Comparison of bivalirudin versus heparin in percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute coronary syndrome

Background: Bivalirudin and heparin are commonly employed anticoagulants in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of bivalirudin and heparin in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing bivalirudin with heparin in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. The outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), net adverse clinical events, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), and stroke. Results: This study included 11 RCTs and 17 cohort studies, encompassing 584,249 patients. Among in-hospital outcomes, bivalirudin was found to significantly reduce the incidence of all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84–0.88, P < .001, I 2 = 0%) and major bleeding (RR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62–0.88, P < .001, I 2 = 51%) compared with heparin, while there were no significant differences in MACEs, MI, ST, and stroke. Among 30-day follow-up outcomes, bivalirudin was found to significantly reduce the incidence of all-cause mortality (RR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76–0.95, P = .006, I 2 = 24%), cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.70–0.94, P = .004, I 2 = 1%), major bleeding (RR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49–0.72, P < .001, I 2 = 67%), and net adverse clinical events (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.70–0.89, P < .001, I 2 = 55%) compared with heparin, while there were no significant differences in MACEs, MI, ST, and stroke. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that bivalirudin may offer advantages over heparin in reducing in-hospital and 30-day mortality and major bleeding in patients with ACS undergoing PCI, with no significant differences in ischemic outcomes such as MACEs, MI, ST, or stroke. These findings suggest that bivalirudin may be a reasonable alternative to heparin in selected patients, but more large-scale, long-term RCTs are needed to confirm these results.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine
Published
2026-09-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000050046
Primary Topic
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Comparison of bivalirudin versus heparin in percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute coronary syndrome

Weiming Liang, Yuanming Liao, Chen Yang, Zhen Ning et al.
Medicine
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
article

Comparison of bivalirudin versus heparin in percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute coronary syndrome

Weiming Liang, Yuanming Liao, Chen Yang, Zhen Ning, Yanzi Mai, Chen Yang
article en

Abstract

Background: Bivalirudin and heparin are commonly employed anticoagulants in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of bivalirudin and heparin in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies comparing bivalirudin with heparin in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. The outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), net adverse clinical events, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), and stroke. Results: This study included 11 RCTs and 17 cohort studies, encompassing 584,249 patients. Among in-hospital outcomes, bivalirudin was found to significantly reduce the incidence of all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR] = 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84–0.88, P < .001, I 2 = 0%) and major bleeding (RR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.62–0.88, P < .001, I 2 = 51%) compared with heparin, while there were no significant differences in MACEs, MI, ST, and stroke. Among 30-day follow-up outcomes, bivalirudin was found to significantly reduce the incidence of all-cause mortality (RR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.76–0.95, P = .006, I 2 = 24%), cardiovascular mortality (RR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.70–0.94, P = .004, I 2 = 1%), major bleeding (RR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.49–0.72, P < .001, I 2 = 67%), and net adverse clinical events (RR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.70–0.89, P < .001, I 2 = 55%) compared with heparin, while there were no significant differences in MACEs, MI, ST, and stroke. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that bivalirudin may offer advantages over heparin in reducing in-hospital and 30-day mortality and major bleeding in patients with ACS undergoing PCI, with no significant differences in ischemic outcomes such as MACEs, MI, ST, or stroke. These findings suggest that bivalirudin may be a reasonable alternative to heparin in selected patients, but more large-scale, long-term RCTs are needed to confirm these results.

MedicineVol. 105(39)
Guangxi University of Science and Technology (CN)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.