Meta-analysis on performance of ABC and GARFIELD-AF compared to CHADS-VASc and HAS-BLED in anticoagulated atrial fibrillation patients.

BACKGROUND

When high thromboembolic and bleeding risks coexist, the former tends to influence physicians' decision making for anti-coagulation therapy. However, the ideal is to weigh the risk of major bleeding and stroke together to ensure effective anti-coagulation treatment, which is a limitation of traditional guideline recommended CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED. This meta-analysis assesses the performance of the two new scores - ABC and GARFIELD-AF compared to CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED for major bleeding and stroke outcomes in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) on anticoagulation therapy.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Cochrane central were searched from 2010 to February 2023 that compared GARFIELD-AF and/or ABC with CHA2DS2-VASc and/or HAS-BLED scores using C-statistics to assess their discriminative ability.

RESULTS

12 studies were included in this meta-analysis. When assessing stroke risk prediction, GARFIELD-AF stroke (C-Statistic: 0.71; 95 % CI: 0.70-0.72; I = 0 %, p < 0.05) was found to be significantly better than ABC-stroke (C-Statistic: 0.67; 95 % CI: 0.65-0.68; I = 0 %, p < 0.05), and CHA2DS2-VASc (C-Statistic: 0.64; 95 % CI: 0.60-0.67; I = 92 %, p < 0.05). Additionally, when assessing bleeding risk prediction, ABC-bleeding (C-Statistic: 0.66; 95 % CI: 0.61-0.70; I = 84 %, p < 0.05), GARFIELD-AF (C-Statistic: 0.64; 95 % CI: 0.60-0.68; I = 95 %, p < 0.05), and HAS-BLED (C-Statistic: 0.64; 95 % CI: 0.62-0.66; I = 85 %, p < 0.05) all showed equivalent performances.

CONCLUSION

The GARFIELD-AF stroke score showed superior performance to the well-established CHA2DS2-VASc score as well as the ABC-stroke score. Therefore, new guidelines should favor GARFIELD-AF use in clinical practice.