Complications of intracoronary abciximab bolus-only versus standard protocol during percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome

Muhammad Tariq Shakoor, Samia Ayub, Sajid Dhakam
{"title":"Complications of intracoronary abciximab bolus-only versus standard protocol during percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndrome","authors":"Muhammad Tariq Shakoor,&nbsp;Samia Ayub,&nbsp;Sajid Dhakam","doi":"10.1016/j.ijchv.2014.03.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Abciximab reduces major adverse cardiac events in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). Standard protocol is intravenous abciximab bolus during PCI plus abciximab infusion for 12–18 h post pPCI. Intracoronary (IC) abciximab bolus administration results in high local drug concentrations and hence it should have higher antiplatelet effect. In this study, we assess the short-term efficacy and safety of IC compared to IV bolus of abciximab in ACS patients during pPCI.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We compared the clinical outcomes between the IC (n = 56) and standard protocol (n = 170) group of patients. Primary endpoints included bleeding/vascular/ischemic complications and MACE.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The two groups were similar with respect to baseline characteristics. IC abciximab bolus only reduced bleeding complications, with no moderate bleed versus 7.2% in standard protocol group (p value 0.04). Ischemic/vascular complications had statistically insignificant difference between the two groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We found no significant difference between IC abciximab bolus only and standard abciximab therapy in terms of ischemic/vascular complications and MACE. But there was higher risk of moderate bleed in standard therapy group. The IC bolus route of abciximab may be superior to the intravenous route. Prospective randomized trials are warranted to validate these findings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":90542,"journal":{"name":"International journal of cardiology. Heart & vessels","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ijchv.2014.03.007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of cardiology. Heart & vessels","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214763214000170","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Abciximab reduces major adverse cardiac events in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). Standard protocol is intravenous abciximab bolus during PCI plus abciximab infusion for 12–18 h post pPCI. Intracoronary (IC) abciximab bolus administration results in high local drug concentrations and hence it should have higher antiplatelet effect. In this study, we assess the short-term efficacy and safety of IC compared to IV bolus of abciximab in ACS patients during pPCI.

Methods

We compared the clinical outcomes between the IC (n = 56) and standard protocol (n = 170) group of patients. Primary endpoints included bleeding/vascular/ischemic complications and MACE.

Results

The two groups were similar with respect to baseline characteristics. IC abciximab bolus only reduced bleeding complications, with no moderate bleed versus 7.2% in standard protocol group (p value 0.04). Ischemic/vascular complications had statistically insignificant difference between the two groups.

Conclusion

We found no significant difference between IC abciximab bolus only and standard abciximab therapy in terms of ischemic/vascular complications and MACE. But there was higher risk of moderate bleed in standard therapy group. The IC bolus route of abciximab may be superior to the intravenous route. Prospective randomized trials are warranted to validate these findings.

急性冠状动脉综合征经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中单剂量阿昔单抗与标准方案的并发症比较
背景:阿昔单抗可减少ST段抬高型心肌梗死患者接受原发性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(pPCI)的主要心脏不良事件。标准方案是PCI期间静脉注射阿昔单抗,外加pPCI后12-18小时输注阿昔单抗。冠状动脉内(IC)阿昔单抗丸给药导致高局部药物浓度,因此它应该具有更高的抗血小板作用。在这项研究中,我们评估了ACS患者pPCI期间IC与静脉注射阿昔单抗的短期疗效和安全性。方法比较IC组(n = 56)和标准方案组(n = 170)患者的临床结果。主要终点包括出血/血管/缺血性并发症和MACE。结果两组患者基线特征相似。IC阿昔单抗仅减少出血并发症,无中度出血,而标准方案组为7.2% (p值0.04)。缺血性/血管并发症两组间差异无统计学意义。结论在缺血性/血管并发症和MACE方面,仅注射IC阿昔单抗与标准阿昔单抗治疗无显著差异。但标准治疗组出现中度出血的风险较高。阿昔单抗的IC丸途径可能优于静脉途径。前瞻性随机试验有必要验证这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信