Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Practice Point
  • Published:

Should bivalirudin be the anticoagulant of choice for percutaneous coronary intervention?

Nature Clinical Practice Cardiovascular Medicine volume 2, pages 384–385 (2005)Cite this article

boxed-textGurm HS et al. (2005) Effectiveness and safety of bivalirudin during percutaneous coronary intervention in a single medical center. Am J Cardiol 95: 716–721

Background

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Bittl JA et al. (2001) Bivalirudin versus heparin during coronary angioplasty for unstable or postinfarction angina: final report reanalysis of the Bivalirudin Angioplasty Study. Am Heart J 142: 952–959

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lincoff AM et al. (2003) Bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade compared with heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary intervention: REPLACE-2 randomized trial. JAMA 289: 853–863

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Lincoff AM et al. (2004) Long-term efficacy of bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade vs heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary revascularization: REPLACE-2 randomized trial. JAMA 292: 696–703

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cohen DJ et al. (2004) Economic evaluation of bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition versus heparin with routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition for percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the REPLACE-2 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 44: 1792–1800

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Silber S et al. (2005) Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions: the Task Force for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 26: 804–847

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The synopsis was written by Hannah Camm, Associate Editor, Nature Clinical Practice.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. an Associate Professor of Cardiology at the Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, New Zealand

    Cheuk-Kit Wong

  2. Auckland City Hospital,

    Harvey D White

  3. University of Auckland, New Zealand

    Harvey D White

Authors
  1. Cheuk-Kit Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Harvey D White
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harvey D White.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

HD White has received consultant fees and research supports from the Medicines Company and research support from Sanofi-Aventis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wong, CK., White, H. Should bivalirudin be the anticoagulant of choice for percutaneous coronary intervention?. Nat Rev Cardiol 2, 384–385 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpcardio0277

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpcardio0277

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing