Utility of the HAS-BLED score for risk stratification of patients with acute coronary syndrome

Clinical Profiles and One-Year Outcome in Middle Eastern Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Hypertension: Analysis From the Jordan Atrial Fibrillation Study

Studies on the impact of hypertension (HTN) on the outcome of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in the Middle East are scarce. The aim of this contemporary multicenter study is to evaluate the effect of the coexisting HTN on the baseline clinical profiles and 1-year prognosis in a cohort of Middle Eastern patients with AF. Consecutive AF patients in 29 hospitals and cardiology clinics were enrolled in the Jordan AF study (May 2019-December 2020). Patients were prospectively followed up for 1 year, and the study had no influence on their treatment, which was at the discretion of the treating physician. We compared clinical features, use of medications, and 1-year prognosis in patients with AF/HTN compared with AF/no HTN. Among 1849 non-valvular AF patients, 76.4% had HTN, with higher prevalence of diabetes, dyslipidemia, coronary heart disease, stroke, and left ventricular hypertrophy in HTN patients. There was a higher thromboembolic and bleeding risk among HTN patients. At 1 year, HTN patients had significantly higher rates of stroke and systemic embolism (SSE) (4.5%), acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (2.4%), rehospitalization (27.9%), and major bleeding events (3.0%) compared with non-HTN patients. In this cohort, the coexistence of HTN was associated with worse baseline clinical profile and 1-year outcomes.

The prognostic value of ORBIT risk score in predicting major bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

The most significant adverse effect of antithrombotic medication in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is major bleeding, which is related to increased mortality. Studies on ORBIT risk score in predicting major bleeding in ACS patients are limited.

OBJECTIVE

This research aimed to examine whether the ORBIT score calculated at the bedside can identify major bleeding risk in patients with ACS.

METHODS

This research was retrospective, observational, and conducted at a single center. Analyses of receiver operating characteristics (ROC) were utilized to define the diagnostic value of CRUSADE and ORBIT scores. The predictive performances of the two scores were compared using DeLong's method. Discrimination and reclassification performances were evaluated by the integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), and net reclassification improvement (NRI).

RESULTS

The study included 771 patients with ACS. The mean age was 68.7 ± 8.6 years, with 35.3 % females. 31 patients had major bleeding. Twenty-three of these patients were BARC 3 A, five were BARC 3 B, and three were BARC 3 C. Bleeding history [OR (95 % CI), 2.46 (1.02-5.94), p = 0.021], hemoglobin levels [OR (95 % CI), 0.54 (0.45-0.63), p < 0.001], and age > 74 years [OR (95 % CI), 1.03 (1.01-1.06), p = 0.039] were independent predictors of major bleeding. The ORBIT score was an independent predictor of major bleeding in the multivariate analysis: continuous variables [OR (95 % CI), 2.53 (2.61-3.95), p < 0.001] and risk categories [OR (95 % CI), 3.06 (1.69-5.52), p < 0.001]. Comparison of c-indexes for major bleeding events revealed a non-significant difference for the discriminative ability of the two tested scores (p = 0.07) with a continuous NRI of 6.6 % (p = 0.026) and an IDI of 4.2 % (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

In ACS patients, the ORBIT score independently predicted major bleeding.

Predictive Value of HAS-BLED Score Regarding Bleeding Events and Graft Survival following Renal Transplantation

