O'Brien Emily C, Simon DaJuanicia N, Thomas Laine E, Hylek Elaine M, Gersh Bernard J, Ansell Jack E, Kowey Peter R, Mahaffey Kenneth W, Chang Paul, Fonarow Gregg C, Pencina Michael J, Piccini Jonathan P, Peterson Eric D
Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, NC 27705, USA
Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
Eur Heart J. 2015 Dec 7;36(46):3258-64. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv476. Epub 2015 Sep 29.
Therapeutic decisions in atrial fibrillation (AF) are often influenced by assessment of bleeding risk. However, existing bleeding risk scores have limitations.
We sought to develop and validate a novel bleeding risk score using routinely available clinical information to predict major bleeding in a large, community-based AF population.
We analysed data from Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF), a prospective registry that enrolled incident and prevalent AF patients at 176 US sites. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we identified factors independently associated with major bleeding among patients taking oral anticoagulation (OAC) over a median follow-up of 2 years (interquartile range = 1.6-2.5). We also created a numerical bedside risk score that included the five most predictive risk factors weighted according to their strength of association with major bleeding. The predictive performance of the full model, the simple five-item score, and two existing risk scores (hypertension, abnormal renal/liver function, stroke, bleeding history or predisposition, labile INR, elderly, drugs/alcohol concomitantly, HAS-BLED, and anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation, ATRIA) were then assessed in both the ORBIT-AF cohort and a separate clinical trial population, Rivaroxaban Once-daily oral direct factor Xa inhibition compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and embolism trial in atrial fibrillation (ROCKET-AF).
Among 7411 ORBIT-AF patients taking OAC, the rate of major bleeding was 4.0/100 person-years. The full continuous model (12 variables) and five-factor ORBIT risk score (older age [75+ years], reduced haemoglobin/haematocrit/history of anaemia, bleeding history, insufficient kidney function, and treatment with antiplatelet) both had good ability to identify those who bled vs. not (C-index 0.69 and 0.67, respectively). These scores both had similar discrimination, but markedly better calibration when compared with the HAS-BLED and ATRIA scores in an external validation population from the ROCKET-AF trial.
The five-element ORBIT bleeding risk score had better ability to predict major bleeding in AF patients when compared with HAS-BLED and ATRIA risk scores. The ORBIT risk score can provide a simple, easily remembered tool to support clinical decision making.
心房颤动(AF)的治疗决策常受出血风险评估的影响。然而,现有的出血风险评分存在局限性。
我们试图开发并验证一种新型出血风险评分,该评分利用常规可得的临床信息来预测大型社区AF人群中的大出血情况。
我们分析了房颤更好知情治疗结果登记处(ORBIT-AF)的数据,这是一项前瞻性登记研究,在美国176个地点纳入了新发和现患AF患者。使用Cox比例风险回归,我们在中位随访2年(四分位间距=1.6 - 2.5年)期间确定了口服抗凝药(OAC)治疗患者中与大出血独立相关的因素。我们还创建了一个数字床边风险评分,其中包括五个最具预测性的风险因素,并根据它们与大出血的关联强度进行加权。然后在ORBIT-AF队列和一个单独的临床试验人群——利伐沙班每日一次口服直接因子Xa抑制与维生素K拮抗剂预防房颤患者中风和栓塞试验(ROCKET-AF)中评估完整模型、简单的五项评分以及两个现有的风险评分(高血压、肾/肝功能异常、中风、出血史或易感性、不稳定的国际标准化比值、老年人、同时使用药物/酒精、HAS-BLED以及房颤中的抗凝和危险因素、ATRIA)的预测性能。
在7411例接受OAC治疗的ORBIT-AF患者中,大出血发生率为4.0/100人年。完整的连续模型(12个变量)和五因素ORBIT风险评分(年龄≥75岁、血红蛋白/血细胞比容降低/贫血史、出血史、肾功能不全以及抗血小板治疗)在识别出血患者与未出血患者方面都具有良好的能力(C指数分别为0.69和0.67)。这两个评分具有相似的辨别力,但在来自ROCKET-AF试验的外部验证人群中与HAS-BLED和ATRIA评分相比,校准明显更好。
与HAS-BLED和ATRIA风险评分相比,五因素ORBIT出血风险评分在预测AF患者大出血方面具有更好的能力。ORBIT风险评分可为临床决策提供一个简单、易于记忆的工具。