Baseline Risk of Major Bleeding in Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction The CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHA guidelines) Bleeding Score
ABSTRACT Treatments for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) reduce ischemic events but increase bleeding. Baseline prediction of bleeding risk can complement ischemic risk prediction for optimization of NSTEMI care; however, existing models are not well suited for this purpose.
We developed (n=71 277) and validated (n=17 857) a model that identifies 8 independent baseline predictors of in-hospital major bleeding among community-treated NSTEMI patients enrolled in the Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHA guidelines (CRUSADE) Quality Improvement Initiative. Model performance was tested by c statistics in the derivation and validation cohorts and according to postadmission treatment (ie, invasive and antithrombotic therapy). The CRUSADE bleeding score (range 1 to 100 points) was created by assignment of weighted integers that corresponded to the coefficient of each variable. The rate of major bleeding increased by bleeding risk score quintiles: 3.1% for those at very low risk (score < or = 20); 5.5% for those at low risk (score 21-30); 8.6% for those at moderate risk (score 31-40); 11.9% for those at high risk (score 41-50); and 19.5% for those at very high risk (score >50; P(trend) <0.001). The c statistics for the major bleeding model (derivation=0.72 and validation=0.71) and risk score (derivation=0.71 and validation=0.70) were similar. The c statistics for the model among treatment subgroups were as follows: > or = 2 antithrombotics=0.72; <2 antithrombotics=0.73; invasive approach=0.73; conservative approach=0.68.
The CRUSADE bleeding score quantifies risk for in-hospital major bleeding across all postadmission treatments, which enhances baseline risk assessment for NSTEMI care.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), which include ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and unstable angina, present a considerable burden to the health care system. Furthermore, many patients with a first ACS event will develop another event within 1 year. To prevent this, higher-risk patients with ACS are revascularized when possible after presentation and then prescribed ongoing treatments to prevent recurrent vascular events. These include agents that prevent platelet aggregation and subsequent coronary thrombosis. However, some patients will develop a recurrent event despite treatment with these drugs, prompting a search for additional strategies to augment the effectiveness of current therapies. One such approach is add-on therapy with oral anticoagulant drugs. These agents may act synergistically with antiplatelet agents in preventing thrombosis. In conclusion, new oral anticoagulants might represent an attractive therapeutic strategy if they do not result in unacceptable bleeding.The American journal of cardiology 07/2012; 110(8):1200-6. DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.06.005 · 3.43 Impact Factor
Article: 2012 ACCF/AHA Focused Update of the Guideline for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2007 Guideline and Replacing the 2011 Focused Update): A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice GuidelinesCirculation 07/2012; 126(7):875-910. DOI:10.1161/CIR.0b013e318256f1e0 · 14.95 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Cardiovascular disease, and in particular ischemic heart disease (IHD), is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in the very elderly (> 80 years) worldwide. These patients represent a rapidly growing cohort presenting for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), now constituting more than one in five patients treated with PCI in real-world practice. Furthermore, they often have greater ischemic burden than their younger counterparts, suggesting that they have greater scope of benefit from coronary revascularization therapy. Despite this, the very elderly are frequently under-represented in clinical revascularization trials and historically there has been a degree of physician reluctance in referring them for PCI procedures, with perceptions of disappointing outcomes, low success and high complication rates. Several issues have contributed to this, including the tendency for older patients with IHD to present late, with atypical symptoms or non-diagnostic ECGs, and reservations regarding their procedural risk-to-benefit ratio, due to shorter life expectancy, presence of comorbidities and increased bleeding risk from antiplatelet and anticoagulation medications. However, advances in PCI technology and techniques over the past decade have led to better outcomes and lower risk of complications and the existing body of evidence now indicates that the very elderly actually derive more relative benefit from PCI than younger populations. Importantly, this applies to all PCI settings: elective, urgent and emergency. This review discusses the role of PCI in the very elderly presenting with chronic stable IHD, non ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome, and ST-elevation myocardial infarction. It also addresses the clinical challenges met when considering PCI in this cohort and the ongoing need for research and development to further improve outcomes in these challenging patients.Journal of Geriatric Cardiology 03/2015; 12(2):174-84. DOI:10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2015.02.012 · 1.06 Impact Factor