Literature DB >> 33404627

Assessing the Risks of Bleeding vs Thrombotic Events in Patients at High Bleeding Risk After Coronary Stent Implantation: The ARC-High Bleeding Risk Trade-off Model.

Philip Urban1, John Gregson2, Ruth Owen2, Roxana Mehran3, Stephan Windecker4, Marco Valgimigli4, Olivier Varenne5,6, Mitchell Krucoff7, Shigeru Saito8, Usman Baber3, Bernard Chevalier9, Davide Capodanno10,11, Marie-Claude Morice12, Stuart Pocock2.   

Abstract

Importance: Patients who are candidates for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and are at high bleeding risk constitute a therapeutic challenge because they often also face an increased risk of thrombotic complications.
Objectives: To develop and validate models to predict the risks of major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and myocardial infarction (MI) and/or stent thrombosis (ST) for individual patients at high bleeding risk and provide assistance in defining procedural strategy and antithrombotic regimens. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study used individual patient data from 6 studies conducted from July 1, 2009, to September 5, 2017, for 6641 patients at more than 200 centers in Europe, the US, and Asia who underwent PCI and were identified as being at high bleeding risk using the Academic Research Consortium criteria. In 1 year of follow-up (excluding periprocedural events), individual patient risks of MI and/or ST and major bleeding were evaluated using 33 baseline variables. To validate these models, a subgroup of 1458 patients at high bleeding risk from the ONYX ONE trial were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed from February 1, 2019, to April 30, 2020. Exposures: All patients underwent PCI with bare metal, drug-coated, or drug-eluting stent implants. Main Outcomes and Measures: Forward, stepwise multivariable proportional hazards models were used to identify highly significant predictors of MI and/or ST and BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding.
Results: A total of 6641 patients (4384 men [66.0%]; median age, 77.9 years [interquartile range, 70.0-82.6 years]) were included in this study. Over 365 days, nonperiprocedural MI and/or ST occurred in 350 patients (5.3%), and BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 381 patients (5.7%). Eight independent baseline predictors of risk of MI and/or ST and 8 predictors for risk of BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding were identified. Four of these predictors were in both risk models. Both risk models showed moderate discrimination: C statistic = 0.69 for predicting MI and/or ST and 0.68 for predicting BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding. Applying these same models to the validation cohort gave a similar strength of discrimination (C statistic = 0.74 for both MI and/or ST and BARC types 3-5 bleeding). Patients with MI and/or ST had a mortality hazard ratio of 6.1 (95% CI, 4.8-7.7), and those with BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding had a mortality hazard ratio of 3.7 (95% CI, 2.9-4.8) compared with patients free of both events. Taking these data into account, the risk scores facilitate investigation of the individual patient trade-off between these 2 risks: 2931 patients (44.1%) at high bleeding risk in the 6 studies had a greater risk of MI and/or ST than of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding, 1555 patients (23.4%) had a greater risk of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding than of MI and/or ST, and 2155 (32.4%) had a comparable risk of both events. Conclusions and Relevance: In a large cohort of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing PCI, 2 prognostic models have been developed to identify individual patients' risk of major coronary thrombotic and bleeding events. In future clinical practice, using an application on a smartphone to evaluate the trade-off between these 2 quantifiable risks for each patient may help clinicians choose the most appropriate revascularization strategy and tailor the duration and intensity of antithrombotic regimens.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33404627      PMCID: PMC7788509          DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2020.6814

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Cardiol            Impact factor:   14.676


  5 in total

Review 1.  Bleeding avoidance strategies in percutaneous coronary intervention.

Authors:  Davide Capodanno; Deepak L Bhatt; C Michael Gibson; Stefan James; Takeshi Kimura; Roxana Mehran; Sunil V Rao; Philippe Gabriel Steg; Philip Urban; Marco Valgimigli; Stephan Windecker; Dominick J Angiolillo
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 32.419

Review 2.  A practical approach to prescribing antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  Mohammad Alkhalil; Michał Kuzemczak; Alan Bell; Sol Stern; Michelle Welsford; Warren J Cantor; Shaun G Goodman
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2022-02-14       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3. 

Authors:  Mohammad Alkhalil; Michał Kuzemczak; Alan Bell; Sol Stern; Michelle Welsford; Warren J Cantor; Shaun G Goodman
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 16.859

4.  Coronary Stent Thrombosis and Mortality: Does the Relationship Stand the Test of Time?

Authors:  George V Moukarbel
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2022-04-04       Impact factor: 5.501

5.  Practical Assessment of the Tradeoff between Fatal Bleeding and Coronary Thrombotic Risks using the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk Criteria.

Authors:  Yohei Sotomi; Shungo Hikoso; Daisaku Nakatani; Tomoharu Dohi; Hiroya Mizuno; Katsuki Okada; Hirota Kida; Bolrathanak Oeun; Akihiro Sunaga; Taiki Sato; Tetsuhisa Kitamura; Yasuhiko Sakata; Hiroshi Sato; Masatsugu Hori; Issei Komuro; Yasushi Sakata
Journal:  J Atheroscler Thromb       Date:  2021-09-15       Impact factor: 4.394

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.