Why the study?
In ACS patients, the ischemic benefit of antithrombotic therapy is counterbalanced by bleeding risk, and bleeding events carry prognostic implications comparable to recurrent ischemic events.
Standardizing bleeding definitions and optimizing bleeding-avoidance strategies are crucial for balancing ischemic and bleeding risks in ACS patients.
Standardized bleeding metrics needed in ACS trials; leaves open optimal avoidance strategies for risk balance.
INTRODUCTION: In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the ischemic benefit of antithrombotic treatment is counterbalanced by the risk of bleeding. The recognition that bleeding events have prognostic implications (i.e. mortality) similar to recurrent ischemic events led to the development of treatment regimens aimed at balancing both ischemic and bleeding risks. AREAS COVERED: This review aims at describing definitions, incidence, and prognosis related to bleeding events in ACS patients as well as bleeding-avoidance strategies for their prevention and management of bleeding complications. EXPERT OPINION: Management of ACS patients has witnessed remarkable progress after the shift in focusing on the trade-off between ischemia and bleeding. Efforts in standardizing bleeding definitions will allow for better defining the prognostic impact of different types of bleeding events and enable to identify the high-bleeding risk patient. Such efforts will allow to balance the trade-off between the thrombotic and bleeding risk of the individual patient translating into better downward diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making. Novel strategies aiming at maximizing the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens as well as the development of novel antithrombotic drugs and reversal agents and technological advances will allow for optimization of bleeding-avoidance strategies and management of bleeding complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Laudani et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: