静脉血栓栓塞抗凝患者大出血的预测:RIETE和VTE-BLEED评分的比较

Ramón Lecumberri, Laura Jiménez, Pedro Ruiz-Artacho, José Antonio Nieto, Nuria Ruiz-Giménez, Adriana Visonà, Andris Skride, Fares Moustafa, Javier Trujillo, Manuel Monreal
{"title":"静脉血栓栓塞抗凝患者大出血的预测:RIETE和VTE-BLEED评分的比较","authors":"Ramón Lecumberri,&nbsp;Laura Jiménez,&nbsp;Pedro Ruiz-Artacho,&nbsp;José Antonio Nieto,&nbsp;Nuria Ruiz-Giménez,&nbsp;Adriana Visonà,&nbsp;Andris Skride,&nbsp;Fares Moustafa,&nbsp;Javier Trujillo,&nbsp;Manuel Monreal","doi":"10.1055/s-0041-1729171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The performance of validated bleeding risk scores in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) could be different depending on the time after index event or the site of bleeding. In this study we compared the \"classic\" Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) score and the more recently developed VTE-BLEED score for the prediction of major bleeding in patients under anticoagulant therapy in different time intervals after VTE diagnosis. Out of 82,239 patients with acute VTE, the proportion of high-risk patients according to the RIETE and VTE-BLEED scores was 7.1 and 62.3%, respectively. The performance of both scores across the different study periods (first 30 days after VTE diagnosis, days 31-90, days 91-180, and days 181-360) was similar, with areas under the receiving operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC) ranging between 0.69 and 0.72. However, the positive predictive values were low, ranging between 0.6 and 3.9 (better for early major bleeding than for later periods). A sensitivity analysis limited to patients with unprovoked VTE showed comparable results. Both scores showed a trend toward a better prediction of extracranial than intracranial major bleeding, the RIETE score resulting more useful for early extracranial bleeding and the VTE-BLEED for late intracranial hemorrhages. Our study reveals that the usefulness of available bleeding scores may vary depending on the characteristics of the patient population and the time frame evaluated. Dynamic scores could be more useful for this purpose.</p>","PeriodicalId":22238,"journal":{"name":"TH Open: Companion Journal to Thrombosis and Haemostasis","volume":"5 3","pages":"e319-e328"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8459175/pdf/","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prediction of Major Bleeding in Anticoagulated Patients for Venous Thromboembolism: Comparison of the RIETE and the VTE-BLEED Scores.\",\"authors\":\"Ramón Lecumberri,&nbsp;Laura Jiménez,&nbsp;Pedro Ruiz-Artacho,&nbsp;José Antonio Nieto,&nbsp;Nuria Ruiz-Giménez,&nbsp;Adriana Visonà,&nbsp;Andris Skride,&nbsp;Fares Moustafa,&nbsp;Javier Trujillo,&nbsp;Manuel Monreal\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0041-1729171\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The performance of validated bleeding risk scores in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) could be different depending on the time after index event or the site of bleeding. In this study we compared the \\\"classic\\\" Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) score and the more recently developed VTE-BLEED score for the prediction of major bleeding in patients under anticoagulant therapy in different time intervals after VTE diagnosis. Out of 82,239 patients with acute VTE, the proportion of high-risk patients according to the RIETE and VTE-BLEED scores was 7.1 and 62.3%, respectively. The performance of both scores across the different study periods (first 30 days after VTE diagnosis, days 31-90, days 91-180, and days 181-360) was similar, with areas under the receiving operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC) ranging between 0.69 and 0.72. However, the positive predictive values were low, ranging between 0.6 and 3.9 (better for early major bleeding than for later periods). A sensitivity analysis limited to patients with unprovoked VTE showed comparable results. Both scores showed a trend toward a better prediction of extracranial than intracranial major bleeding, the RIETE score resulting more useful for early extracranial bleeding and the VTE-BLEED for late intracranial hemorrhages. Our study reveals that the usefulness of available bleeding scores may vary depending on the characteristics of the patient population and the time frame evaluated. Dynamic scores could be more useful for this purpose.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22238,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TH Open: Companion Journal to Thrombosis and Haemostasis\",\"volume\":\"5 3\",\"pages\":\"e319-e328\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8459175/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TH Open: Companion Journal to Thrombosis and Haemostasis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1729171\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TH Open: Companion Journal to Thrombosis and Haemostasis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1729171","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

静脉血栓栓塞(VTE)患者的有效出血风险评分的表现可能因指标事件发生后的时间或出血部位而异。在这项研究中,我们比较了“经典的”Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE)评分和最近开发的VTE- bleed评分,用于预测VTE诊断后不同时间间隔抗凝治疗患者的大出血。在82239例急性静脉血栓栓塞患者中,根据RIETE和VTE- bleed评分,高危患者的比例分别为7.1和62.3%。两项评分在不同研究期间(VTE诊断后的前30天、31-90天、91-180天和181-360天)的表现相似,接受工作特征(ROC)曲线下面积(AUC)在0.69至0.72之间。然而,阳性预测值很低,范围在0.6到3.9之间(早期大出血优于后期大出血)。一项仅限于非诱发性静脉血栓栓塞患者的敏感性分析显示了类似的结果。两种评分都显示出比颅内大出血更能预测颅内外出血的趋势,RIETE评分对早期颅内外出血更有用,而VTE-BLEED对晚期颅内出血更有用。我们的研究表明,可用出血评分的有用性可能因患者群体的特征和评估的时间框架而异。对于这个目的,动态分数可能更有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Prediction of Major Bleeding in Anticoagulated Patients for Venous Thromboembolism: Comparison of the RIETE and the VTE-BLEED Scores.

Prediction of Major Bleeding in Anticoagulated Patients for Venous Thromboembolism: Comparison of the RIETE and the VTE-BLEED Scores.

The performance of validated bleeding risk scores in patients with venous thromboembolism (VTE) could be different depending on the time after index event or the site of bleeding. In this study we compared the "classic" Registro Informatizado de Enfermedad TromboEmbólica (RIETE) score and the more recently developed VTE-BLEED score for the prediction of major bleeding in patients under anticoagulant therapy in different time intervals after VTE diagnosis. Out of 82,239 patients with acute VTE, the proportion of high-risk patients according to the RIETE and VTE-BLEED scores was 7.1 and 62.3%, respectively. The performance of both scores across the different study periods (first 30 days after VTE diagnosis, days 31-90, days 91-180, and days 181-360) was similar, with areas under the receiving operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC) ranging between 0.69 and 0.72. However, the positive predictive values were low, ranging between 0.6 and 3.9 (better for early major bleeding than for later periods). A sensitivity analysis limited to patients with unprovoked VTE showed comparable results. Both scores showed a trend toward a better prediction of extracranial than intracranial major bleeding, the RIETE score resulting more useful for early extracranial bleeding and the VTE-BLEED for late intracranial hemorrhages. Our study reveals that the usefulness of available bleeding scores may vary depending on the characteristics of the patient population and the time frame evaluated. Dynamic scores could be more useful for this purpose.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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