Dataset Information

Available Bleeding Scoring Systems Poorly Predict Major Bleeding in the Acute Phase of Pulmonary Embolism.

ABSTRACT: We aimed to compare six available bleeding scores, in a real-life cohort, for prediction of major bleeding in the early phase of pulmonary embolism (PE). We recorded in-hospital characteristics of 2754 PE patients in a prospective observational multicenter cohort contributing 18,028 person-days follow-up. The VTE-BLEED (Venous Thrombo-Embolism Bleed), RIETE (Registro informatizado de la enfermedad tromboembólica en España; Computerized Registry of Patients with Venous Thromboembolism), ORBIT (Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment), HEMORR₂HAGES (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), ATRIA (Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation), and HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal Renal/Liver Function, Stroke, Bleeding History or Predisposition, Labile International Normalized Ratio, Elderly, Drugs/Alcohol) scores were assessed at baseline. International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH)-defined bleeding events were independently adjudicated. Accuracy of the overall original 3-level and newly defined optimal 2-level outcome of the scores were evaluated and compared. We observed 82 first early major bleedings (3.0% (95% CI, 2.4-3.7)). The predictive power of bleeding scores was poor (Harrel's C-index from 0.57 to 0.69). The RIETE score had numerically higher model fit and discrimination capacity but without reaching statistical significance versus the ORBIT, HEMORR₂HAGES, and ATRIA scores. The VTE-BLEED and HAS-BLED scores had significantly lower C-index, integrated discrimination improvement, and net reclassification improvement compared to the others. The rate of observed early major bleeding in score-defined low-risk patients was high, between 15% and 34%. Current available scoring systems have insufficient accuracy to predict early major bleeding in patients with acute PE. The development of acute-PE-specific risk scores is needed to optimally target bleeding prevention strategies.

SUBMITTER: Mathonier C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8396851 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective To compare the predictive accuracy and clinical utility of five risk scoring systems in the assessment of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Design International multicentre prospective study.Setting Six large hospitals in Europe, North America, Asia, and Oceania.Participants 3012 consecutive patients presenting over 12 months with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Main outcome measures Comparison of pre-endoscopy scores (admission Rockall, AIMS65, and Glasgow Blatchford) and post-endoscopy scores (full Rockall and PNED) for their ability to predict predefined clinical endpoints: a composite endpoint (transfusion, endoscopic treatment, interventional radiology, surgery, or 30 day mortality), endoscopic treatment, 30 day mortality, rebleeding, and length of hospital stay. Optimum score thresholds to identify low risk and high risk patients were determined.Results The Glasgow Blatchford score was best (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) 0.86) at predicting intervention or death compared with the full Rockall score (0.70), PNED score (0.69), admission Rockall score (0.66, and AIMS65 score (0.68) (all P<0.001). A Glasgow Blatchford score of ≤1 was the optimum threshold to predict survival without intervention (sensitivity 98.6%, specificity 34.6%). The Glasgow Blatchford score was better at predicting endoscopic treatment (AUROC 0.75) than the AIMS65 (0.62) and admission Rockall scores (0.61) (both P<0.001). A Glasgow Blatchford score of ≥7 was the optimum threshold to predict endoscopic treatment (sensitivity 80%, specificity 57%). The PNED (AUROC 0.77) and AIMS65 scores (0.77) were best at predicting mortality, with both superior to admission Rockall score (0.72) and Glasgow Blatchford score (0.64; P<0.001). Score thresholds of ≥4 for PNED, ≥2 for AIMS65, ≥4 for admission Rockall, and ≥5 for full Rockall were optimal at predicting death, with sensitivities of 65.8-78.6% and specificities of 65.0-65.3%. No score was helpful at predicting rebleeding or length of stay.Conclusions The Glasgow Blatchford score has high accuracy at predicting need for hospital based intervention or death. Scores of ≤1 appear the optimum threshold for directing patients to outpatient management. AUROCs of scores for the other endpoints are less than 0.80, therefore their clinical utility for these outcomes seems to be limited.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16235737.

Dataset Information

Available Bleeding Scoring Systems Poorly Predict Major Bleeding in the Acute Phase of Pulmonary Embolism.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets