Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018 · 196 citations · 19 references
MedicineCardiologySurgeryClinical CardiologyHemostasisInterventional CardiologyAntithrombotic TherapyCardiac Risk AssessmentCardiovascular RiskCoronary Artery DiseaseThrombosisThrombosis PreventionAntithrombotic Therapy After Stent ImplantationClinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary InterventionClinical Risk ScoresHemorrhagic Risk AssessmentRisk Stratification ScoresThrombosis Risk StratificationThrombotic Risk AssessmentThrombotic Risk Stratification
Background Prediction of thrombotic and bleeding risk is important to optimize antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and Results We developed the prediction rules for thrombotic and bleeding events separately in Japanese patients. Derivation and validation cohorts consisted of 4778 patients from CREDO ‐Kyoto (Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto) registry cohort 2 and 4669 patients from RESET (Randomized Evaluation of Sirolimus‐Eluting Versus Everolimus‐Eluting Stent Trial) and NEXT (Nobori Biolimus‐Eluting Versus Xience/Promus Everolimus‐Eluting Stent Trial). Primary thrombotic and bleeding events were a composite of myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis or ischemic stroke, and GUSTO (Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries) moderate or severe bleeding. The prediction rule for thrombosis assigned 2 points for severe chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, peripheral vascular disease, and anemia and 1 point for age ≥75 years, heart failure, diabetes mellitus, and chronic total occlusion. The prediction rule for bleeding assigned 2 points for thrombocytopenia, severe chronic kidney disease, peripheral vascular disease, and heart failure and 1 point for prior myocardial infarction, malignancy, and atrial fibrillation. In derivation and validation cohorts, area under the curve was 0.68 and 0.64, respectively, for thrombosis and 0.66 and 0.66, respectively, for bleeding. In the validation cohort, a high thrombosis risk score (≥4, n=682) was associated with higher 3‐year incidence of thrombotic events than a score that was intermediate (2–3, n=1178) or low (0–1, n=2809) (7.6%, 3.7%, versus 2.4%, respectively; P <0.0001). A high bleeding risk score (≥3, n=666) was associated with higher incidence of bleeding than scores that were intermediate (1–2, n=1802) or low (0, n=2201) (8.8%, 4.1%, versus 2.3%, respectively; P <0.0001). Among 682 patients at high thrombotic risk, only 39 (5.7%) had low bleeding risk, whereas 401 (58.8%) had high bleeding risk with very high incidence of bleeding (11.6%). Conclusions CREDO ‐Kyoto thrombotic and bleeding risk scores demonstrated modest accuracy in stratifying thrombotic and bleeding risks; however, a large proportion of patients at high thrombotic risk also had high bleeding risk.
19
Basic principles of ROC analysis
Charles E. Metz · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · 1978 · 6.1K citations
Twelve or 30 Months of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Drug-Eluting Stents
Laura Mauri, Robert W. Yeh, Priscilla Driscoll-Shempp et al. · New England Journal of Medicine · 2014 · 1.9K citations · Full text
Discrimination and Calibration of Clinical Prediction Models
Ana Carolina Alba, Thomas Agoritsas, Michael Walsh et al. · JAMA · 2017 · 1.6K citations