Bleeding risk differences after TAVR according to the ARC-HBR criteria: insights from SCOPE 2

DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-21-01048

Philippe Garot
Philippe Garot1, MD; Antoinette Neylon1, MD; Marie-Claude Morice1, MD; Corrado Tamburino2, MD, PhD; Sabine Bleiziffer3, MD; Holger Thiele4, MD; Smita Scholtz5, MD; Rene Schramm3, MD, PhD; James Cockburn6, MD; Michael Cunnington7, MD; Alexander Wolf8, MD; Marco Barbanti9, MD; Didier Tchetché10, MD; Paolo Pagnotta11, MD; Martine Gilard12, MD; Francesco Bedogni13, MD; Eric Van Belle14, MD; Mariuca Vasa-Nicotera15, MD; Alaide Chieffo16, MD; Kris Bogaerts17, PhD; Christian Hengstenberg18, MD; Davide Capodanno2, MD, PhD
1. Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris-Sud, Hôpital Privé Jacques Cartier, Ramsay-Santé, Massy, France; 2. Division of Cardiology Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria "Policlinico‐Vittorio Emanuele" University of Catania, Catania, Italy; 3. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center Northrhein-Westfalia, University Hospital, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany; 4. Department of Cardiology, Leipzig Heart Center, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany; 5. Department of Interventional Cardiology, Heart and Diabetes Center North Rhine Westfalia, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany; 6. Department of Cardiology, Brighton & Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, United Kingdom; 7. Department of Cardiology, Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, United Kingdom; 8. Department of Interventional Cardiology, Elisabeth Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; 9. Department of Cardio-Thoracic-Vascular diseases and transplantation, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Policlinico “G. Rodolico-San Marco”, Catania, Italy; 10. Groupe CardioVasculaire Interventionnel, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France; 11. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Humanitas Clinical and Research Center, Milano, Italy; 12. Department of Cardiology, Brest University Hospital, Brest, France; 13. Cardiology Department, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Milano, Italy; 14. Department of Cardiology, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France; 15. Department of Cardiology, Goethe University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany; 16. Interventional Cardiology Unit, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; 17. KU Leuven, Faculty of Medicine, I-BioStat, Leuven, Belgium and UHasselt, I-BioStat, Hasselt, Belgium; 18. Department of Internal Medicine II, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Background: The Academic Research Consortium – High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) initiative defined conditions associated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related bleeding.

Aims: We sought to further explore these HBR conditions in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Methods: Patients from the SCOPE 2 trial were stratified by their bleeding risk status based on the ARC-HBR definitions. Baseline and procedural characteristics, as well as key clinical outcomes including Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3-5 bleeding, were compared in ARC-HBR positive (HBR+) and ARC-HBR negative (HBR−) patients.

Results: Of 787 patients randomised in SCOPE 2 and included in this study, 633 were HBR+ (80.4%). Compared with HBR- patients, those HBR+ were older and more frequently presented with diabetes, a history of coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, prior cerebrovascular accident, and a Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of 30-day mortality (STS-PROM) (4.9±2.9% vs 3.3%±2.1%; p<0.0001). In addition, HBR+ patients were more frequently on oral anticoagulation therapy. At 1 year, HBR+ patients had higher rates of all-cause death (12.4% vs 4.3%, respectively, risk difference 8.09%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.76-12.41; p=0.0002); the rates of BARC 3-5 type bleeding were relatively high but not statistically different compared with HBR- patients (7.7% vs 6.1%, risk difference 1.67%; 95% CI: –2.72-6.06; p=0.46). Subgroup analyses for bleeding events showed no significant interaction in terms of STS-PROM score, age, or medications.

Conclusions: The ARC-HBR criteria failed to isolate a subgroup of patients at higher bleeding risk in TAVR patients from a randomised trial. These findings have potential implications, especially for the selection of post-TAVR antithrombotic regimens based on individual bleeding-risk profiles. Specific HBR criteria should be defined for TAVR patients.

Sign in to read and download the full article

Forgot your password?

No account yet?
Sign up for free!

Create my pcr account

Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com

bleedingtavr
Read next article
A mini focus on left main revascularisation with the IDEAL-LM trial; rationale and design of the ORBITA-2 trial; vessel FFR; a novel scoring tool for predicting the need for rotational atherectomy; outcomes of percutaneous vs surgical transaxillary TAVI; transcatheter mitral valve replacement with the Tendyne valve; ASD and PFO closure with a new bioresorbable transcatheter occluder; and more...

Latest news