Abstract 324: Real World Use of Bivalirudin in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction is Associated with Lower In-Hospital Complications, 1-Year Major Adverse Cardiac Events and Mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Bivalirudin decreased bleeding and improved mortality in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the HORIZON trial. Currently there is limited data regarding the benefits of bivalirudin in unselected STEMI patients in real-world clinical practice. Methods: We reviewed consecutive STEMI patients at a large regional STEMI referral center from June 2009 to December 2011. All patients received aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors. In-hospital complications, length of stay (LOS), total variable costs, 1-year cardiovascular readmissions, major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and mortality were compared for: bivalirudin alone, heparin alone and either medication with IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Results: Among 759 STEMI PCI cases, 208 (27.4%) received bivalirudin, 216 (28.5%) heparin and 335 (44.1%) IIb/IIIa, including only 48 cases with bivalirudin. Bivalirudin alone had significantly lower in-hospital complications, bleeding events, mortality and 1-year MACE and mortality (p<0.05 for all) (Figure). There were no significant differences in LOS (median 2.6 vs. 2.8 vs. 2.9 days; p=0.065), total variable costs (median $9,303 vs. $9,242 vs. $9,860; p=0.15) or readmissions within 1 year. Conclusions: In an unselected population of STEMI patients, those treated with bivalirudin had lower in-hospital complications and lower 1-year MACE and mortality rates compared to patients receiving heparin or IIb/IIIa inhibitors. These results provide further support for bivalirudin use in STEMI patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".