Dataset Information

Comparing the predictive validity of three contemporary bleeding risk scores in acute coronary syndrome.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

Haemorrhagic complications are strongly linked with adverse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. Various risk scores (RS) are available to predict bleeding risk in these patients. We compared the performance of three contemporary bleeding RS in ACS.

Methods

We studied 4500 consecutive patients with ACS. We calculated the ACTION, CRUSADE, and Mehran et al. (2010) bleeding RS, and evaluated their performance for predicting their own major bleeding events and TIMI serious (major or minor) bleeding episodes, in patients with either non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTEACS) or ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Calibration (Hosmer-Lemeshow test, HL) and discrimination (c-statistic) for the three RS were computed and compared.

Results

For RS-specific major bleeding, ACTION and CRUSADE showed the best prognostic discrimination in STEMI (c=0.734 and 0.791, respectively; p=0.04), and in NSTEACS (c=0.791 and 0.810; p=0.4); being CRUSADE significantly superior to Mehran et al. in both ACS types (p<0.05). All RS performed well in patients undergoing coronary arteriography using either a radial or femoral approach (all c?0.718); however, their discriminative capacity was modest in patients not undergoing coronary arteriography and in those previously on oral anticoagulant (all c<0.70). For TIMI serious bleeding, ACTION and CRUSADE displayed the highest c-index values in both STEMI (0.724 and 0.703, respectively; p=0.3) and NSTEACS (c=0.733 and 0.744, respectively; p=0.6); however, calibration of ACTION was poor in both ACS types (HL p<0.05).

Conclusions

Of contemporary bleeding RS, the CRUSADE score was found to be the most accurate quantitative tool for NSTEACS and STEMI patients undergoing coronary arteriography.

SUBMITTER: Abu-Assi E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3760544 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparing the predictive validity of three contemporary bleeding risk scores in acute coronary syndrome.

Abu-Assi Emad E Raposeiras-Roubin Sergio S Lear Pamela P Cabanas-Grandío Pilar P Girondo Mar M Rodríguez-Cordero Marta M Pereira-López Eva E Romaní Santiago Gestal SG González-Cambeiro Cristina C Alvarez-Alvarez Belén B García-Acuña José María JM González-Juanatey José Ramón JR

European heart journal. Acute cardiovascular care 20120901 3

<h4>Aims</h4>Haemorrhagic complications are strongly linked with adverse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. Various risk scores (RS) are available to predict bleeding risk in these patients. We compared the performance of three contemporary bleeding RS in ACS.<h4>Methods</h4>We studied 4500 consecutive patients with ACS. We calculated the ACTION, CRUSADE, and Mehran et al. (2010) bleeding RS, and evaluated their performance for predicting their own major bleeding events and TIMI ...[more]

PMID: 24062910

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe validation of various risk scores in elderly patients with comorbid atrial fibrillation (AF) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has not been reported. The present study compared the predictive performance of existing risk scores in these patients.MethodsA total of 1252 elderly patients with AF and ACS comorbidities (≥ 65 years old) were consecutively enrolled from January 2015 to December 2019. All patients were followed up for one year. The predictive performance of risk scores in predicting bleeding and thromboembolic events was calculated and compared.ResultsDuring the 1-year follow-up, 183 (14.6%) patients had thromboembolic events, 198 (15.8%) patients had BARC class ≥ 2 bleeding events, and 61 (4.9%) patients had BARC class ≥ 3 bleeding events. For the BARC class ≥ 3 bleeding events, discrimination of the existing risk scores was low to moderate, PRECISE-DAPT (C-statistic: 0.638, 95% CI: 0.611-0.665), ATRIA (C-statistic: 0.615, 95% CI: 0.587-0.642), PARIS-MB (C-statistic: 0.612, 95% CI: 0.584-0.639), HAS-BLED (C-statistic: 0.597, 95% CI: 0.569-0.624) and CRUSADE (C-statistic: 0.595, 95% CI: 0.567-0.622). However, the calibration was good. PRECISE-DAPT showed a higher integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) than PARIS-MB, HAS-BLED, ATRIA, and CRUSADE (P < 0.05) and the best decision curve analysis (DCA). For thromboembolic events, the discrimination of GRACE (C-statistic: 0.636, 95% CI: 0.608-0.662) was higher than CHA2DS2-VASc (C-statistic: 0.612, 95% CI: 0.584-0.639), OPT-CAD (C-statistic: 0.602, 95% CI: 0.574-0.629) and PARIS-CTE (C-statistic: 0.595, 95% CI: 0.567-0.622). The calibration was good. Compared to OPT-CAD and PARIS-CTE, the IDI of the GRACE score slightly improved (P < 0.05). However, NRI analysis showed no significant difference. DCA showed that the clinical practicability of thromboembolic risk scores was similar.ConclusionsThe discrimination and calibration of existing risk scores in predicting 1-year thromboembolic and bleeding events were unsatisfactory in elderly patients with comorbid AF and ACS. PRECISE-DAPT showed higher IDI and DCA than other risk scores in predicting BARC class ≥ 3 bleeding events. The GRACE score showed a slight advantage in predicting thrombotic events.

Project description:BackgroundDespite direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) being safer than warfarin for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), major bleeding concerns persist. Most bleeding risk scores predate DOAC approval.ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the Age, history of Bleeding, and non-bleeding related Hospitalisation [ABH] score's performance-derived for DOAC-treated patients-with those of 5 other scores (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation [ATRIA], Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding history or predisposition, Labile international normalized ratio, Elderly [>65 years], Drugs/alcohol concomitantly [HAS-BLED], Hepatic, Hepatic or Renal Disease, Ethanol Abuse, Malignancy, Older Age, Reduced Platelet Count or Function, Re-Bleeding, Hypertension, Anemia, Genetic Factors, Excessive Fall Risk and Stroke [HEMORR2HAGES], Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation [ORBIT-AF], and Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥75 [doubled], Diabetes, Stroke [doubled]-Vascular disease, Age 65-74, Sex category [CHA2DS2-VASc]) in predicting DOAC-related major bleeding in patients with AF.MethodsIn this retrospective study of 2364 patients with nonvalvular AF on rivaroxaban or apixaban (median age, 68.3 years; 32.1% women), International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis-defined major bleeding (incidence, 4.1%; n = 97) was analyzed. C-statistics from time-dependent receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for continuous risk scores were the primary comparison metric, but other metrics, such as decision curves, were also compared.ResultsAt 100 days, C-statistics were highest for ORBIT-AF and ATRIA (0.62 and 0.61, respectively, with other scores having an area under the ROC curve of <0.60); some significant differences favored ORBIT-AF. At 1100 days, C-statistics remained highest for ORBIT-AF and ATRIA (0.62 and 0.61, respectively, with other scores having an area under the ROC curve of <0.60 again), and ORBIT-AF had significantly higher C-statistics than those for all other risk scores (P < .05), except for ATRIA. At 2100 days, all C-statistics were <0.60 with no significant differences. Decision curves showed the greatest net benefit for ORBIT-AF and ATRIA at 100 days and for ATRIA at 1100 days, with no discernible net benefit for any of the scores at 2100 days.ConclusionORBIT-AF and ATRIA provided the best bleeding risk prediction within the first 1100 days. None of the 6 bleeding risk scores provided predictive benefit over 2100 days of DOAC treatment.

Dataset Information

Comparing the predictive validity of three contemporary bleeding risk scores in acute coronary syndrome.

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Comparing the predictive validity of three contemporary bleeding risk scores in acute coronary syndrome.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets