Search

Background Risk factors for bleeding complications during extracorporeal life support (ECLS) indicated for cardiac support remain poorly investigated. The aim is to develop and internally validate a prediction model to calculate the risk for bleeding complications in adult patients receiving veno-arterial (V-A) ECLS. Methods Data of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry of adult patients undergoing V-A ECLS between 2010 and 2020 were analyzed. The primary outcome was bleeding complications recorded during V-A ECLS. Multivariable logistic regression with backward stepwise elimination was used to develop the prediction model. Performance of the model was tested by discriminative ability and calibration with receiver operator characteristic, area under the curve, and visual inspection of the calibration plot. Internal validation was performed to detect overfitting of the model. Results In total 28 767 adult patients were included, of which 29.0% developed bleeding complications. Sex, body mass index, surgical cannulation, pre-ECLS respiratory and hemodynamic variables, pre-ECLS support and interventions, and different type of diagnosis were included in the prediction model. This prediction model showed a predictive capability with an AUC of 0.66. Conclusion The model is based on the largest cohort of V-A ECLS patients and is the best available predictive model for bleeding events given the predictors that are available in V-A ECLS compared to current literature. The model can help in identifying patients at high risk for bleeding complications and will help in developing further research and decision-making in terms of anticoagulation management. External validation is warranted to extrapolate this model in the clinical setting.

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.

In 2014, a joint consensus document dealing with the management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions was published, which represented an effort of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), and European Association of Acute Cardiac Care (ACCA) endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS). Since publication of this document, additional data from observational cohorts, randomized controlled trials, and percutaneous interventions as well as new guidelines have been published. Moreover, new drugs and devices/interventions are also available, with an increasing evidence base. The approach to managing AF has also evolved towards a more integrated or holistic approach. In recognizing these advances since the last consensus document, EHRA, WG Thrombosis, EAPCI, and ACCA, with additional contributions from HRS, APHRS, Latin America Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), and Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA), proposed a focused update, to include the new data, with the remit of comprehensively reviewing the available evidence and publishing a focused update consensus document on the management of antithrombotic therapy in AF patients presenting with ACS and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions, and providing up-to-date consensus recommendations for use in clinical practice.

Background Oral anticoagulation is the mainstay of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), but must be balanced against the associated bleeding risk. Several risk scores have been proposed for prediction of bleeding events in patients with AF. Objectives To compare the performance of contemporary clinical bleeding risk scores in 18 113 patients with AF randomized to dabigatran 110 mg, 150 mg or warfarin in the RE-LY trial. Methods HAS-BLED, ORBIT, ATRIA and HEMORR2HAGES bleeding risk scores were calculated based on clinical information at baseline. All major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated. Results There were 1182 (6.5%) major bleeding events during a median follow-up of 2.0 years. For all the four schemes, high-risk subgroups had higher risk of major bleeding (all P

Background Several bleeding risk scores have been validated in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The ORBIT score has been recently proposed as a simple score with the best ability to predict major bleeding. The present study aimed to test the hypothesis that the ORBIT score was superior to the HAS-BLED score for predicting major bleeding and death in "real world" anticoagulated AF patients. Methods and results We analyzed the predictive performance for bleeding and death of 406 AF patients who underwent 571 electrical cardioversion procedures and 1,276 patients with permanent/persistent AF from the FANTASIIA registry. In the cardioversion population, 21 patients had major bleeding events and 26 patients died. The predictive performance for major bleeding of HAS-BLED and ORBIT were not significantly different (c-statistics 0.77 (95% CI 0.66-0.88) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.77-0.93), respectively; P=0.080). For the FANTASIIA population, 46 patients had major bleeding events and 50 patients died. The predictive performances for major bleeding of HAS-BLED and ORBIT were not significantly different (c-statistics 0.63 (95% CI 0.56-0.71) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.62-0.77), respectively; P=0.116). For death, the predictive performances of HAS-BLED and ORBIT were not significantly different in both populations. The ORBIT score categorized most patients as "low risk". Conclusions Despite the original claims in its derivation paper, the ORBIT score was not superior to HAS-BLED for predicting major bleeding and death in a "real world" oral anticoagulated AF population. (Circ J 2016; 80: 2102-2108).

