Bivalirudin versus heparin as an antithrombotic agent in patients who undergo percutaneous saphenous vein graft intervention with a distal protection device

Seung Woon Rha, Pramod K. Kuchulakanti, Rajbabu Pakala, Edouard Cheneau, Ellen Pinnow, Rebecca Torguson, Augusto D. Pichard, Lowell F. Satler, William O. Suddath, Kenneth M. Kent, Joseph Lindsay, Ron Waksman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Bivalirudin (Angiomax) is increasingly used as a substitute for heparin in a variety of percutaneous coronary interventions, and data on its usage in saphenous vein graft interventions are limited. This retrospective, observational study evaluated the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin compared with heparin as an antithrombotic regimen in patients who underwent saphenous vein graft intervention with distal protection devices. We found that bivalirudin use is clinically safe and feasible, with fewer vascular and ischemic complications compared with heparin.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)67-70
Number of pages4
JournalAmerican Journal of Cardiology
Volume96
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2005 Jul 1

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Bivalirudin versus heparin as an antithrombotic agent in patients who undergo percutaneous saphenous vein graft intervention with a distal protection device'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Rha, S. W., Kuchulakanti, P. K., Pakala, R., Cheneau, E., Pinnow, E., Torguson, R., Pichard, A. D., Satler, L. F., Suddath, W. O., Kent, K. M., Lindsay, J., & Waksman, R. (2005). Bivalirudin versus heparin as an antithrombotic agent in patients who undergo percutaneous saphenous vein graft intervention with a distal protection device. American Journal of Cardiology, 96(1), 67-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.02.047