Observational studyEuropean heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy2025
The four-item PRECISE-DAPT score identifies coronary artery bypass grafting patients with increased risk for post-discharge major bleeding.
Observational study in European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bleeding risk assessment in patients with new-onset atrial fibrillation after coronary surgery: a proof-of-concept study.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2026Observational
- Patient-centred anti-platelet therapy following coronary artery bypass graft surgery.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Review
- Prognostic Role of the PRECISE-DAPT Score in Acute Coronary Syndrome and Different Antithrombotic Treatment Strategies.Cardiology and therapy · 2026Article
- Predictive Value of Serum Pepsinogen and Gastrin-17 in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome for Post-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Oral Dual Antiplatelet Therapy-Associated Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsEarly identification of patients with increased bleeding risk increases the possibility to individualize antithrombotic treatment. We validated the PRECISE-DAPT score, originally developed to estimate bleeding risk in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients. METHODS AND
resultsAll patients who underwent the first time, isolated CABG in Sweden 2009-2020 and survived until discharge were included. The four-item PRECISE-DAPT score, based on age, estimated glomerular filtration rate, pre-operative haemoglobin concentration, and previous spontaneous bleeding, was calculated in patients discharged on DAPT (n = 6838), or antiplatelet monotherapy (n = 15 406). High bleeding risk was defined as a score ≥25 in accordance with previous studies and major bleeding as hospitalization due to bleeding. Associations were assessed by C-statistics and Cox regression models. Major bleeding occurred during the first post-operative year in 130 patients (1.9%) in the DAPT group, and in 197 patients (1.3%) in the monotherapy group. The score identified 32.9% of the patients in the DAPT group and 38.2% in the monotherapy groups as having high bleeding risk. The area under the ROC-curve for the score was 0.67 (95%CI 0.62-0.72) for DAPT and 0.71 (0.67-0.74) for monotherapy. The hazard ratio for high bleeding risk vs. very low risk was 4.14 (2.07-8.26) for DAPT patients, and 4.95 (2.61-9.39) for monotherapy patients, both P < 0.001.
conclusionThe PRECISE-DAPT identifies patients with increased risk for major bleeding after discharge following CABG with moderate accuracy. The accuracy is comparable to what previously has been reported for patients after PCI.
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.