CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

科学研究

Abstract

Recommended Article

MITRA-FR vs. COAPT: Lessons from two trials with diametrically opposed results Ablation Versus Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure Results From the CABANA Trial Treatment Effects of Pulmonary Artery Denervation for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Stratified by REVEAL Risk Score: Results from PADN-CFDA Trial The Art of SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement in Valve-in-Ring and Valve-in-Mitral-Annular-Calcification Procedures The management of secondary mitral regurgitation in patients with heart failure: a joint position statement from the Heart Failure Association (HFA), European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Patients in Atrial Fibrillation Suboptimal for Warfarin Therapy: 5-year Results of the PLAATO (Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Transcatheter Occlusion) Study 2020 ACC Expert Consensus Decision Pathway on Management of Bleeding in Patients on Oral Anticoagulants: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee Prospective Evaluation of Transseptal TMVR for Failed Surgical Bioprostheses: MITRAL Trial Valve-in-Valve Arm 1-Year Outcomes

Original Research

JOURNAL:Circulation. Article Link

EUROPCR 2019 - ARC Defined High Bleeding Risk in PCI Patients

CBSMD

Pre-reading

Currently available bleeding risk scores are listed in Table 2. PRECISE-DAPT with Class IIb, Evidence A was recommended by ESC in 2017.

These risk scores were developed based on randomized trials with significant heterogeneity with respect to the patient population, such differences highlight the need for a standardized definition of HBR:

1. The differences in eligibility criteria (all-comer, patients at increased bleeding risk) and enrolled patient populations in completed trials are reflected in the differences in bleeding event rates, varies from 3.5-7.3%。

2. Patients unsuitable for long-term DAPT continue to be systematically excluded.

3. Clinical trials of DAPT strategies after stenting have also excluded patients at HBR, with reported major bleeding rates at 1 year varying between 0.3% and 2.8% (Table 1).

4. Subjects at HBR are still underrepresented in contemporary studies.




To optimize the identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk under going PCI, "Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Consensus Document From the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk" proposed the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients under going PCI. This white paper covers 20 criteria (14 major criteria and 6 minor criteria) which can assist clinicians identify patients with 1 major criterion or 2 minor criteria as high bleeding risk rapidly and make clinical decisions accordingly.