Objectives The aim of the study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials (RTs) comparing abciximab versus small molecules (eptifibatide and tirofiban) in primary angioplasty (PPCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Background Abciximab has been shown to provide significant benefits in PPCI for STEMI. However, small molecules represent an attractive strategy due to the reversibility of the inhibition of platelet aggregation and the lower costs. Methods We obtained results from RTs comparing abciximab versus small molecules in PPCI. The literature was scanned by searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE and CENTRAL) up to October 2008. The following key words were used: RT, myocardial infarction, reperfusion, primary angioplasty, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, abciximab, tirofiban, and eptifibatide. Concerning tirofiban, we only included trials or groups of patients with high-dose bolus and infusion. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. Secondary end points were 30-day reinfarction, postprocedural Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade 3, and ST-segment resolution. Results A total of 6 RTs were included in the meta-analysis, involving 2,197 patients (1,082 randomized to abciximab and 1,115 to small molecules [high-dose tirofiban in 5 trials and eptifibatide in 1 trial]). Abciximab did not improve post-procedural TIMI flow grade 3 (89.8% vs. 89.1%, p = 0.72) or ST-segment resolution (67.8% vs. 68.2%, p = 0.66). Abciximab did not reduce 30-day mortality (2.2% vs. 2.0%, p=0.66) or reinfarction (1.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.88), nor was there any difference in major bleeding complications (1.3% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.27). Conclusions This meta-analysis shows among STEMI patients undergoing PPCI similar results between abciximab and small molecules in terms of angiographic, electrocardiographic, and clinical outcome. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53: 1668-73) (C) 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
Benefits From Small Molecule Administration as Compared With Abciximab Among Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Primary Angioplasty A Meta-Analysis
DE LUCA, GIUSEPPE;
2009-01-01
Abstract
Objectives The aim of the study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials (RTs) comparing abciximab versus small molecules (eptifibatide and tirofiban) in primary angioplasty (PPCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Background Abciximab has been shown to provide significant benefits in PPCI for STEMI. However, small molecules represent an attractive strategy due to the reversibility of the inhibition of platelet aggregation and the lower costs. Methods We obtained results from RTs comparing abciximab versus small molecules in PPCI. The literature was scanned by searches of electronic databases (MEDLINE and CENTRAL) up to October 2008. The following key words were used: RT, myocardial infarction, reperfusion, primary angioplasty, glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, abciximab, tirofiban, and eptifibatide. Concerning tirofiban, we only included trials or groups of patients with high-dose bolus and infusion. The primary end point was 30-day mortality. Secondary end points were 30-day reinfarction, postprocedural Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade 3, and ST-segment resolution. Results A total of 6 RTs were included in the meta-analysis, involving 2,197 patients (1,082 randomized to abciximab and 1,115 to small molecules [high-dose tirofiban in 5 trials and eptifibatide in 1 trial]). Abciximab did not improve post-procedural TIMI flow grade 3 (89.8% vs. 89.1%, p = 0.72) or ST-segment resolution (67.8% vs. 68.2%, p = 0.66). Abciximab did not reduce 30-day mortality (2.2% vs. 2.0%, p=0.66) or reinfarction (1.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.88), nor was there any difference in major bleeding complications (1.3% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.27). Conclusions This meta-analysis shows among STEMI patients undergoing PPCI similar results between abciximab and small molecules in terms of angiographic, electrocardiographic, and clinical outcome. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 53: 1668-73) (C) 2009 by the American College of Cardiology FoundationPubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
