CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Thorac Cardiovasc Surg
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1716390
Original Cardiovascular

Comparison of Safety between Different Kinds of Heparins in Patients Receiving Intra-Aortic Balloon Counterpulsation

Xiaonan Guan
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Mulei Chen
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Yanbing Li
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Jianjun Zhang
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Li Xu
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Hao Sun
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Dapeng Zhang
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Lefeng Wang
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
,
Xinchun Yang
1  Center of Cardiology, Beijing Chaoyang Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Background The present study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of low molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH) and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients receiving intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP).

Materials and Methods We retrospectively analyzed a total of 344 patients receiving IABP for cardiogenic shock, severe heart failure, ventricular septal rupture, or mitral valve prolapse due to AMI. A total of 161 patients received UFH (a bolus injection 70 U/kg immediately after IABP, followed by infusion at a rate of 15 U/kg/hour and titration to for 50 to 70 seconds of activated partial thromboplastin time. A total of 183 patients received LMWH (subcutaneous injection of 1.0 mg/kg every 12 hours for 5 to 7 days and 1.0 mg/kg every 24 hours thereafter). Events of ischemia, arterial thrombosis or embolism, and bleeding during IABP were evaluated. Major bleeding was defined as a hemoglobin decrease by >50 g/L (vs. prior to IABP) or bleeding that caused hemodynamic shock or life-threatening or requiring blood transfusion.

Results Subjects receiving UFH and LMWH did not differ in baseline characteristics. Ischemia was noted in five (3.1%) and two (1.1%) subjects in UFH and LMWH groups, respectively. Arterial thromboembolism occurred in three (1.9%) subjects in the UFH group, but not in the LMWH group. Logistic regression analysis failed to reveal an association between ischemia or bleeding with heparin type. Major bleeding occurred in 16 (9.9%) and six (3.3%) patients in the UFH and LWMH groups, respectively (p = 0.014). Regression analysis indicated that LMWH is associated with less major bleeding.

Conclusion LMWH could reduce the risk of major bleeding in patients receiving IABP. Whether LMWH could reduce arterial thromboembolism needs further investigation.

Authors' Contributions

M.C. dedicated to study design. X.G., Y.L., and L.X. supported in collection of data. X.G., H.S., D.Z., and L.W. performed data analysis/interpretation. X.G., M.C., X.Y. cooperated in writing (revising) of the manuscript.




Publication History

Received: 02 March 2020

Accepted: 24 July 2020

Publication Date:
30 September 2020 (online)

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Stuttgart · New York