Objective: Due to the high prevalence and incidence of cardio- and cerebrovascular diseases among dialysis-dependent patients with end-stage renal disease (ERSD) scheduled for kidney transplantation (KT), the use of antiplatelet therapy (APT) and/or anticoagulant drugs in this patient population is common. However, these patients share a high risk of complications, either due to thromboembolic or bleeding events, which makes adequate peri- and post-transplant anticoagulation management challenging. Predictive clinical models, such as the HAS-BLED score developed for predicting major bleeding events in patients under anticoagulation therapy, could be helpful tools for the optimization of antithrombotic management and could reduce peri- and postoperative morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data from 204 patients undergoing kidney transplantation (KT) between 2011 and 2018 at the University Hospital Leipzig were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were stratified and categorized postoperatively into the prophylaxis group (group A)—patients without pretransplant anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy and receiving postoperative heparin in prophylactic doses—and into the (sub)therapeutic group (group B)—patients with postoperative continued use of pretransplant antithrombotic medication used (sub)therapeutically. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative bleeding events, which was evaluated for a possible association with the use of antithrombotic therapy. Secondary analyses were conducted for the associations of other potential risk factors, specifically the HAS-BLED score, with allograft outcome. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression as well as a Cox proportional hazard model were used to identify risk factors for long-term allograft function, outcome and survival. The calibration and prognostic accuracy of the risk models were evaluated using the Hosmer−Lemshow test (HLT) and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) model. Results: In total, 94 of 204 (47%) patients received (sub)therapeutic antithrombotic therapy after transplantation and 108 (53%) patients received prophylactic antithrombotic therapy. A total of 61 (29%) patients showed signs of postoperative bleeding. The incidence (p < 0.01) and timepoint of bleeding (p < 0.01) varied significantly between the different antithrombotic treatment groups. After applying multivariate analyses, pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) (OR 2.89 (95% CI: 1.02−8.21); p = 0.04), procedure-specific complications (blood loss (OR 1.03 (95% CI: 1.0−1.05); p = 0.014), Clavien−Dindo classification > grade II (OR 1.03 (95% CI: 1.0−1.05); p = 0.018)), HAS-BLED score (OR 1.49 (95% CI: 1.08−2.07); p = 0.018), vit K antagonists (VKA) (OR 5.89 (95% CI: 1.10−31.28); p = 0.037), the combination of APT and therapeutic heparin (OR 5.44 (95% CI: 1.33−22.31); p = 0.018) as well as postoperative therapeutic heparin (OR 3.37 (95% CI: 1.37−8.26); p < 0.01) were independently associated with an increased risk for bleeding. The intraoperative use of heparin, prior antiplatelet therapy and APT in combination with prophylactic heparin was not associated with increased bleeding risk. Higher recipient body mass index (BMI) (OR 0.32 per 10 kg/m2 increase in BMI (95% CI: 0.12−0.91); p = 0.023) as well as living donor KT (OR 0.43 (95% CI: 0.18−0.94); p = 0.036) were associated with a decreased risk for bleeding. Regarding bleeding events and graft failure, the HAS-BLED risk model demonstrated good calibration (bleeding and graft failure: HLT: chi-square: 4.572, p = 0.802, versus chi-square: 6.52, p = 0.18, respectively) and moderate predictive performance (bleeding AUC: 0.72 (0.63−0.79); graft failure: AUC: 0.7 (0.6−0.78)). Conclusions: In our current study, we could demonstrate the HAS-BLED risk score as a helpful tool with acceptable predictive accuracy regarding bleeding events and graft failure following KT. The intensified monitoring and precise stratification/assessment of bleeding risk factors may be helpful in identifying patients at higher risks of bleeding, improved individualized anticoagulation decisions and choices of antithrombotic therapy in order to optimize outcome after kidney transplantation.

Untangling the difficult interplay between ischemic and hemorrhagic risk: The role of risk scores

BACKGROUND

Bleedings are an independent risk factor for subsequent mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and in those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. This represents a hazard equivalent to or greater than that for recurrent ACS. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) represents the cornerstone in the secondary prevention of thrombotic events, but the benefit of such therapy is counteracted by the increased hemorrhagic complications. Therefore, an early and individualized patient risk stratification can help to identify high-risk patients who could benefit the most from intensive medical therapies while minimizing unnecessary treatment complications in low-risk patients.

AIM

To review existing literature and gain better understanding of the role of ischemic and hemorrhagic risk scores in patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD).

METHODS

We used a combination of terms potentially used in literature describing the most common ischemic and hemorrhagic risk scores to search in PubMed as well as references of full-length articles.

RESULTS

In this review we briefly describe the most important ischemic and bleeding scores that can be adopted in patients with IHD, focusing on GRACE, CHA2DS2-Vasc, PARIS CTE, DAPT, CRUSADE, ACUITY, HAS-BLED, PARIS MB and PRECISE-DAPT score. In the second part of this review, we try to define a possible approach to the IHD patient, using the most suitable scores to stratify patient risk and decide the most appropriate patient treatment.

CONCLUSION

It becomes evident that risk scores by themselves can’t be the solution to balance the ischemic/bleeding risk of an IHD patient. Instead, some risk factors that are commonly associated with an elevated risk profile and that are already included in risk scores should be the focus of the clinician while he/she is taking care of a patient affected by IHD.

