The comparative safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin versus heparin monotherapy in patients on dialysis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan cardiovascular consortium.

BACKGROUND

Dialysis patients are at a higher risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, due to their exclusion from randomized clinical trials, the optimal antithrombotic regimen for this population remains unknown. We sought to evaluate the comparative safety and effectiveness of bivalirudin monotherapy versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) monotherapy in dialysis patients undergoing PCI.

METHODS

We included dialysis patients who underwent PCI in a multicenter registry between January 2010 and September 2015 at 47 Michigan hospitals. We compared in-hospital outcomes between bivalirudin versus UFH; excluding those treated with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Optimal full matching was used to account for the nonrandom use of these drugs.

RESULTS

Of 177,963 patients who underwent PCI, 4,303 (2.4%) were on dialysis. Among those, 1,257 (29.2%) received bivalirudin monotherapy and 2,112 (49.1%) received UFH monotherapy. Patients treated with bivalirudin had fewer comorbidities. After matching, there were no significant differences in outcomes between those who received bivalirudin versus UFH: bleeding (adjusted odds ratio: 0.67; 95% confidence interval: 0.41-1.07; P = 0.093); major bleeding (0.81; 0.19-3.50; P = 0.77); transfusion (1.01; 0.77-1.33; P = 0.96); repeat PCI (0.57; 0.14-2.24; P = 0.42); stent thrombosis (0.56; 0.05-5.83; P = 0.63); and death (0.84; 0.46-1.51; P = 0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

We found no significant differences in in-hospital outcomes between bivalirudin and UFH monotherapy among dialysis patients undergoing PCI. Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the optimal anticoagulant regimen for this population. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.