1. Intravenous enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: the Zurich enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in PCI study (ZEUS)
- Author
-
Osmund Bertel, Dominik Maurer, Tobias Wettstein, David J. Kurz, David R. Ramsay, Irene Stettler, Juergen Frielingsdorf, Edwin Straumann, and Barbara Naegeli
- Subjects
Male ,Acute coronary syndrome ,medicine.medical_specialty ,medicine.drug_class ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Low molecular weight heparin ,Coronary Artery Disease ,Fibrinolytic Agents ,medicine ,Clinical endpoint ,Humans ,Myocardial infarction ,Prospective Studies ,Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary ,Enoxaparin ,Dose-Response Relationship, Drug ,business.industry ,Heparin ,Anticoagulant ,Percutaneous coronary intervention ,Middle Aged ,medicine.disease ,Surgery ,Radiography ,Treatment Outcome ,Anesthesia ,Conventional PCI ,Injections, Intravenous ,Female ,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine ,business ,Enoxaparin sodium ,Switzerland ,medicine.drug ,Follow-Up Studies - Abstract
Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of intravenous enoxaparin as an alternative to unfractionated heparin (UFH) as antithrombotic therapy in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and results: Eight hundred and seventy-six (876) consecutive eligible patients undergoing PCI were prospectively randomised to either intravenous enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg or dose-adjusted UFH in this open-label study that was prematurely stopped due to slow recruitment. Randomisation was stratified on elective PCI or PCI for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The primary endpoint was a combination of death, myocardial infarction, unplanned target vessel revascularisation and major bleeding at 30 days. Secondary endpoint was a composite of major and minor bleeding and thrombocytopenia < 50x109. The primary endpoint of intravenous enoxaparin did not differ from those of UFH (5.5% vs. 7.0%, p=ns) whereas safety endpoints were reduced with enoxaparin compared to UFH (9.9% vs. 20.0%, p
- Published
- 2010