Background: Several bleeding risk scores have been validated in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). The ORBIT score has been recently proposed as a simple score with the best ability to predict major bleeding. The present study aimed to test the hypothesis that the ORBIT score was superior to the HAS-BLED score for predicting major bleeding and death in "real world" anticoagulated AF patients. Methods and Results: We analyzed the predictive performance for bleeding and death of 406 AF patients who underwent 571 electrical cardioversion procedures and 1,276 patients with permanent/persistent AF from the FANTASIIA registry. In the cardioversion population, 21 patients had major bleeding events and 26 patients died. The predictive performance for major bleeding of HAS-BLED and ORBIT were not significantly different (c-statistics 0.77 (95% CI 0.66-0.88) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.77-0.93), respectively; P=0.080). For the FANTASIIA population, 46 patients had major bleeding events and 50 patients died. The predictive performances for major bleeding of HASBLED and ORBIT were not significantly different (c-statistics 0.63 (95% CI 0.56-0.71) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.62-0.77), respectively; P=0.116). For death, the predictive performances of HAS-BLED and ORBIT were not significantly different in both populations. The ORBIT score categorized most patients as "low risk". Conclusions: Despite the original claims in its derivation paper, the ORBIT score was not superior to HAS-BLED for predicting major bleeding and death in a "real world" oral anticoagulated AF population.

ObjectiveThe effect of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) on the risk of bleeding after tooth extraction remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of postextraction bleeding among patients who received DOAC and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), such as warfarin.DesignThis study was a retrospective cohort analysis. Incidence rates and propensity score-matched regression models were used to compare the risks of bleeding after tooth extractions involving DOACs and VKAs.SettingThe study took place in a single university hospital in Japan.ParticipantsBetween April 2013 and April 2015, 543 patients underwent a total of 1196 simple tooth extractions.Primary outcome measureThe primary outcome measure was the occurrence of postextraction bleeding, which was defined as bleeding that could not be stopped by biting down on gauze and required medical treatment between 30 min and 7 days after the extraction.ResultsA total of 1196 tooth extractions (634 procedures) in 541 patients fulfilled the study criteria, with 72 extractions (41 procedures) involving DOACs, 100 extractions (50 procedures) involving VKAs and 1024 extractions (543 procedures) involving no anticoagulants. The incidences of postextraction bleeding per tooth for the DOAC, VKA and no anticoagulant extractions were 10.4%, 12.0% and 0.9%, respectively. The incidences of postextraction bleeding per procedure for DOACs, VKAs and no anticoagulants were 9.7%, 10.0% and 1.1%, respectively. In comparison to the VKA extractions, the DOAC extractions did not significantly increase the risk of postextraction bleeding (OR 0.69, 95% CIs 0.24 to 1.97; p=0.49).ConclusionsThe risk of postextraction bleeding was similar for DOAC and VKA extractions.

Background Scores for cardio-embolic and bleeding risk in patients with atrial fibrillation are described in the literature. However, it is not clear how they co-classify elderly patients with multimorbidity, nor whether and how they affect the physician's decision on thromboprophylaxis. Methods Four scores for cardio-embolic and bleeding risks were retrospectively calculated for ≥ 65 year old patients with atrial fibrillation enrolled in the REPOSI registry. The co-classification of patients according to risk categories based on different score combinations was described and the relationship between risk categories tested. The association between the antithrombotic therapy received and the scores was investigated by logistic regressions and CART analyses. Results At admission, among 543 patients the median scores (range) were: CHADS22 (0-6), CHA2DS2-VASc 4 (1-9), HEMORR2HAGES 3 (0-7), HAS-BLED 2 (1-6). Most of the patients were at high cardio-embolic/high-intermediate bleeding risk (70.5% combining CHADS2and HEMORR2HAGES, 98.3% combining CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED). 50-60% of patients were classified in a cardio-embolic risk category higher than the bleeding risk category. In univariate and multivariable analyses, a higher bleeding score was negatively associated with warfarin prescription, and positively associated with aspirin prescription. The cardio-embolic scores were associated with the therapeutic choice only after adjusting for bleeding score or age. Conclusion REPOSI patients represented a population at high cardio-embolic and bleeding risks, but most of them were classified by the scores as having a higher cardio-embolic than bleeding risk. Yet, prescription and type of antithrombotic therapy appeared to be primarily dictated by the bleeding risk. © 2013 European Federation of Internal Medicine.