Superior in-hospital and 30-day outcomes with abciximab versus eptifibatide: a contemporary analysis of 495 consecutive percutaneous coronary interventions.

BACKGROUND: Both abciximab (AB) and eptifibatide (EP) are approved for use during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) but comparative data between the 2 agents are limited. METHODS: We compared in-hospital and 30-day outcomes of contemporary 495 consecutive PCIs performed by a single operator between July 2001 and November 02 with AB and EP (242 with AB and 253 with EP). Cardiogenic shock patients who underwent a second procedure within 30 days from their first procedure were excluded. Selection of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa was at the operator's discretion. The initial 444 cases were performed with unfractionated heparin and the last 51 with bivalirudin. RESULTS: AB cases comprised a higher risk group with more patients with diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, ST-elevation myocardial infarction and renal failure (p<0.05 for each) and more rotablator use and longer lesions (p<0.01 for each). AB was associated with less in-hospital (4.6 versus 12.3%; OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.17-0.7; p=0.004) as well as 30-day (5.5 versus 14%; OR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.19-0.71; p=0.003) major adverse cardiac events (sum of death, MI, urgent revascularization, all bleeding and stroke). CONCLUSION: Despite its use in higher risk PCI patients, AB resulted in superior short-term outcomes compared with EP. Our data suggest that significant efficacy differences may exist between these 2 agents and that a randomized comparison is warranted.

Duke Scholars

Author Bharathi Upadhya Medicine, Cardiology