Validation of Long-Term Benefits of Bivalirudin Versus Unfractionated Heparin in Routine Clinical Practice After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Randomized controlled trials have shown improved short-term bleeding outcomes for bivalirudin compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable angina and acute coronary syndrome. This study analyzed the impact of bivalirudin-based anticoagulation strategy versus UFH-based anticoagulation strategy on long-term bleeding complications and major adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing PCI in routine clinical practice. From September 2005 to April 2009, 3,367 consecutive patients who underwent PCI for stable angina or non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome at Brigham and Womenʹs Hospital were studied. Of these patients, 2,228 patients (66%) received UFH and 1,139 (34%) received bivalirudin. Bleeding complication and major adverse cardiac event rates were compared at discharge, 30 days, and 1 year. In a propensity-score matched analysis, bivalirudin-based anticoagulation strategy was associated with lower bleeding complications at 30 days (7.0% vs 13.7%, p = 0.001) and 1 year (12.7% vs 18.9%, p = 0.013). Major adverse cardiac event rates were not significantly different between groups at discharge, 30 days, and 1 year (6.4% vs 8.3%, p = 0.103; 9.4% vs 10.9%, p = 0.449; 12.1% vs 14.8%, p = 0.235, respectively). There was no difference in all-cause mortality rates between the 2 groups (0.9% vs 0.8%, p = 0.808, at discharge; 1.9% vs 3.6%, p = 0.112, at 30 days; 3.6% vs 5.5%, p = 0.195, at 1 year). In conclusion, in a real-world cohort of patients undergoing PCI, bivalirudin-based anticoagulation strategy is associated with a significant decrease in risk of bleeding complications after 30 days and 1 year compared to a UFH-based anticoagulation strategy with no increase in risk for major adverse cardiac events.