Clinical outcomes of intracoronary eptifibatide bolus only versus intracoronary bolus and intravenous infusion of eptifibatide in primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

Intracoronary bolus of eptifibatide during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has been shown to result in higher local platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor occupancy with improved microvascular perfusion. It is unclear whether intracoronary administration of eptifibatide in a larger patient population results in favourable clinical outcomes. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of two regimens of intracoronary eptifibatide (bolus only versus bolus followed by intravenous infusion) in patients undergoing primary PCI for ST-elevation MI. They were divided into two groups: Group A (n =  67) who received fixed-dose intracoronary eptifibatide bolus only and Group B (n =  88) who received intracoronary bolus and continuous intravenous infusion of eptifibatide for 18 h. The preliminary findings from our registry showed that both regimens were associated with good angiographic outcomes, few bleeding events and low in-hospital major adverse cardiac events. A large prospective randomized, multi-centre trial is needed to confirm our observation.

Keywords::

• Eptifibatide
• intracoronary
• primary percutaneous coronary intervention
• myocardial infarction

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

NOTICE OF CORRECTION

The Early Online version of this article was published online ahead of print/online issue on 24 January 2012 without keywords. Keywords have now been added.