Low-molecular-weight heparin use in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary interventions: An update
- 16 Downloads
Based on important studies published in the past year, the role of low-molecular-weight heparin in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary interventions has continued to evolve. For patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes, several alternatives to enoxaparin have been introduced, including fondaparinux and bivalirudin. In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, recent studies have demonstrated a clear mortality benefit from adjunctive antithrombin therapy and the superiority of a prolonged course of enoxaparin over a standard duration of unfractionated heparin. Furthermore, recent data have demonstrated the safety of enoxaparin as an alternative to unfractionated heparin among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References and Recommended Reading
- 5.Hansen JB, Naalsund T, Sandset PM, Svensson B: Rebound activation of coagulation after treatment with unfractionated heparin and not with low molecular weight heparin is associated with partial depletion of tissue factor pathway inhibitor and antithrombin. Thromb Res 2000, 100:413–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Cohen M, Demers C, Gurfinkel EP, et al.: A comparison of low-molecular-weight heparin with unfractionated heparin for unstable coronary artery disease. Efficacy and Safety of Subcutaneous Enoxaparin in Non-Q-Wave Coronary Events Study Group. N Engl J Med 1997, 337:447–452.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW, et al.: ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction—summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina). J Am Coll Cardiol 2002, 40:1366–1374.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Ferguson JJ, Califf RM, Antman EM, et al.: Enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin in high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes managed with an intended early invasive strategy: primary results of the SYNERGY randomized trial. JAMA 2004, 292:45–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Lincoff AM, Kleiman NS, Kereiakes DJ, et al.: Long-term efficacy of bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade vs heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary revascularization: REPLACE-2 randomized trial. JAMA 2004, 292:696–703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Cohen DJ, Lincoff AM, Lavelle TA, et al.: Economic evaluation of bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein IIB/IIIA inhibition versus heparin with routine glycoprotein IIB/IIIA inhibition for percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the REPLACE-2 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 44:1792–1800.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW, et al.: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infraction—executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1999 guidelines for the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction). J Am Coll Cardiol 2004, 44:671–719.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase in combination with enoxaparin, abciximab, or unfractionated heparin: the ASSENT-3 randomised trial in acute myocardial infarction. Lancet 2001, 358:605–613.Google Scholar
- 21.Wallentin L, Goldstein P, Armstrong PW, et al.: Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase in combination with the low-molecular-weight heparin enoxaparin or unfractionated heparin in the prehospital setting: the Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimen (ASSENT)-3 PLUS randomized trial in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation 2003, 108:135–142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar