Clinical Investigation
Interventional Cardiology
One-year clinical outcome after abciximab bolus-only compared with abciximab bolus and 12-hour infusion in the Randomized EArly Discharge after Transradial Stenting of CoronarY Arteries (EASY) Study

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2008.02.006Get rights and content

Background

Long-term clinical follow-up has shown a significant benefit after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for abciximab bolus followed by 12-hour infusion over placebo or bolus-only. With contemporary techniques and clopidogrel pretreatment, it is unknown whether the 12-hour infusion is still associated with a clinical benefit. The purpose of this study is to compare 6- and 12-month clinical outcomes in patients treated after PCI with abciximab bolus-only and abciximab bolus followed by 12-hour infusion.

Methods

After a bolus of abciximab (0.25 mg/kg) and uncomplicated transradial coronary stenting, 1,005 patients were randomized either to same-day discharge and no infusion of abciximab (bolus-only group, n = 504) or to overnight hospitalization and 12 hours (0.125 μg/[kg min]) of abciximab infusion (bolus + infusion group, n = 501). The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) was evaluated at 30 days, 6 months, and 12 months.

Results

At 30 days, the rate of MACE including death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization was similar in the 2 groups: 1.4% in the bolus-only group versus 1.8% in the bolus + infusion group (P = .63). At 6 months, the MACE rate was 5.6% in the 2 randomized groups. At 12 months, the MACE rate was also similar in both groups: 8.7% in the bolus-only group and 9.2% in the bolus + infusion group (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.79-1.20, P = .80). Similar efficacy was also observed in several subgroups including higher-risk patients such as those with elevated troponin T before PCI.

Conclusions

In patients pretreated with clopidogrel and undergoing uncomplicated coronary artery stenting, there is no difference in the 6- and 12-month outcomes between patients treated with abciximab bolus-only versus those treated with bolus + infusion, a finding consistent with the initial 30-day outcomes.

Section snippets

Study population

The details of the EASY trial have been previously described.3 Briefly, patients referred for coronary angiography and possible PCI were enrolled at Laval Hospital from October 2003 to April 2005. Patients were excluded if they had ST-elevation MI within 72 hours or history of left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30%. Because of study design, contraindication for same-day discharge or abciximab administration was also an exclusion criterion. Except for a secondary branch in bifurcation lesions

Results

Enrolment in the study took place between October 15, 2003, and April 11, 2005. Overall, 1005 patients were randomized either to the bolus-only group or the bolus + infusion group. Clinical follow-up at 1 year was 100%. Baseline and procedural characteristics were similar in both randomized groups (Table I, Table II). The results of the primary composite end point analysis at 30 days have been previously reported in details.3 Briefly, the incidence of the primary end point was 11.1% in the

Discussion

In our study, we have shown for the first time that the initial clinical equivalence demonstrated at 30 days between abciximab bolus-only and bolus + infusion was maintained at 6 and 12 months. The use of a 12-hour abciximab infusion after the bolus was initiated in the EPIC trial and remained standard in all following studies.1, 2, 5, 6 Initial pharmacological studies have shown that a 0.25-mg/kg bolus of abciximab produced ≥80% platelet aggregation inhibition via occupancy of platelet

Conclusion

Our results suggest that after clopidogrel pretreatment and uncomplicated transradial coronary stenting, there is no difference in the 6- and 12-month outcomes between patients treated with abciximab bolus-only and those treated with bolus plus infusion, a finding consistent with the initial 30-day outcomes.

References (27)

  • S.V. Manoukian et al.

    Impact of major bleeding on 30-day mortality and clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the ACUITY Trial

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (2007)
  • G.W. Stone et al.

    Bivalirudin in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a subgroup analysis from the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage strategy (ACUITY) trial

    Lancet

    (2007)
  • Use of a monoclonal antibody directed against the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor in high-risk coronary angioplasty. The EPIC Investigation

    N Engl J Med

    (1994)
  • Cited by (45)

    • I'll Take My PCI to Go

      2020, Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine
    • Same-Day Discharge After Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society

      2019, JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
      Citation Excerpt :

      Although previous research has shown the safety of SDD (3,12,13,29), many of the studies have been derived from health care systems in which SDD is not commonplace and were derived from low-risk cohorts from which complex PCI cases were excluded. For example, many of the randomized controlled studies have excluded elderly patients (10,15), those with complex disease such as chronic total occlusion, LMS or prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (10,15), or those with impaired left ventricular function (10,11). Hence such data may not reflect outcomes of contemporary higher risk cohorts that are SDD cases.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This study was designed as investigator-initiated trial and funded by unrestricted grants from Eli-Lilly, Bristol-Myers-Squibb/Sanofi-Aventis, Régie Régionale de Québec, and Corporation de l'Institut de cardiologie de Québec. O. F. Bertrand and P. Poirier are research-scholars from Quebec Foundation for Health Research.

    View full text