Low-molecular-weight heparins vs. unfractionated heparin in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis

dc.contributor.authorNavarese, Eliano Pio
dc.contributor.authorDe Luca, G.
dc.contributor.authorCastriota, Fausto
dc.contributor.authorKoziński, Marek
dc.contributor.authorGurbel, Paul Alfred
dc.contributor.authorGibson, C. M.
dc.contributor.authorAndreotti, Felicita
dc.contributor.authorBuffon, Antonino
dc.contributor.authorSiller-Matula, Jolanta Maria
dc.contributor.authorDe Servi, Stefano
dc.contributor.authorSukiennik, Adam
dc.contributor.authorKubica, Jacek
dc.date.accessioned2013-01-15T12:19:35Z
dc.date.available2013-01-15T12:19:35Z
dc.date.issued2013-01-15
dc.description.abstractSummary. 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.urihttp://repozytorium.umk.pl/handle/item/285
dc.language.isoengpl
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen
dc.subjectlow-molecular-weight heparinpl
dc.subjectpercutaneous coronary interventionpl
dc.subjectST-elevation myocardial infarctionpl
dc.subjectunfractionated heparinpl
dc.titleLow-molecular-weight heparins vs. unfractionated heparin in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysispl
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlepl

Files

Original bundle

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
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...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.35 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections