Predictive Ability of Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk Criteria in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Undergoing Primary Coronary Intervention.

BACKGROUND

This observational study validated Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) criteria and the Predicting Bleeding Complication in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (PRECISE-DAPT) score in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Risk clusters of 939 STEMI patients with traceable 1-year outcomes were assessed according to ARC-HBR criteria and PRECISE-DAPT score. The diagnostic accuracy and first-year probability of bleeding events, defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5, according to risk cluster were assessed. Of all patients, 42.9% and 46.8% were classified as HBR (ARC-HBR criteria) and at high risk (PRECISE-DAPT score), respectively, and bleeding events were observed in 13.7% and 16.2% of these patients. The C-statistic for ARC-HBR criteria and the PRECISEDAPT score was 0.60 and 0.69, respectively (P<0.01). Patients with mechanical hemodynamic support devices had high bleeding rates, even in the non-HBR group (22.6%), and excluding these patients improved the C-statistics, making them equivalent between the 2 models (0.72 vs. 0.74; P=0.53). Bleeding event probabilities (95% confidence intervals) were equivalent in high-risk patients in the 2 models (0.12 [0.09-0.16] vs. 0.12 [0.08-0.16]).

CONCLUSIONS

After exclusion of patients with mechanical devices, who had high bleeding event rates regardless of risk cluster, both ARC-HBR criteria and the PRECISE-DAPT score had high predictive ability.