Direct comparison of predictive performance of PRECISE-DAPT versus PARIS versus CREDO-Kyoto: a subanalysis of the ReCre8 trial.
Bleeding
Coronary artery disease
Percutaneous coronary intervention
Risk stratification
Thrombosis
Journal
Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation
ISSN: 1568-5888
Titre abrégé: Neth Heart J
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101095458
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2021
Apr 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
22
9
2020
medline:
22
9
2020
entrez:
21
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Multiple scores have been proposed to guide risk stratification after percutaneous coronary intervention. This study assessed the performance of the PRECISE-DAPT, PARIS and CREDO-Kyoto risk scores to predict post-discharge ischaemic or bleeding events. A total of 1491 patients treated with latest-generation drug-eluting stent implantation were evaluated. Risk scores for post-discharge ischaemic or bleeding events were calculated and directly compared. Prognostic performance of both risk scores was assessed with calibration, Harrell's c‑statistics net reclassification index and decision curve analyses. Post-discharge ischaemic events occurred in 56 patients (3.8%) and post-discharge bleeding events in 34 patients (2.3%) within the first year after the invasive procedure. C‑statistics for the PARIS ischaemic risk score was marginal (0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.68), whereas the CREDO-Kyoto ischaemic risk score was moderate (0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.75). With regard to post-discharge bleeding events, CREDO-Kyoto displayed moderate discrimination (c-statistic 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.77), whereas PRECISE-DAPT (0.59, 95% CI 0.48-0.69) and PARIS (0.55, 95% CI 0.44-0.65) had a marginal discriminative capacity. Net reclassification index and decision curve analysis favoured CREDO-Kyoto-derived bleeding risk assessment. In this contemporary all-comer population, PARIS and PRECISE-DAPT risk scores were not resilient to independent testing for post-discharge bleeding events. CREDO-Kyoto-derived risk stratification was associated with a moderate predictive capability for post-discharge ischaemic or bleeding events. Future studies are warranted to improve risk stratification with more focus on robustness and rigorous testing.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Multiple scores have been proposed to guide risk stratification after percutaneous coronary intervention. This study assessed the performance of the PRECISE-DAPT, PARIS and CREDO-Kyoto risk scores to predict post-discharge ischaemic or bleeding events.
METHODS
METHODS
A total of 1491 patients treated with latest-generation drug-eluting stent implantation were evaluated. Risk scores for post-discharge ischaemic or bleeding events were calculated and directly compared. Prognostic performance of both risk scores was assessed with calibration, Harrell's c‑statistics net reclassification index and decision curve analyses.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Post-discharge ischaemic events occurred in 56 patients (3.8%) and post-discharge bleeding events in 34 patients (2.3%) within the first year after the invasive procedure. C‑statistics for the PARIS ischaemic risk score was marginal (0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.68), whereas the CREDO-Kyoto ischaemic risk score was moderate (0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.75). With regard to post-discharge bleeding events, CREDO-Kyoto displayed moderate discrimination (c-statistic 0.67, 95% CI 0.56-0.77), whereas PRECISE-DAPT (0.59, 95% CI 0.48-0.69) and PARIS (0.55, 95% CI 0.44-0.65) had a marginal discriminative capacity. Net reclassification index and decision curve analysis favoured CREDO-Kyoto-derived bleeding risk assessment.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
In this contemporary all-comer population, PARIS and PRECISE-DAPT risk scores were not resilient to independent testing for post-discharge bleeding events. CREDO-Kyoto-derived risk stratification was associated with a moderate predictive capability for post-discharge ischaemic or bleeding events. Future studies are warranted to improve risk stratification with more focus on robustness and rigorous testing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32955703
doi: 10.1007/s12471-020-01486-y
pii: 10.1007/s12471-020-01486-y
pmc: PMC7991032
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
201-214Références
N Engl J Med. 2001 Aug 16;345(7):494-502
pubmed: 11519503
Lancet. 2018 May 12;391(10133):1867-1868
pubmed: 29735390
J Cardiol. 2019 Jun;73(6):479-487
pubmed: 30598387
N Engl J Med. 2009 Sep 10;361(11):1045-57
pubmed: 19717846
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Apr 25;69(16):2011-2022
pubmed: 28427576
Arch Intern Med. 2002 Jun 24;162(12):1401-8
pubmed: 12076240
Chest. 2010 Nov;138(5):1093-100
pubmed: 20299623
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 May 17;67(19):2224-2234
pubmed: 27079334
EuroIntervention. 2018 Mar 20;13(16):1914-1922
pubmed: 29131804
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Jan 6;162(1):55-63
pubmed: 25560714
J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 May 22;7(11):
pubmed: 29789335
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Feb 26;73(7):741-754
pubmed: 30784667
Circulation. 2011 Jun 14;123(23):2736-47
pubmed: 21670242
Circulation. 2010 Apr 20;121(15):1768-77
pubmed: 20404268
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012 Apr;41(4):734-44; discussion 744-5
pubmed: 22378855
Circulation. 2004 Oct 19;110(16):2287-92
pubmed: 15477396
Neth Heart J. 2018 May;26(5):242-251
pubmed: 29541996
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Oct 25;68(17):1851-1864
pubmed: 27595509
Lancet. 2017 Mar 11;389(10073):1025-1034
pubmed: 28290994
Lancet. 2002 May 11;359(9318):1686-9
pubmed: 12020548
Circulation. 2007 May 1;115(17):2344-51
pubmed: 17470709
N Engl J Med. 2007 Nov 15;357(20):2001-15
pubmed: 17982182
Circulation. 2019 Jan 2;139(1):67-77
pubmed: 30586704
Nephron. 1976;16(1):31-41
pubmed: 1244564
N Engl J Med. 2011 Jan 20;364(3):226-35
pubmed: 21247313
Biometrics. 1988 Sep;44(3):837-45
pubmed: 3203132
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019 Jul 1;94(1):61-69
pubmed: 30604493
BMJ. 2016 Jan 25;352:i6
pubmed: 26810254
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Feb 15;91(3):410-416
pubmed: 28544782
Neth Heart J. 2019 Jun;27(6):321-329
pubmed: 30895527