Download the Free Prime PubMed App to your smartphone or tablet.

Available for iPhone or iPad:

Unbound PubMed app for iOS iPhone iPadAlso Available:
Unbound PubMed app for Android

Available for Mac and Windows Desktops and laptops:

Unbound PubMed app for WindowsUnbound PubMed app for MAC OS Yosemite Macbook Air pro
1,667 results
  • Bivalirudin versus Heparin during intervention in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials. [Journal Article]
  • CHCardiovasc Hematol Disord Drug Targets 2019 Jun 26
  • Bhogal S, Mukherjee D, … Paul TK
  • CONCLUSIONS: Bivalirudin demonstrates its superiority over heparin plus GPI with better clinical outcomes in terms of preventing bleeding complications, thus making it as an anticoagulation of choice particularly in patients at high risk of bleeding. Further studies are warranted for head to head comparison of bivalirudin to heparin monotherapy to establish an optimal heparin dosing regimen and post-PCI bivalirudin infusion to affirm its beneficial effect in reducing acute ST.
  • A systematic review and meta-analysis of bivalirudin application in peripheral endovascular procedures. [Review]
  • JVJ Vasc Surg 2019; 70(1):274-284.e5
  • Hu Y, Liu AY, … Zhang X
  • CONCLUSIONS: Compared with UFH, PEPs using BIV had comparable procedural success rates and odds of perioperative transient ischemic attack and hemorrhagic stroke. However, procedures with BIV had a lower but nonsignificant odds of perioperative bleeding and transfusion. Depending on the procedures conducted, the patients who received BIV will have reduced or comparable odds of perioperative mortality, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, net adverse clinical events, and major and minor vascular complications. Therefore, BIV may be chosen solely as an alternative procedural anticoagulant to UFH for PEPs.
New Search Next