A Systematic Review on Bleeding Risk Scores’ Accuracy after Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Acute and Elective Settings
Open Access
- 2 February 2021
- journal article
- review article
- Published by MDPI AG in Healthcare
- Vol. 9 (2), 148
- https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9020148
Abstract
Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) is recommended for all patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), as it significantly reduces the ischemic risk at the cost of increasing the incidence of bleeding events. Several clinical predictive models were developed to better stratify the bleeding risk associated with DAT. This systematic review aims to perform a literature survey of both standard and emerging bleeding risk scores and report their performance on predicting hemorrhagic events, especially in the era of second-generation drug-eluting stents and more potent P2Y12 inhibitors. We searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane databases for full-text studies that developed or validated bleeding risk scores in adult patients undergoing PCI with subsequent DAT. The risk of bias for each study was assessed using the prediction model risk of bias assessment tool (PROBAST). Eighteen studies were included in the present systematic review. Bleeding risk scores showed a modest to good discriminatory power with c-statistic ranging from 0.49 (95% CI, 0.45–0.53) to 0.82 (95% CI, 0.80–0.85). Clinical models that predict in-hospital bleeding events had a relatively good predictive performance, with c-statistic ranging from 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67–0.72) to 0.80 (95% CI, 0.73–0.87), depending on the risk scores and major hemorrhagic event definition used. The knowledge and utilization of the current bleeding risk scores in appropriate clinical contexts could improve the prediction of bleeding events.This publication has 41 references indexed in Scilit:
- Stent ThrombosisJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, 2014
- CRUSADE bleeding risk score validation for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary interventionThrombosis Research, 2013
- Three vs Twelve Months of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Zotarolimus-Eluting StentsJAMA, 2013
- Comparison of the performance of the CRUSADE, ACUITY-HORIZONS, and ACTION bleeding risk scores in STEMI undergoing primary PCI: insights from a cohort of 1391 patientsEuropean Heart Journal Acute Cardiovascular Care, 2012
- A New Strategy for Discontinuation of Dual Antiplatelet TherapyJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2012
- Stent thrombosis with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysisThe Lancet, 2012
- In-Hospital Major Bleeding During ST-Elevation and Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Care: Derivation and Validation of a Model from the ACTION Registry®-GWTG™The American Journal of Cardiology, 2011
- A Risk Score to Predict Bleeding in Patients With Acute Coronary SyndromesJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2010
- The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaborationJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2009
- Baseline Risk of Major Bleeding in Non–ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial InfarctionCirculation, 2009