Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 1, 2026
Catheter Ablation in Combination With Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 26, 2013
Adjunctive Eptifibatide Administration in ACS Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Randomized
Fatemeh Baharvand1, Maedeh Dadras1, Arsalan Salari1
1Department of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Diseases Research Center, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Heshmat Hospital, Rasht, Iran.
Insights
Bolus-only eptifibatide (a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor) offers similar ischemic protection to standard infusion for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This simplified approach also reduced minor bleeding events.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Current guidelines reserve glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs) for high-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
- Most ACS patients receive dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus clopidogrel), with GPIs used as adjunctive therapy.
- The optimal administration strategy (bolus-only vs. bolus-plus-infusion) for GPIs remains debated, particularly concerning bleeding risk.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the efficacy and safety of bolus-only eptifibatide versus standard bolus-plus-infusion in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
- To determine if a simplified bolus-only GPI strategy can maintain ischemic protection while reducing bleeding complications.
Main Methods:
- An open-label, randomized trial involving 183 ACS patients on dual antiplatelet therapy undergoing PCI.
- Patients received either bolus-only eptifibatide (n=102) or bolus-plus-infusion (n=81).
- Primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 90 days; secondary outcomes included bleeding and left ventricular function.
Main Results:
- Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates were similar between the bolus-only and bolus-plus-infusion groups (2.0% vs. 2.5%, p=0.87).
- No major bleeding events were reported in either group.
- Minor bleeding was significantly lower in the bolus-only group (1.0% vs. 8.6%, p=0.02).
- Left ventricular ejection fraction improved similarly in both groups.
Conclusions:
- Bolus-only eptifibatide provides comparable ischemic protection to the standard bolus-plus-infusion regimen in ACS patients on dual antiplatelet therapy undergoing PCI.
- The simplified bolus-only strategy is associated with a significant reduction in minor bleeding.
- This supports a simplified adjunctive GPI strategy for high thrombotic-risk patients undergoing PCI.
Background:
Guidelines do not recommend routine glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs), reserving them for high thrombotic-risk or bailout cases. Most acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are already on dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus clopidogrel). GPIs thus act as adjunctive therapy, providing short-term platelet inhibition. The optimal strategy, bolus-only versus bolus-plus-infusion, remains uncertain, especially in patients at higher bleeding risk.
Objective:
To evaluate whether bolus-only eptifibatide provides ischemic protection comparable to standard bolus-plus-infusion while reducing bleeding in ACS patients undergoing PCI.
Methods:
In this open-label, randomized trial, 183 ACS patients on aspirin and clopidogrel undergoing PCI received bolus-only eptifibatide (Group A, n = 102) or bolus plus continuous infusion (Group B, n = 81) and were followed for 90 days. The primary outcome, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), included cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or repeat target-vessel revascularization. Secondary endpoints included left ventricular function, mechanical/electrical complications, and bleeding. Major bleeding was defined by TIMI criteria; minor bleeding included clinically apparent non-life-threatening events.
Results:
MACE rates were similar (2.0% vs. 2.5%; p = 0.87). No major bleeding occurred. Left ventricular ejection fraction improved in both groups without significant difference (p = 0.52). Minor bleeding was lower in the bolus-only group (1.0% vs. 8.6%; p = 0.02). Electrical complications were infrequent and comparable.
Conclusions:
In ACS patients on dual antiplatelet therapy, bolus-only eptifibatide provides ischemic protection comparable to bolus-plus-infusion while reducing minor bleeding, supporting a simplified adjunctive strategy in high thrombotic-risk patients undergoing PCI.
Related Concept Videos
01:28Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
01:30Acute Coronary Syndrome I: Introduction
01:30Acute Coronary Syndrome III: Diagnostic Studies
01:26Acute Coronary Syndrome V: Nursing Management
01:19Acute Coronary Syndrome II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations
01:27Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care