Dataset Information

Bleeding risk differences after TAVR according to the ARC-HBR criteria: insights from SCOPE 2.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Academic Research Consortium - High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) initiative defined conditions associated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related bleeding.

Aims

We sought to further explore these HBR conditions in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Methods

Patients from the SCOPE 2 trial were stratified by their bleeding risk status based on the ARC-HBR definitions. Baseline and procedural characteristics, as well as key clinical outcomes including Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3-5 bleeding, were compared in ARC-HBR positive (HBR+) and ARC-HBR negative (HBR-) patients.

Results

Of 787 patients randomised in SCOPE 2 and included in this study, 633 were HBR+ (80.4%). Compared with HBR- patients, those HBR+ were older and more frequently presented with diabetes, a history of coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, prior cerebrovascular accident, and a Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of 30-day mortality (STS-PROM) (4.9±2.9% vs 3.3%±2.1%; p<0.0001). In addition, HBR+ patients were more frequently on oral anticoagulation therapy. At 1 year, HBR+ patients had higher rates of all-cause death (12.4% vs 4.3%, respectively, risk difference 8.09%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.76-12.41; p=0.0002); the rates of BARC 3-5 type bleeding were relatively high but not statistically different compared with HBR- patients (7.7% vs 6.1%, risk difference 1.67%; 95% CI: -2.72 to 6.06; p=0.46). Subgroup analyses for bleeding events showed no significant interaction in terms of STS-PROM score, age, or medications.

Conclusions

The ARC-HBR criteria failed to isolate a subgroup of patients at higher bleeding risk in TAVR patients from a randomised trial. These findings have potential implications, especially for the selection of post-TAVR antithrombotic regimens based on individual bleeding-risk profiles. Specific HBR criteria should be defined for TAVR patients.

SUBMITTER: Garot P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10241269 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Bleeding risk differences after TAVR according to the ARC-HBR criteria: insights from SCOPE 2.

Garot Philippe P Neylon Antoinette A Morice Marie-Claude MC Tamburino Corrado C Bleiziffer Sabine S Thiele Holger H Scholtz Smita S Schramm Rene R Cockburn James J Cunnington Michael M Wolf Alexander A Barbanti Marco M Tchetché Didier D Pagnotta Paolo P Gilard Martine M Bedogni Francesco F Van Belle Eric E Vasa-Nicotera Mariuca M Chieffo Alaide A Bogaerts Kris K Hengstenberg Christian C Capodanno Davide D

EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology 20220801 6

<h4>Background</h4>The Academic Research Consortium - High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) initiative defined conditions associated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related bleeding.<h4>Aims</h4>We sought to further explore these HBR conditions in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).<h4>Methods</h4>Patients from the SCOPE 2 trial were stratified by their bleeding risk status based on the ARC-HBR definitions. Baseline and procedural characteristics, as well as key cl ...[more]

PMID: 35450838

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Valve Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (VARC-HBR) has recently introduced a consensus document that outlines risk factors to identify high bleeding risk in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the prevalence and predictive value of the VARC-HBR definition in a contemporary, large-scale transcatheter aortic valve replacement population.MethodsMulticenter study including 10 449 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Based on consensus, 21 clinical and laboratory criteria were identified and classified as major or minor. Patients were stratified as at low, moderate, high, and very high bleeding risk according to the VARC-HBR definition. The primary end point was the rate of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding at 1 year, defined as the composite of periprocedural (within 30 days) or late (after 30 days) bleeding.ResultsPatients with at least 1 VARC-HBR criterion (n=9267, 88.7%) had a higher risk of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding, proportional to the severity of risk assessment (10.8%, 16.1%, and 24.6% for moderate, high, and very-high-risk groups, respectively). However, a comparable rate of bleeding events was observed in the low-risk and moderate-risk groups. The area under receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.58. Patients with VARC-HBR criteria also exhibited a gradual increase in 1-year all-cause mortality, with an up to 2-fold increased mortality risk for high and very-high-risk groups (hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.04-1.70] and 1.97 [95% CI, 1.53-2.53], respectively).ConclusionsThe VARC-HBR consensus offered a pragmatic approach to guide bleeding risk stratification in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The results of the present study would support the predictive validity of the new definition and promote its application in clinical practice to minimize bleeding risk and improve patient outcomes.

Project description:ImportancePatients who are candidates for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and are at high bleeding risk constitute a therapeutic challenge because they often also face an increased risk of thrombotic complications.ObjectivesTo develop and validate models to predict the risks of major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and myocardial infarction (MI) and/or stent thrombosis (ST) for individual patients at high bleeding risk and provide assistance in defining procedural strategy and antithrombotic regimens.Design, setting, and participantsThis prognostic study used individual patient data from 6 studies conducted from July 1, 2009, to September 5, 2017, for 6641 patients at more than 200 centers in Europe, the US, and Asia who underwent PCI and were identified as being at high bleeding risk using the Academic Research Consortium criteria. In 1 year of follow-up (excluding periprocedural events), individual patient risks of MI and/or ST and major bleeding were evaluated using 33 baseline variables. To validate these models, a subgroup of 1458 patients at high bleeding risk from the ONYX ONE trial were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed from February 1, 2019, to April 30, 2020.ExposuresAll patients underwent PCI with bare metal, drug-coated, or drug-eluting stent implants.Main outcomes and measuresForward, stepwise multivariable proportional hazards models were used to identify highly significant predictors of MI and/or ST and BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding.ResultsA total of 6641 patients (4384 men [66.0%]; median age, 77.9 years [interquartile range, 70.0-82.6 years]) were included in this study. Over 365 days, nonperiprocedural MI and/or ST occurred in 350 patients (5.3%), and BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 381 patients (5.7%). Eight independent baseline predictors of risk of MI and/or ST and 8 predictors for risk of BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding were identified. Four of these predictors were in both risk models. Both risk models showed moderate discrimination: C statistic = 0.69 for predicting MI and/or ST and 0.68 for predicting BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding. Applying these same models to the validation cohort gave a similar strength of discrimination (C statistic = 0.74 for both MI and/or ST and BARC types 3-5 bleeding). Patients with MI and/or ST had a mortality hazard ratio of 6.1 (95% CI, 4.8-7.7), and those with BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding had a mortality hazard ratio of 3.7 (95% CI, 2.9-4.8) compared with patients free of both events. Taking these data into account, the risk scores facilitate investigation of the individual patient trade-off between these 2 risks: 2931 patients (44.1%) at high bleeding risk in the 6 studies had a greater risk of MI and/or ST than of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding, 1555 patients (23.4%) had a greater risk of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding than of MI and/or ST, and 2155 (32.4%) had a comparable risk of both events.Conclusions and relevanceIn a large cohort of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing PCI, 2 prognostic models have been developed to identify individual patients' risk of major coronary thrombotic and bleeding events. In future clinical practice, using an application on a smartphone to evaluate the trade-off between these 2 quantifiable risks for each patient may help clinicians choose the most appropriate revascularization strategy and tailor the duration and intensity of antithrombotic regimens.

Project description:TAVR is a safe alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR); however, sex-related differences are still debated. This research aimed to examine gender differences in a real-world transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) cohort. All-comer aortic stenosis (AS) patients undergoing TAVR with a Medtronic valve across 19 Italian sites were prospectively included in the Italian Clinical Service Project (NCT01007474) between 2007 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 1-year mortality. We also investigated 3-year mortality, and ischemic and hemorrhagic endpoints, and we performed a propensity score matching to assemble patients with similar baseline characteristics. Out of 3821 patients, 2149 (56.2%) women were enrolled. Compared with men, women were older (83 ± 6 vs. 81 ± 6 years, p < 0.001), more likely to present severe renal impairment (GFR ≤ 30 mL/min, 26.3% vs. 16.3%, p < 0.001) but had less previous cardiovascular events (all p < 0.001), with a higher mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score (7.8% ± 7.1% vs. 7.2 ± 7.5, p < 0.001) and a greater mean aortic gradient (52.4 ± 15.3 vs. 47.3 ± 12.8 mmHg, p < 0.001). Transfemoral TAVR was performed more frequently in women (87.2% vs. 82.1%, p < 0.001), with a higher rate of major vascular complications and life-threatening bleeding (3.9% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.012 and 2.5% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.024). One-year mortality differed between female and male (11.5% vs. 15.0%, p = 0.002), and this difference persisted after adjustment for significant confounding variables (Adj.HR1yr 1.47, 95%IC 1.18-1.82, p < 0.001). Three-year mortality was also significantly lower in women compared with men (19.8% vs. 24.9%, p < 0.001) even after adjustment for age, STS score, eGFR, diabetes and severe COPD (Adj.HR3yr 1.42, 95%IC 1.21-1.68, p < 0.001). These results were confirmed in 689 pairs after propensity score matching. Despite higher rates of peri-procedural complications, women presented better survival than men. This better adaptive response to TAVR may be driven by sex-specific factors.

Dataset Information

Bleeding risk differences after TAVR according to the ARC-HBR criteria: insights from SCOPE 2.

Background

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Bleeding risk differences after TAVR according to the ARC-HBR criteria: insights from SCOPE 2.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets