Effectiveness of fondaparinux vs unfractionated heparin following percutaneous coronary intervention in survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest due to acute myocardial infarction.

Abstract

AIM\nThere is no specific evidence on the antithrombotic management of survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to compare the short-term outcome of unfractioned heparin (UFH) vs fondaparinux in OHCA survivors due to AMI admitted in our Institution in the last decade.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe performed a retrospective cohort study on survivors of OHCA due to AMI managed with UFH or fondaparinux during the hospitalization. The primary outcome was the occurrence of any bleeding, all-cause mortality, cerebrovascular accidents, re-MI, and unplanned revascularization at 1\xa0month. A propensity-score matching was performed to compare the outcome between UFH and fondaparinux.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOut of 2083 AMI patients undergoing successful PCI, OHCA was present in 94 (4.5%): 41 (43.6%) treated with UFH and 53 (56.4%) with fondaparinux. At clinical follow-up, the incidence of the primary outcome was 65.9% in UFH and 35.8% in fondaparinux group (p\u2009=\u20090.007). More than half of the events included in the primary outcome were related to bleeding complications. In the matched cohort of 56 patients, the primary outcome occurred in 46.4% and 25.0% (p\u2009=\u20090.16), while bleeding was present in 32.1% and 7.1% (p\u2009=\u20090.04), in the UFH and fondaparinux group, respectively.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe present analysis suggests that fondaparinux is safer than UFH in the management of OHCA due to AMI by reducing early bleeding complications at one month.