A high PRECISE-DAPT score (≥25) predicted increased major bleeding risk (HR 2.2; 95% CI 2.0-2.5; P<0.001), but its discriminative ability was poor in patients with preexisting bleeding risk factors.
Observational (n=66,295)
Yes
Does the PRECISE-DAPT score accurately predict major bleeding in patients undergoing PCI for MI on DAPT?
The PRECISE-DAPT score performs moderately in the general MI population but poorly in patients with preexisting bleeding risk factors, limiting its clinical usefulness in these subgroups.
Effect estimate: HR 2.2 (95% CI 2.0-2.5)
Absolute Event Rate: 3.9% vs 1.8%
p-value: p=<0.001
Background The Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (PRECISE‐DAPT) score has been shown to predict out‐of‐hospital major bleeding after myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, large validation studies have been scarce and the discriminative ability for patients with a preexisting bleeding risk factor (elderly, underweight, women, anemia, kidney dysfunction, or cancer) in a real‐world setting is unknown. Methods and Results Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction between 2008 and 2017 were included from the SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web System for Enhancement of Evidence‐Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies) registry (n=66 295). The predictive value of the PRECISE‐DAPT score for rehospitalization with major bleeding during dual antiplatelet therapy was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic analyses. A high PRECISE‐DAPT score (≥25; n=13 894) was associated with increased risk of major bleeding (3.9% versus 1.8%; hazard ratio HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 2.0–2.5; P <0.001) compared with a non‐high score (<25; n=52 401). The score demonstrated a c‐statistic of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.63–0.66). The discriminative ability of the score to further stratify bleeding risk in patients with preexisting bleeding risk factors was poor, especially in patients who are elderly (c‐statistic=0.57; 95% CI, 0.55–0.60) or underweight (c‐statistic=0.56; 95% CI, 0.51–0.61), for whom a non‐high PRECISE‐DAPT score was associated with similar bleeding risk as a high PRECISE‐DAPT score in the general myocardial infarction population. Conclusions In this nationwide population‐based study, the PRECISE‐DAPT score performed moderately in the general myocardial infarction population and poorly in patients with preexisting bleeding risk factors, where its usefulness seems limited.
Wester et al. (Wed,) conducted a observational in Myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and dual antiplatelet therapy (n=66,295). High PRECISE-DAPT score (≥25) vs. Non-high PRECISE-DAPT score (<25) was evaluated on Rehospitalization with major bleeding during dual antiplatelet therapy (HR 2.2, 95% CI 2.0-2.5, p=<0.001). A high PRECISE-DAPT score (≥25) predicted increased major bleeding risk (HR 2.2; 95% CI 2.0-2.5; P<0.001), but its discriminative ability was poor in patients with preexisting bleeding risk factors.