Low-molecular-weight heparins vs. unfractionated heparin in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis
dc.contributor.author | Navarese, Eliano Pio | |
dc.contributor.author | De Luca, G. | |
dc.contributor.author | Castriota, Fausto | |
dc.contributor.author | Koziński, Marek | |
dc.contributor.author | Gurbel, Paul Alfred | |
dc.contributor.author | Gibson, C. M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Andreotti, Felicita | |
dc.contributor.author | Buffon, Antonino | |
dc.contributor.author | Siller-Matula, Jolanta Maria | |
dc.contributor.author | De Servi, Stefano | |
dc.contributor.author | Sukiennik, Adam | |
dc.contributor.author | Kubica, Jacek | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2013-01-15T12:19:35Z | |
dc.date.available | 2013-01-15T12:19:35Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2013-01-15 | |
dc.description.abstract | Summary. Background: The aim of the current study was to perform two separate meta-analyses of available studies comparing low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) vs. unfractionated heparin (UFH) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated (i) with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) or (ii) with PCI after thrombolysis. Methods: All-cause mortality was the prespecified primary endpoint and major bleeding complications were recorded as the secondary endpoints. Relative risk (RR) with a 95%confidence interval (CI) and absolute risk reduction (ARR) were chosen as the effect measure. Results: Ten studies comprising 16 286 patients were included. The median followup was 2 months for the primary endpoint. Among LMWHs, enoxaparin was the compound most frequently used. In the pPCI group, LMWHs were associated with a reduction in mortality [RR (95% CI) = 0.51 (0.41–0.64), P < 0.001, ARR = 3%] and major bleeding [RR (95% CI) = 0.68 (0.49–0.94), P = 0.02, ARR = 2.0%] as compared with UFH. Conversely, no clear evidence of benefits with LWMHs was observed in the PCI group after thrombolysis. Metaregression showed that patients with a higher baseline risk had greater benefits from LMWHs (r = 0.72, P = 0.02). Conclusions: LMWHs were associated with greater efficacy and safety than UFH in STEMI patients treated with pPCI, with a significant relationship between risk profile and clinical benefits. Based on this meta-analysis, LMWHs may be considered as a preferred anticoagulant among STEMI patients undergoing pPCI. | pl |
dc.identifier.uri | http://repozytorium.umk.pl/handle/item/285 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | pl |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | en |
dc.subject | low-molecular-weight heparin | pl |
dc.subject | percutaneous coronary intervention | pl |
dc.subject | ST-elevation myocardial infarction | pl |
dc.subject | unfractionated heparin | pl |
dc.title | Low-molecular-weight heparins vs. unfractionated heparin in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis | pl |
dc.type | info:eu-repo/semantics/article | pl |
Files
Original bundle
Loading...
- Name:
- Low-Molecular-Weight Heparins vs Unfractionated Heparin in the Setting of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction A Meta-analysis.pdf
- Size:
- 384.85 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Loading...
- Name:
- license.txt
- Size:
- 1.35 KB
- Format:
- Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
- Description: