Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc ; Rev. bras. cir. cardiovasc;38(1): 139-148, Jan.-Feb. 2023. tab, graf
Artículo en Inglés | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1423092

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT Introduction: A clear assessment of the bleeding risk score in patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI) is crucial because of its impact on prognosis. The Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA score is a validated risk score to predict bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation (AF), but its predictive value in predicting bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients receiving antithrombotic therapy is unknown. Our aim was to investigate the predictive performance of the ATRIA bleeding score in STEMI and NSTEMI patients in comparison to the CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines) and ACUITY-HORIZONS (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage strategY-Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction) bleeding scores. Methods: A total of 830 consecutive STEMI and NSTEMI patients who underwent PCI were evaluated retrospectively. The ATRIA, CRUSADE, and ACUITY-HORIZONS risk scores of the patients were calculated. Discrimination of the three risk models was evaluated using C-statistics. Results: Major bleeding occurred in 52 (6.3%) of 830 patients during hospitalization. Bleeding scores were significantly higher in the bleeding patients than in non-bleeding patients (all P<0.001). The discriminatory ability of the ATRIA, CRUSADE, and ACUITY-HORIZONS bleeding scores for bleeding events was similar (C-statistics 0.810, 0.832, and 0.909, respectively). The good predictive value of all three scores for predicting the risk of bleeding was observed in NSTEMI and STEMI patients as well (C-statistics: 0.820, 0.793, and 0.921 and 0.809, 0.854, and 0.905, respectively). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that the ATRIA bleeding score is a useful risk score for predicting major in-hospital bleeding in MI patients. This good predictive value was also present in STEMI and NSTEMI patient subgroups.

2.
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg ; 38(1): 139-148, 2023 02 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35675497

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: A clear assessment of the bleeding risk score in patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI) is crucial because of its impact on prognosis. The Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA score is a validated risk score to predict bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation (AF), but its predictive value in predicting bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients receiving antithrombotic therapy is unknown. Our aim was to investigate the predictive performance of the ATRIA bleeding score in STEMI and NSTEMI patients in comparison to the CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines) and ACUITY-HORIZONS (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage strategY-Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction) bleeding scores. METHODS: A total of 830 consecutive STEMI and NSTEMI patients who underwent PCI were evaluated retrospectively. The ATRIA, CRUSADE, and ACUITY-HORIZONS risk scores of the patients were calculated. Discrimination of the three risk models was evaluated using C-statistics. RESULTS: Major bleeding occurred in 52 (6.3%) of 830 patients during hospitalization. Bleeding scores were significantly higher in the bleeding patients than in non-bleeding patients (all P<0.001). The discriminatory ability of the ATRIA, CRUSADE, and ACUITY-HORIZONS bleeding scores for bleeding events was similar (C-statistics 0.810, 0.832, and 0.909, respectively). The good predictive value of all three scores for predicting the risk of bleeding was observed in NSTEMI and STEMI patients as well (C-statistics: 0.820, 0.793, and 0.921 and 0.809, 0.854, and 0.905, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the ATRIA bleeding score is a useful risk score for predicting major in-hospital bleeding in MI patients. This good predictive value was also present in STEMI and NSTEMI patient subgroups.


Asunto(s)
Hemorragia , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST , Humanos , Fibrilación Atrial/complicaciones , Hemorragia/epidemiología , Hemorragia/etiología , Hospitales , Infarto del Miocardio/complicaciones , Infarto del Miocardio sin Elevación del ST/complicaciones , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/complicaciones , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA