Comparison of Discriminative Ability of Bleeding Risk Criteria and Scores for Predicting Short- and Mid-Term Major Bleeding Events in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Abstract

Background: This study aimed to compare the discriminative ability of the Japanese Version of High Bleeding Risk (J-HBR), Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR), and Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (PRECISE-DAPT) scores for predicting major bleeding events. Methods and Results: Between January 2017 and December 2020, 646 consecutive patients who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled. We scored the ARC-HBR and J-HBR criteria by assigning 1 point to each major criterion and 0.5 point to each minor criterion. The primary outcome was major bleeding events, defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding events. According to the J-HBR, ARC-HBR, and PRECISE-DAPT scores, 428 (66.3%), 319 (49.4%), and 282 (43.7%) patients respectively had a high bleeding risk. During the follow-up period (median, 974 days), 44 patients experienced major bleeding events. The area under the curve (AUC) using the time-dependent receiver operating characteristic curve for major bleeding events was 0.84, 0.82, and 0.83 within 30 days and 0.86, 0.83, and 0.80 within 2 years for the J-HBR, ARC-HBR, and PRECISE-DAPT scores, respectively. The AUC values did not differ significantly among the 3 bleeding risk scores. Conclusions: The J-HBR score had a discriminative ability similar to the ARC-HBR and PRECISE-DAPT scores for predicting short- and mid-term major bleeding events.