Observational follow-up reveals dynamic reassessment of risk scores improves stroke and bleeding prediction in atrial fibrillation, highlighting the need for regular clinical re-evaluation.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Stroke and bleeding risks in atrial fibrillation (AF) are often assessed at baseline to predict outcomes years later. We investigated whether dynamic changes in CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores over time modify risk prediction. METHODS: We included patients with AF who were stable while taking vitamin K antagonists. During a 6-year follow-up, all ischemic strokes/transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) and major bleeding events were recorded. CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED were recalculated every 2-years and tested for clinical outcomes at 2-year periods. RESULTS: We included 1361 patients (mean CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED 4.0±1.7 and 2.9±1.2). During the follow-up, 156 (11.5%) patients had an ischemic stroke/TIA and 269 (19.8%) had a major bleeding event. Compared with the baseline CHA2DS2-VASc, the CHA2DS2-VASc recalculated at 2 years had higher predictive ability for ischemic stroke/TIA during the period from 2 to 4 years. Integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) and net reclassification improvement (NRI) showed improvements in sensitivity and better reclassification. The CHA2DS2-VASc recalculated at 4 years had better predictive performance than the baseline CHA2DS2-VASc during the period from 4 to 6 years, with an improvement in IDI and an enhancement of the reclassification. The recalculated HAS-BLED at 2-years had higher predictive ability than the baseline score for major bleeding during the period from 2 to 4 years, with significant improvements in sensitivity and reclassification. A slight enhancement in sensitivity was observed with the HAS-BLED score recalculated at 4 years compared with the baseline score. CONCLUSIONS: In AF patients, stroke and bleeding risks are dynamic and change over time. The CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores should be regularly reassessed, particularly for accurate stroke risk prediction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Serna et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: