What literature is available for cangrelor as a bailout strategy during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI)? Is this recommended by any guidelines?

Comment by InpharmD Researcher

Evidence specifically evaluating cangrelor for bailout PCI is limited to a 2025 descriptive study demonstrating improved TIMI flow and acceptable safety when used for intraprocedural thrombotic complications (see Table 1). Major ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines classify cangrelor as an IV P2Y12 inhibitor for P2Y12-naïve patients undergoing PCI, while glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors remain the agents typically reserved for bailout therapy.

Background

In the 2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI acute coronary syndrome (ACS) guideline, cangrelor is listed as an option for ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) who have not been pretreated with an oral P2Y12 inhibitor (Class IIb, Level B-R). In the 2023 ESC ACS guideline, cangrelor is placed as an intravenous P2Y12 inhibitor that may be considered in P2Y12-inhibitor–naïve patients undergoing PCI in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST elevation ACS (Class IIb). The 2021 ESC/EAPCI/ACCA consensus document similarly states that parenteral therapy should be used to cover the delayed onset of oral P2Y12 inhibitors and that cangrelor is preferred unless no-reflow or bailout occurs, in which case glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors may be used. Collectively, these documents place cangrelor as an intravenous (IV) P2Y12 inhibitor for P2Y12-naïve patients undergoing PCI, while glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors remain the agents explicitly designated for bailout therapy. [1], [2], [3]

A 2023 retrospective analysis evaluated the use of cangrelor in high-risk patients undergoing PCI for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiac arrest (CA) and/or cardiogenic shock (CS). The study examined the challenge of delayed oral P2Y12 inhibitor onset in CA or CS, particularly in the presence of therapeutic hypothermia or morphine-and assessed whether intravenous cangrelor could provide rapid and reversible platelet inhibition in this setting. The cohort included 303 patients from Austria and Germany, all presenting with AMI and either heart failure requiring ventilation, CA, CS, or both. Cangrelor was initiated before PCI in 12.9% of cases and infused for a mean of 121 minutes. Within the first 48 hours after PCI, stent thrombosis or myocardial re-infarction occurred in only two patients (0.7%). The Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2–3 bleeding was reported in 11.2% of patients, with BARC 5 fatal bleeding in 3.3%. Total in-hospital mortality was 41.6%. In a matched comparison with patients from the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial, cangrelor use was associated with comparable thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 3 flow and numerically fewer ischemic events. These findings support cangrelor’s ability to reduce early ischemic complications in CA and CS patients and suggest an acceptable safety profile in this population. However, this study did not evaluate cangrelor initiated specifically as a bailout treatment for intraprocedural thrombotic complications. [4]

In a 2025 retrospective analysis of 493 high-risk PCI patients receiving cangrelor, most of whom presented with ACS (78.7%, including 29.6% STEMI and 14.8% cardiogenic shock) and underwent complex PCI (79.3%), investigators primarily evaluated real-world use patterns and transition strategies. Cangrelor was commonly used for thrombus-containing lesions or intraprocedural thrombotic complications (51.5%). Transition to ticagrelor occurred in 80.5% of patients and was associated with lower in-hospital MACCE compared with transition to thienopyridines (9.8% vs. 24.0%), and protocol-adherent transitions similarly reduced major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (10.9% vs. 19.4%). Extended low-dose infusions were well tolerated in critically ill patients. However, although thrombotic complications were frequent indications, this study did not evaluate cangrelor initiated specifically as a bailout intervention after events such as slow-flow, no-reflow, or acute stent thrombosis. [5]

References:

[1] Gorog DA, Price S, Sibbing D, et al. Antithrombotic therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome complicated by cardiogenic shock or out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a joint position paper from the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Thrombosis, in association with the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. 2021;7(2):125-140. doi:10.1093/ehjcvp/pvaa009
[2] Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ, et al. 2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J. 2023;44(38):3720-3826. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehad191
[3] Rao SV, O'Donoghue ML, Ruel M, et al. 2025 ACC/AHA/ACEP/NAEMSP/SCAI Guideline for the Management of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2025;151(13):e771-e862. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001309
[4] Zeymer U, Lober C, Richter S, et al. Cangrelor in patients with percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction after cardiac arrest and/or with cardiogenic shock. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2023;12(7):462-463. doi:10.1093/ehjacc/zuad041
[5] Oliva A, Cao D, Shneyderman M, et al. Timing, indications and transition patterns associated with cangrelor use in patients undergoing PCI. J Thromb Thrombolysis. Published online August 14, 2025. doi:10.1007/s11239-025-03136-9

Literature Review

A search of the published medical literature revealed 1 study investigating the researchable question:

What literature is available for cangrelor as a bailout strategy during percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI)? Is this recommended by any guidelines?

Level of evidence

C - Multiple studies with limitations or conflicting results  Read more→



Please see Table 1 for your response.


Bailout Use of Cangrelor During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Associated Outcomes
Design

Single-center, descriptive analysis

N= 67

Objective To detail the procedural characteristics and outcomes from the use of cangrelor as a bailout therapy during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)
Study Groups Cangrelor bailout (n= 67)
Inclusion Criteria Patients who underwent PCI and received cangrelor without concomitant use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa 
Exclusion Criteria Not specified
Methods Patients receiving cangrelor as bailout therapy were identified. Cangrelor was administered as a 30 mg/kg bolus followed by a 4 mg/kg/min infusion. 
Duration January 2016 through December 2023
Outcome Measures Improvement in thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow, in-hospital ischemic events, major bleeding, length of stay
Baseline Characteristics   Cangrelor bailout (n= 67)
Age, years 66.7 ± 11.1
Male sex 49 (73.1%)
Caucasian 41 (61.2%)
Hypertension 57 (85.1%)
Hyperlipidemia 59 (88.1%)
Diabetes mellitus 28 (41.8%)
Heart failure 36 (53.7%)
History of coronary artery disease 37 (55.2%)

Indications

Stable coronary artery disease

NSTEMI

STEMI

 

36 (53.7%)

22 (32.8%)

8 (11.9%)

Results   Cangrelor bailout (n= 67)

Composite ischemic outcome

In hospital death

Target vessel revascularization/ target lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR)

Ischemic stroke

8 (11.9%)

4 (6%)

7 (10.4%)

0 (0%)

Any bleeding

6 (9%)

Major bleed (intracranial hemorrhage, clinically indicated transfusion with a hemoglobin drop >3 gram %) 3 (4.5%)
Length of stay, days 5.8 ± 9.3
Adverse Events See Results
Study Author Conclusions The use of bailout therapy during PCI is low, with cangrelor offering a reasonable alternative to existing therapies such as glycoprotein IIb/IIIa. Whether the routine early initiation of cangrelor during all-comer PCI improves outcomes warrants further research.
Critique The study provides valuable real-world data on the use of cangrelor as a bailout therapy during PCI, highlighting its safety and efficacy. However, the single-center, descriptive nature and small sample size limit the generalizability of the findings. Additionally, the lack of a control group prevents direct comparison with other therapies.
References:

Chaturvedi A, Hill AP, Creechan P, et al. Bailout Use of Cangrelor During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Associated Outcomes. Am J Cardiol. 2025;256:89-92. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2025.07.022