TY - JOUR
T1 - Preoperative Factors Associated With In-Hospital Major Bleeding After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
T2 - A Systematic Review
AU - Chowdhury, Mohammad Rocky Khan
AU - Stub, Dion
AU - Dinh, Diem
AU - Karim, Md Nazmul
AU - Chowdhury, Hasina Akhter
AU - Billah, Baki
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2025/6
Y1 - 2025/6
N2 - Background: Preoperative risk assessment of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is vital for clinical quality registries, performance monitoring, and, most importantly, for clinical decision-making. This systematic review aims to summarise preoperative factors associated with post-PCI in-hospital major bleeding. Method: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus databases until December 2023 without any language restriction were systematically searched to identify preoperative factors related to in-hospital major bleeding post-PCI. Data were systematically appraised and summarised in a descriptive manner, following the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies. Results: The search yielded 17,997 studies, of which, 32 articles were included for the final assessment. The pool prevalence of in-hospital major bleeding post-PCI was 3.21%. One hundred independent preoperative factors were significantly associated with in-hospital major bleeding and, of them, 17 factors appeared repeatedly in various studies were identified as potential factors. Factors that repeatedly used in various models were but not limited to renal disease (n=25, 78.1%), acute coronary syndrome (n=21, 65.6%), age (n=17, 53.1%), gender (n=17, 53.1%), cardiac events (n=15, 46.9%), anticoagulant therapy/drugs (n=12, 40.6%), anaemia/haemoglobin/haematocrit (n=11, 34.4%), percutaneous access site (n=10, 31.3%), glycoprotein inhibitors (n=10, 31.3%), body surface area (n=9, 28.1%), hypertension (n=9, 28.1%), and heart failure or disease (n=9, 28.1%). Eight (25.0%) articles used the imputation method to treat missing values. Logistic regression was used by 26 (81.2%) articles, and three (9.4%) articles used machine learning method. Eleven articles (34.4%) reported the model's discrimination ability using internal validation with receiver operating characteristics score ranging from 0.620 (95% confidence interval 0.575–0.665) to 0.837 (95% confidence interval 0.772–0.903). Conclusions: The 17 preoperative factors identified in this study can help clinicians balance ischaemic and bleeding risks and implement strategies to reduce bleeding. Risk adjustment models need further improvement in their quality through the inclusion of these factors, appropriately handling missing values and model validation, and using machine learning methods.
AB - Background: Preoperative risk assessment of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is vital for clinical quality registries, performance monitoring, and, most importantly, for clinical decision-making. This systematic review aims to summarise preoperative factors associated with post-PCI in-hospital major bleeding. Method: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Scopus databases until December 2023 without any language restriction were systematically searched to identify preoperative factors related to in-hospital major bleeding post-PCI. Data were systematically appraised and summarised in a descriptive manner, following the CHecklist for critical Appraisal and data extraction for systematic Reviews of prediction Modelling Studies. Results: The search yielded 17,997 studies, of which, 32 articles were included for the final assessment. The pool prevalence of in-hospital major bleeding post-PCI was 3.21%. One hundred independent preoperative factors were significantly associated with in-hospital major bleeding and, of them, 17 factors appeared repeatedly in various studies were identified as potential factors. Factors that repeatedly used in various models were but not limited to renal disease (n=25, 78.1%), acute coronary syndrome (n=21, 65.6%), age (n=17, 53.1%), gender (n=17, 53.1%), cardiac events (n=15, 46.9%), anticoagulant therapy/drugs (n=12, 40.6%), anaemia/haemoglobin/haematocrit (n=11, 34.4%), percutaneous access site (n=10, 31.3%), glycoprotein inhibitors (n=10, 31.3%), body surface area (n=9, 28.1%), hypertension (n=9, 28.1%), and heart failure or disease (n=9, 28.1%). Eight (25.0%) articles used the imputation method to treat missing values. Logistic regression was used by 26 (81.2%) articles, and three (9.4%) articles used machine learning method. Eleven articles (34.4%) reported the model's discrimination ability using internal validation with receiver operating characteristics score ranging from 0.620 (95% confidence interval 0.575–0.665) to 0.837 (95% confidence interval 0.772–0.903). Conclusions: The 17 preoperative factors identified in this study can help clinicians balance ischaemic and bleeding risks and implement strategies to reduce bleeding. Risk adjustment models need further improvement in their quality through the inclusion of these factors, appropriately handling missing values and model validation, and using machine learning methods.
KW - In-hospital major bleeding
KW - Percutaneous coronary intervention
KW - Preoperative variables
KW - Risk prediction model
KW - Systematic review
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105001804727
U2 - 10.1016/j.hlc.2024.12.001
DO - 10.1016/j.hlc.2024.12.001
M3 - Review Article
C2 - 40175207
AN - SCOPUS:105001804727
SN - 1443-9506
VL - 34
SP - 566
EP - 584
JO - Heart Lung and Circulation
JF - Heart Lung and Circulation
IS - 6
ER -