting

To combine data from all randomized trials of abciximab versus placebo or open-label control in patients with STEMI treated with primary stenting to assess the short-term and long-term mortality, reinfarction, and bleeding complications. Clinical trials of adjunctive abciximab therapy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary stenting have produced conflicting results. Formal searches of electronic databases (Medline, Cochrane) from January 1990 to April 2009 were performed. Five trials randomizing 2,937 patients (1,475 in the abciximab group, 1,462 in the placebo group) were included in the analysis. When compared with placebo, abciximab was not associated with a significant reduction in the odds of 30-day (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.45-1.14, P = 0.16) or long-term (OR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.48-1.50, P = 0.57) mortality. Similarly, the rate of reinfarction was not statistically different at 30 days (OR 0.59, 95% CI: 0.30-1.17, P = 0.13) or at long-term follow-up (OR 0.67; 95% CI: 0.39-1.16, P = 0.16). However, when trials with upstream use of thienopyridines were excluded, abciximab was associated with a significant reduction in the composite of death or reinfarction at 30 days (OR 0.45; 95% CI: 0.26-0.77, P = 0.004) but not at long-term follow-up (OR 0.59; 95% CI: 0.27-1.28, P = 0.18). Routine use of abciximab in patients with STEMI treated with primary stenting may reduce short-term rates of death or reinfarction in patients not administered preprocedural thienopyridine therapy, but does not appear to be beneficial in those who receive preprocedural thienopyridines.