Search

Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines encapsulate current knowledge to guide health care professionals in the treatment of patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), yet adherence to guideline recommendations is suboptimal. Guideline adherence may be improved by quality improvement programs such as the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes with Early Implementation?) National Quality Improvement Initiative of the American College of Cardiology-American Heart Association Guidelines. The CRUSADE data have been analyzed to demonstrate that overall guideline adherence is directly associated with mortality and that improvement in guideline adherence saves lives. Also, the CRUSADE data have determined that the real-life mortality risk associated with unstable angina and NSTEMI is greater than suggested by clinical trials. The newer antiplatelet drugs recommended in early intervention and discharge treatment strategies are underused across many segments of the unstable angina-NSTEMI population. Glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors are underused in high-risk populations, and clopidogrel is markedly underused in patients who are medically managed rather than undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. In addition, often the specialty of the treating physician and the status of the hospital influence the use of antiplatelet therapy. The reasons for underprescribing of antiplatelet drugs by physicians are not entirely clear but may be related to a lack of guideline familiarity and understanding, as well as factors such as drug novelty, safety, and cost. Continued education and data dissemination are therefore vital in promoting the prescription of guideline-recommended drugs, both in the early hospitalization phase and as patients transition to community-based care. The role of the pharmacist is pivotal in ensuring adherence to clinical guidelines by interacting with both the physician and patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. To compare clinical outcomes and glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitor use in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) who received bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) in a real-world setting. Design. Retrospective cohort analysis. Setting. University-affiliated medical center. Patients. One thousand seventy-five adult patients who underwent PCI and received either bivalirudin (539 patients) or UFH (536 patients) from April 1, 2003-April 1, 2004. Measurement and Main Results. Patient data on demographics, comorbidities, laboratory values, and reports of radiologic examinations, cardiac catheterizations, and discharge summaries were obtained. Outcomes evaluated included rates of in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularization, and length of stay (LOS), as well as Randomized Evaluation of PCI Linking Angiomax to Reduced Clinical Events (REPLACE-2) and Thrombosis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) bleeding categorization. Bivalirudin use was associated with a significant reduction in TIMI major (5.0% vs 9.7%, p=0.003), REPLACE-2 major (5.4% vs 12.9%, p<0.001), and TIMI minor (1.7% vs 6%, p<0.001) bleeding complications compared with UFH use. Significantly fewer patients in the bivalirudin group received glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors (27.3% vs 62.7%, p<0.001). Patients receiving bivalirudin had significantly fewer myocardial infarctions after catheterization (10.7% [40/375] vs 18.0% [51/284], p=0.007). No differences were noted in mortality and revascularization rates between groups. A shortened LOS was observed in the bivalirudin group. Conclusions. This real-world analysis that included high-risk patients provides further evidence that bivalirudin is an attractive alternative to UFH because of a decrease in bleeding events without compromising efficacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Objective. To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing three treatment approaches during nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein (GP) IIb-IIIa inhibitor therapy, unfractionated heparin (UFH) with eptifibatide, and UFH with abciximab. Design. Literature-based decision model from an institutional perspective. Data Source. Patient data from the Randomized Evaluation in PCI Linking Angiomax to Reduced Clinical Events (REPLACE)-2 study and three other randomized controlled trials that included UFH and routine GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor (eptifibatide or abciximab) therapy. All included studies were comparable based on patient population, procedural techniques, and general treatment approaches. Measurements and Main Results. We included patient populations undergoing contemporary nonurgent PCI to identify probabilities of success or complications (myocardial infarction, urgent revascularization, thrombocytopenia, and major or minor bleeding at 30 days). Costs were assigned to each outcome by incorporating diagnosis-related group- and/or Current Procedural Terminology-associated costs, institutional drug acquisition costs, and unit replacement costs of platelets and red blood cells. In the base-case analysis, the use of bivalirudin with provisional GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor therapy dominated the UFH and planned GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor approach: UFH with eptifibatide was $74 more expensive and 1.2% less effective, and UFH with abciximab was $777 more expensive and 2.3% less effective. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the model results were robust, but also revealed that bivalirudin lost its cost-effectiveness, resulting in UFH with eptifibatide becoming more cost-effective, when two or more vials of bivalirudin were necessary in greater than 27% of cases or when the use of provisional GP IIb-IIIa inhibitor therapy exceeded 20%. Conclusion. This analysis indicates that bivalirudin with provisional GP IIb- IIIa inhibitor therapy is the most cost-effective antithrombotic treatment strategy in nonurgent PCI when its use and dosing are consistent with the REPLACE-2 trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]