ARC-HBR criteria identified 39% AMI patients as high bleeding risk, who had 2.7-3.0-fold higher MACE and 2.3-2.7-fold higher major bleeding risks over ~5 years.
Does high bleeding risk (HBR) status according to ARC-HBR criteria predict major bleeding and ischemic events in an all-comer AMI population?
The ARC-HBR criteria effectively identify AMI patients at significantly increased risk for both major bleeding and ischemic events, regardless of whether they are managed medically or invasively.
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 0%
Abstract Background A significant proportion of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients have characteristics of high-bleeding -risk (HBR). Their influence on ischaemic and bleeding-events in AMI all-comers is not well described. Methods AMI Patients in England and Wales (E admission with reinfarction and cardiovascular death) and major-bleeding events (death or readmission with bleeding), secondary outcomes were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, up-to five-years, with Cox-regression models, adjusted for baseline demographics. Secondary analyses evaluated medically and invasively-managed patients. Results 563,251 AMI patients from E0.001). MACE was more likely in medically-managed (E0.001), as were major-bleeding events; medical (E0.001); invasive groups (E0.001), Sweden: 1.411.29-1.54, P=0.024). Conclusions In an all-comer AMI population, 1 in 3 meet HBR criteria. HBR patients had significantly higher rates of MACE and major bleeding, persisting whether managed invasively or medically. We show that the ARC-HBR criteria are associated with increased bleeding and MACE risk in all-comer AMI patients.
Weight et al. (Thu,) reported a other. ARC-HBR criteria identified 39% AMI patients as high bleeding risk, who had 2.7-3.0-fold higher MACE and 2.3-2.7-fold higher major bleeding risks over ~5 years.