Unbound MEDLINE

Switch from abciximab to eptifibatide during percutaneous coronary intervention. International journal of cardiology [Int J Cardiol] Journal article

 
TitleSwitch from abciximab to eptifibatide during percutaneous coronary intervention.
Author(s)Wahlin M, Albertsson P, Karlsson T, Matejka G, Odell A, Tahmasebiepour F, Wolmeryd C, Grip L 
InstitutionThe Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine/Cardiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital and Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
SourceInt J Cardiol 2008 Jul 10.
AbstractBACKGROUND: Treatment with glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduce ischemic complications and improve outcome. Of the GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors abciximab is better documented than eptifibatide, but the former is more expensive. The aim of this study was to monitor a switch from abciximab to eptifibatide with respect to clinical outcome up to six months after PCI.
METHODS: All consecutive patients that six months before and six months after a switch from abciximab to eptifibatide received GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors during and after de novo PCIs were followed for six months with respect to clinical outcome.
RESULTS: 310 patients received abciximab and 350 eptifibatide. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. 55% of the patients underwent PCI for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction and 41% for unstable coronary artery disease. There were trends for lower mortality among abciximab-treated than among the eptifibatide-treated patients during in-hospital stay (0.6% vs 2.0%:NS) as well as during the six month follow up (2.3% vs 3.7%:NS). The combined endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, repeated revascularisation and serious bleeding occurred in 14.9% in the abciximab group vs 16.8% in the eptifibatide group (NS).
CONCLUSION: The study could not demonstrate any significant deterioration of clinical results after a switch from abciximab to eptifibatide as routine GPIIb/IIIa inhibition during PCI. With respect to the limited number of patients a clinical significant difference between the two GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors cannot, however, be excluded.
LanguageENG
Pub Type(s)JOURNAL ARTICLE
PubMed ID18620765
  
Advertise on this site.