ArticleJournal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis2022
Practical Assessment of the Tradeoff between Fatal Bleeding and Coronary Thrombotic Risks using the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk Criteria.
Article in Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after complex percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- In Hospital Assessment and Management of High Bleeding Risk in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI).Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Invasive Strategy in Octogenarians with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- The Prognostic Impact of In-Hospital Major Bleeding and Recurrence of Myocardial Infarction during Acute Phase after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2024Observational
- Influence of an abnormal ankle-brachial index on ischemic and bleeding events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2023Article
- Individual acute-phase bleeding and thrombotic risk balance assessment in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2023Article
- What Are Your Expectations for Risk Prediction Tools?JACC. Asia · 2022Article
- Pre-infarction Angina: Time Interval to Onset of Myocardial Infarction and Comorbidity Predictors.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsWe aimed to establish a practical method for the assessment of tradeoff between thrombotic and bleeding risks.
methodsWe aimed to investigate the balance between bleeding risk and coronary thrombotic risk according to the number of the Academic Research Consortium for high bleeding risk (ARC-HBR) criteria in the multicenter prospective ST/non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI/NSTEMI) registry (N=12,093). Patients were divided as follows by the number of ARC-HBR criteria fulfilled: group 0, 0 major with ≤ 1 minor (N=6,792); group 1, 1 major with 0 minor (N=1,705); group 2, 0 major with ≥ 2 minors (N=790); group 3, 1 major with ≥ 1 minor (N=1,709); group 4, 2 majors with ≥ 0 minors (N=861); and group 5, ≥ 3 majors with ≥ 0 minor (N=236). We assessed the acute-phase absolute risk differences between bleeding and coronary thrombotic events in each group.
resultsAt 7-day follow-up, all patients (groups 0-5) had a higher risk of major bleeding than that of any myocardial infarction (MI). Patients at ARC-HBR (groups 1-5) had a balanced risk between fatal MI and fatal bleeding, whereas patients at non-ARC-HBR (group 0) had a higher risk of fatal MI than that of fatal bleeding.
conclusionsAll STEMI/NSTEMI patients have a relatively high risk of major bleeding as compared with the risk of any MI in the acute phase. The ARC-HBR criteria would be a practical tool for assessing the tradeoff between fatal bleeding and fatal MI risks. This practical assessment would be helpful for the optimal decision-making of appropriate treatment strategy considering the balance between bleeding and coronary thrombotic risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.