image dons

I make a donation

The use of intravenous enoxaparin in elective percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with renal impairment: results from the SafeTy and Efficacy of Enoxaparin in PCI patients, an internationaL randomized Evaluation (STEEPLE) trial.

La Grande Journée du Coeur (13 juin 2023)
Attention : plus que quelques places restantes !

La Grande Journée du Coeur (mardi 13 juin 2023)
Les présentations sont en ligne

Colloquium "Rythme et conduction" (23 avril 2024)
Inscrivez-vous !

The use of intravenous enoxaparin in elective percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with renal impairment: results from the SafeTy and Efficacy of Enoxaparin in PCI patients, an internationaL randomized Evaluation (STEEPLE) trial.

Published in American Heart Journal,  2008.

Read the article here en consultant le site.

Autors : White HD, Gallo R, Cohen M, Steg PG, Aylward PE, Bode C, Steinhubl S, Montalescot G.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The STEEPLE trial assessed outcomes of patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention randomized to receive a bolus of intravenous enoxaparin (0.5 or 0.75 mg/kg, n = 2,298) or activated clotting time-adjusted unfractionated heparin (UFH, n = 1,230), stratified according to planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use.

METHODS:

In this subanalysis, we assessed outcomes in patients with renal impairment (creatinine clearance < or =60 mL/min, n = 659).

RESULTS:

Major bleeding occurred more often in patients with renal impairment compared with those without (2.7% vs 1.5%, P = .04). Enoxaparin was associated with less major bleeding than UFH with normal renal function (0.9% for enoxaparin 0.5 mg/kg or 1.0% for enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg vs 2.6%, respectively; both P = .01 vs UFH), with a trend toward less major bleeding with impaired renal function (2.6% or 1.8% vs 3.8%, P = .18 for enoxaparin 0.5 mg/kg and P = .47 for 0.75 mg/kg vs UFH). Minor bleeding rates were similar irrespective of renal function or anticoagulation regimen. The incidence of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or urgent target-vessel revascularization was similar between patients with and without renal impairment (5.7% vs 6.5%, P = .45). In patients with renal impairment, event rates were 6.2% or 5.3% with enoxaparin vs 5.6% with UFH (P = nonsignificant). Target anticoagulation levels were achieved 4 to 5 times more often with enoxaparin compared with UFH in patients with normal and impaired renal function (both P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS:

A single bolus of enoxaparin was associated with similar ischemic events and a trend for less major bleeding compared with UFH in patients with renal impairment undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Enoxaparin can be administered safely without dose adjustment in these patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION:

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00077844.

Autres actualités

+

01/10/2023


Rationale and design of the ARAMIS trial: Anakinra versus pl...

Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2023 Oct;116(10):460-466
+

01/09/2023


Comparison of three echo-guidance techniques in percutaneous...

Arch Cardiovasc Dis. 2023 Sep 29:S1875-2136(23)00171-7