Relationship between predicting bleeding complication in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy (PRECISE-DAPT) score and mortality among patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

The predicting bleeding complication in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy, PRECISE-DAPT (P-DAPT) score has been validated in large cohorts as an effective tool in predicting bleeding complication after dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) as well as in predicting in-hospital mortality. The implication of using this score to predict outcomes, including mortality in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing PCI is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

Role of P-DAPT score to study clinical outcomes, including mortality, hospitalization, and major bleeding, particularly among patients with AF.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study of 18,850 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) across a large multihospital healthcare system from 2010 to 2019. Patients were stratified into four groups depending on the presence or absence of AF and P-DAPT score, with score ≥ 25 defined as high risk. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes evaluated were hospitalization and major bleeding.

RESULTS

In the unadjusted analyses, a P-DAPT score ≥ 25, in both AF and non-AF population, was associated with increased mortality, hospitalization, and bleeding. After adjusting for baseline covariates, no significant differences in major bleeding risk were found across the four groups. However, a P-DAPT score of ≥25 in AF patients was associated with a higher risk for hospitalizations related to cardiovascular causes (HR: 2.15 95% CI 2.00-2.3, p < .0001). Among AF patients, P-DAPT score ≥ 25 was found to be strongly associated with mortality (HR 3.5; 95% CI 2.95-4.25, p < .0001) as compared with AF patients with score < 25 (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.88-1.54, p = .26).

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of patients undergoing PCI, the P-DAPT score can help to identify patients at high risk for long-term mortality, particularly among those with atrial fibrillation.

Risk Stratification of Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

Defining the risk factors affecting the prognosis of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been a challenge. Many individual biomarkers and risk scores that predict outcomes during different periods following ACS have been proposed. This review evaluates known outcome predictors supported by clinical data in light of the development of new treatment strategies for ACS patients during the last three decades.

Empiric use of anticoagulation in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a propensity score-matched study of risks and benefits

Background

Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 demonstrate a higher risk of developing thromboembolism. Anticoagulation (AC) has been proposed for high-risk patients, even without confirmed thromboembolism. However, benefits and risks of AC are not well assessed due to insufficient clinical data. We performed a retrospective analysis of outcomes from AC in a large population of COVID-19 patients.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed 1189 patients hospitalized for COVID-19 between March 5 and May 15, 2020, with primary outcomes of mortality, invasive mechanical ventilation, and major bleeding. Patients who received therapeutic AC for known indications were excluded. Propensity score matching of baseline characteristics and admission parameters was performed to minimize bias between cohorts.

Results

The analysis cohort included 973 patients. Forty-four patients who received therapeutic AC for confirmed thromboembolic events and atrial fibrillation were excluded. After propensity score matching, 133 patients received empiric therapeutic AC while 215 received low dose prophylactic AC. Overall, there was no difference in the rate of invasive mechanical ventilation (73.7% versus 65.6%, p = 0.133) or mortality (60.2% versus 60.9%, p = 0.885). However, among patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, empiric therapeutic AC was an independent predictor of lower mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.476, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.345–0.657, p < 0.001) with longer median survival (14 days vs 8 days, p < 0.001), but these associations were not observed in the overall cohort (p = 0.063). Additionally, no significant difference in mortality was found between patients receiving empiric therapeutic AC versus prophylactic AC in various subgroups with different D-dimer level cutoffs. Patients who received therapeutic AC showed a higher incidence of major bleeding (13.8% vs 3.9%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, patients with a HAS-BLED score of ≥2 had a higher risk of mortality (HR 1.482, 95% CI 1.110–1.980, p = 0.008), while those with a score of ≥3 had a higher risk of major bleeding (Odds ratio: 1.883, CI: 1.114–3.729, p = 0.016).

Conclusion

Empiric use of therapeutic AC conferred survival benefit to patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation, but did not show benefit in non-critically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19. Careful bleeding risk estimation should be pursued before considering escalation of AC intensity.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40364-021-00283-y.

Using the ORACLE Risk Score to Assess Hemorrhagic Risk in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome and Atrial Fibrillation

Aim. To study the prognostic value of the ORACLE risk score for assessing the risk of bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation using the combined database of the ORACLE II and RECORD 3 registers.

