心房颤动患者颅内出血新预测因子在当代现实世界临床实践中的适用性

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Naoya Kataoka, Teruhiko Imamura
{"title":"心房颤动患者颅内出血新预测因子在当代现实世界临床实践中的适用性","authors":"Naoya Kataoka,&nbsp;Teruhiko Imamura","doi":"10.1002/clc.70078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), is a significant complication in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) undergoing treatment with oral anticoagulants (OACs). The authors proposed a novel risk score for predicting ICH in NVAF patients, incorporating variables such as age, sex, nonsmoking status, renal replacement therapy, and OAC use [<span>1</span>]. However, several critical concerns merit discussion.</p><p>The authors compared their proposed risk score with the established HAS-BLED score [<span>1</span>], a widely utilized tool for predicting not only ICH but also other major bleeding events classified as ≥ BARC 3b [<span>2</span>]. Unlike the novel score, the HAS-BLED score includes parameters such as hepatic dysfunction and the use of antiplatelet agents. Consequently, employing the HAS-BLED score as a comparator may not fully capture the nuances of the novel score's predictive capability for ICH specifically.</p><p>Patients with NVAF are susceptible to a range of complications, including thromboembolic events and heart failure. A noteworthy concern is the potential applicability of the novel risk score in predicting these broader complications. Furthermore, in the authors' study, only 6.7% of the cohort were treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) [<span>1</span>], which currently represent the predominant class of anticoagulants in clinical practice [<span>3</span>]. This limited representation raises questions about the generalizability of the score to patients receiving DOACs, warranting further validation.</p><p>Additionally, prior literature advises against the use of OACs in patients undergoing renal replacement therapy due to heightened bleeding risks [<span>4</span>]. Excluding such patients from the construction of risk scores may be more appropriate to ensure clinical relevance and applicability.</p><p>The authors have nothing to report.</p><p>The authors have nothing to report.</p><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p>","PeriodicalId":10201,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Cardiology","volume":"48 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11725980/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Applicability of Novel Predictor of Intracranial Hemorrhage in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation in the Contemporary Real-World Clinical Practice\",\"authors\":\"Naoya Kataoka,&nbsp;Teruhiko Imamura\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/clc.70078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), is a significant complication in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) undergoing treatment with oral anticoagulants (OACs). The authors proposed a novel risk score for predicting ICH in NVAF patients, incorporating variables such as age, sex, nonsmoking status, renal replacement therapy, and OAC use [<span>1</span>]. However, several critical concerns merit discussion.</p><p>The authors compared their proposed risk score with the established HAS-BLED score [<span>1</span>], a widely utilized tool for predicting not only ICH but also other major bleeding events classified as ≥ BARC 3b [<span>2</span>]. Unlike the novel score, the HAS-BLED score includes parameters such as hepatic dysfunction and the use of antiplatelet agents. Consequently, employing the HAS-BLED score as a comparator may not fully capture the nuances of the novel score's predictive capability for ICH specifically.</p><p>Patients with NVAF are susceptible to a range of complications, including thromboembolic events and heart failure. A noteworthy concern is the potential applicability of the novel risk score in predicting these broader complications. Furthermore, in the authors' study, only 6.7% of the cohort were treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) [<span>1</span>], which currently represent the predominant class of anticoagulants in clinical practice [<span>3</span>]. This limited representation raises questions about the generalizability of the score to patients receiving DOACs, warranting further validation.</p><p>Additionally, prior literature advises against the use of OACs in patients undergoing renal replacement therapy due to heightened bleeding risks [<span>4</span>]. Excluding such patients from the construction of risk scores may be more appropriate to ensure clinical relevance and applicability.</p><p>The authors have nothing to report.</p><p>The authors have nothing to report.</p><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Cardiology\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11725980/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/clc.70078\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/clc.70078","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Applicability of Novel Predictor of Intracranial Hemorrhage in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation in the Contemporary Real-World Clinical Practice

Major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), is a significant complication in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) undergoing treatment with oral anticoagulants (OACs). The authors proposed a novel risk score for predicting ICH in NVAF patients, incorporating variables such as age, sex, nonsmoking status, renal replacement therapy, and OAC use [1]. However, several critical concerns merit discussion.

The authors compared their proposed risk score with the established HAS-BLED score [1], a widely utilized tool for predicting not only ICH but also other major bleeding events classified as ≥ BARC 3b [2]. Unlike the novel score, the HAS-BLED score includes parameters such as hepatic dysfunction and the use of antiplatelet agents. Consequently, employing the HAS-BLED score as a comparator may not fully capture the nuances of the novel score's predictive capability for ICH specifically.

Patients with NVAF are susceptible to a range of complications, including thromboembolic events and heart failure. A noteworthy concern is the potential applicability of the novel risk score in predicting these broader complications. Furthermore, in the authors' study, only 6.7% of the cohort were treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) [1], which currently represent the predominant class of anticoagulants in clinical practice [3]. This limited representation raises questions about the generalizability of the score to patients receiving DOACs, warranting further validation.

Additionally, prior literature advises against the use of OACs in patients undergoing renal replacement therapy due to heightened bleeding risks [4]. Excluding such patients from the construction of risk scores may be more appropriate to ensure clinical relevance and applicability.

The authors have nothing to report.

The authors have nothing to report.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Cardiology
Clinical Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
189
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Cardiology provides a fully Gold Open Access forum for the publication of original clinical research, as well as brief reviews of diagnostic and therapeutic issues in cardiovascular medicine and cardiovascular surgery. The journal includes Clinical Investigations, Reviews, free standing editorials and commentaries, and bonus online-only content. The journal also publishes supplements, Expert Panel Discussions, sponsored clinical Reviews, Trial Designs, and Quality and Outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信