Material and methods. This analysis included patients with ACS from 2 observational studies: ORACLE II (ObseRvation after Acute Coronary syndrome for deveLopment of trEatment options; n=1803) and the RECORD-3 register (n=2370). In total, the database included 4173 patients, of which 246 (6.08%) received oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation. The mean age of patients was 64.7±11.9 years, 2493 (59.7%) were men. Hemorrhagic risk was assessed using the ORACLE, CRUSADE, ORBIT, and HAS-BLED risk score.

Results. Patients receiving anticoagulant therapy were older (69.9±11.3 years and 64.0±12.2 years, p<0.001). Among these patients there was a larger proportion of women, and a smaller proportion of patients with ACS with ST elevation, they were more likely to have chronic heart failure, chronic kidney disease, history of stroke. Among patients receiving anticoagulants and included in the ORACLE study, the frequency of percutaneous coronary intervention was higher than in patients included in the RECORD study. In the joint database, 71 significant bleeding was recorded during the hospitalization period – 64 (1.7%) in patients without anticoagulants and 7 (2.8%) among patients taking anticoagulants (p=0.06). Over 6 months, among patients who did not receive anticoagulants, there were 97 cases of bleeding (in 2.6% of patients), in the group of patients receiving anticoagulants – 12 cases of bleeding (4.9%) – the differences in frequency were significant (p=0.029). The ORACLE risk score had the greatest prognostic value (area under the ROC curve 0.874±0.0416, sensitivity 82.7%, specificity 79.1%). The predictive value of the HAS-BLED risk score was slightly lower (area under the ROC curve 0.710±0.0360, sensitivity 63.2%, specificity 56.8%). The value of the CRUSADE risk score (area under the ROC curve 0.612±0.0269, sensitivity 53.7%, specificity 59.5%) and ORBIT risk score (area under the ROC curve 0.606±0.0457, sensitivity 62.5%, specificity 58.3%) were lower (p<0.001 for all scales).

Conclusion. The use of the ORACLE bleeding risk score can be recommended for patients with ACS requiring anticoagulant therapy.

Complex chronic patients as an emergent group with high risk of intracerebral haemorrhage: an observational cohort study

Background

Demographic aging is a generalised event and the proportion of older adults is increasing rapidly worldwide with chronic pathologies, disability, and complexity of health needs. The intracerebral haemorrhage (ICH) has devastating consequences in high risk people. This study aims to quantify the incidence of ICH in complex chronic patients (CCP).

Methods

This is a multicentre, retrospective and community-based cohort study of 3594 CCPs followed up from 01/01/2013 to 31/12/2017 in primary care without a history of previous ICH episode. The cases were identified from clinical records encoded with ICD-10 (10th version of the International Classification of Diseases) in the e-SAP database of the Catalan Health Institute. The main variable was the ICH episode during the study period. Demographic, clinical, functional, cognitive and pharmacological variables were included. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were carried out to identify the variables associated with suffering an ICH. The independent risk factors were obtained from logistic regression models, ruling out the variables included in the HAS-BLED score, to avoid duplication effects. Results are presented as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The analysis with the resulting model was also stratified by sex.

Results

161 (4.4%) participants suffered an ICH episode. Mean age 87 ± 9 years; 55.9% women. The ICH incidence density was 151/10000 person-years [95%CI 127–174], without differences by sex. Related to subjects without ICH, presented a higher prevalence of arterial hypertension (83.2% vs. 74.9%; p = 0.02), hypercholesterolemia (55.3% vs. 47.4%, p = 0.05), cardiovascular disease (36.6% vs. 28.9%; p = 0.03), and use of antiplatelet drugs (64.0% vs. 52.9%; p = 0.006). 93.2% had a HAS-BLED score ≥ 3. The independent risk factors for ICH were identified: HAS-BLED ≥3 [OR 3.54; 95%CI 1.88–6.68], hypercholesterolemia [OR 1.62; 95%CI 1.11–2.35], and cardiovascular disease [OR 1.48 IC95% 1.05–2.09]. The HAS_BLED ≥3 score showed a high sensitivity [0.93 CI95% 0.89–0.97] and negative predictive value [0.98 (CI95% 0.83–1.12)].

Conclusions

In the CCP subgroup the incidence density of ICH was 5–60 times higher than that observed in elder and general population. The use of bleeding risk score as the HAS-BLED scale could improve the preventive approach of those with higher risk of ICH.

Trial registration

This study was retrospectively registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03247049) on August 11/2017.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02004-4.