Comparative incidence and risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary artery disease: Insights from the Keio Cardiovascular Registry in Japan

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY Thrombosis research Pub Date : 2024-09-12 DOI:10.1016/j.thromres.2024.109150
Ikuko Ueda , Shun Kohsaka , Yohei Numasawa , Ryo Takemura , Naoki Hosoe , Masaki Ieda
{"title":"Comparative incidence and risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary artery disease: Insights from the Keio Cardiovascular Registry in Japan","authors":"Ikuko Ueda ,&nbsp;Shun Kohsaka ,&nbsp;Yohei Numasawa ,&nbsp;Ryo Takemura ,&nbsp;Naoki Hosoe ,&nbsp;Masaki Ieda","doi":"10.1016/j.thromres.2024.109150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), antiplatelet medication usage is crucial for preventing thrombotic events. However, it requires careful monitoring, especially because of the risk of life-threatening bleeding complications. In hemorrhagic complications, assessment of patient background and risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) remain limited for GIB that develops during long-term observation after hospital discharge. This study aimed to examine the incidence of GIB and patient characteristics in CAD post-PCI.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>All CAD patients undergoing PCI for urgent, emergent, or elective indications were enrolled in the Keio Interhospital Cardiovascular Studies (JCD-KiCS)-PCI registry (January 2009 and December 2017) and followed up to 2 years after PCI discharge. From the JCD-KiCS PCI registry, 8864 patients (median [interquartile range [IQR]] age: non-GIB: 69.0 y [16 y], upper GIB (UGI): 72.0 y [15.5 y], lower GIB (LGI): 73.0 y [IQR: 13 y]) were categorized based on the occurrence of hospitalization-requiring GIB. Patient characteristics and detailed information regarding these GIB events, including the location (upper vs lower GI) and bleeding severity, were analyzed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Overall, 36 patients experienced UGI, while 85 patients experienced LGI. The rates of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and triple therapy were significantly different among the non-GIB (n = 8734), UGI (n = 36) and LGI (n = 85) groups (DAPT [aspirin + P2Y12 (clopidogrel/prasugrel/ticlopidine)]: 64 [76.2 %] in the LGI group vs 24 [68.6 %] in the UGI group vs 7330 [84.6 %] in the non-GIB group; triple therapy [aspirin + P2Y12 (clopidogrel/prasugrel/ticlopidine)] + oral anticoagulant (OAC) (warfarin/direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC]): 17 [20.2 %] in the LGI group vs 8 [22.9 %] in the UGI group vs 836 [9.6 %] in the non-GIB group; p &lt; 0.001). In the LGI and UGI groups, aspirin and warfarin were used in 2 (2.4 %) and 2 (5.7 %) patients, respectively, but not in combination with DOAC. The 2-year post-PCI hospitalization incidence for GIB was 1.4 % (LGI, 1.0 %; UGI, 0.4 %). The most common causes were colonic diverticular hemorrhage (43.5 %) for LGI and duodenal ulcer (21.9 %) for UGI. No significant differences were found in the cumulative 2-year post-PCI risks between the LGI and UGI groups (log-rank p = 0.97). Most GIB events were Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2-equivalent (hemoglobin decrease &lt;3 g/dL). Notably, the use of OACs at PCI discharge, bleeding complications within 72 h, and preprocedural anemia were significantly correlated with an increased GIB risk.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The real-world incidence of LGI is two times higher than that of UGI in CAD patients undergoing PCI, and most events are mild. OAC use at PCI discharge is the strongest potential risk factor for GIB development.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23064,"journal":{"name":"Thrombosis research","volume":"243 ","pages":"Article 109150"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049384824002822/pdfft?md5=183c1e641cf929263bc192156fd36c12&pid=1-s2.0-S0049384824002822-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thrombosis research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049384824002822","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

In patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), antiplatelet medication usage is crucial for preventing thrombotic events. However, it requires careful monitoring, especially because of the risk of life-threatening bleeding complications. In hemorrhagic complications, assessment of patient background and risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) remain limited for GIB that develops during long-term observation after hospital discharge. This study aimed to examine the incidence of GIB and patient characteristics in CAD post-PCI.

Methods

All CAD patients undergoing PCI for urgent, emergent, or elective indications were enrolled in the Keio Interhospital Cardiovascular Studies (JCD-KiCS)-PCI registry (January 2009 and December 2017) and followed up to 2 years after PCI discharge. From the JCD-KiCS PCI registry, 8864 patients (median [interquartile range [IQR]] age: non-GIB: 69.0 y [16 y], upper GIB (UGI): 72.0 y [15.5 y], lower GIB (LGI): 73.0 y [IQR: 13 y]) were categorized based on the occurrence of hospitalization-requiring GIB. Patient characteristics and detailed information regarding these GIB events, including the location (upper vs lower GI) and bleeding severity, were analyzed.

Results

Overall, 36 patients experienced UGI, while 85 patients experienced LGI. The rates of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and triple therapy were significantly different among the non-GIB (n = 8734), UGI (n = 36) and LGI (n = 85) groups (DAPT [aspirin + P2Y12 (clopidogrel/prasugrel/ticlopidine)]: 64 [76.2 %] in the LGI group vs 24 [68.6 %] in the UGI group vs 7330 [84.6 %] in the non-GIB group; triple therapy [aspirin + P2Y12 (clopidogrel/prasugrel/ticlopidine)] + oral anticoagulant (OAC) (warfarin/direct oral anticoagulant [DOAC]): 17 [20.2 %] in the LGI group vs 8 [22.9 %] in the UGI group vs 836 [9.6 %] in the non-GIB group; p < 0.001). In the LGI and UGI groups, aspirin and warfarin were used in 2 (2.4 %) and 2 (5.7 %) patients, respectively, but not in combination with DOAC. The 2-year post-PCI hospitalization incidence for GIB was 1.4 % (LGI, 1.0 %; UGI, 0.4 %). The most common causes were colonic diverticular hemorrhage (43.5 %) for LGI and duodenal ulcer (21.9 %) for UGI. No significant differences were found in the cumulative 2-year post-PCI risks between the LGI and UGI groups (log-rank p = 0.97). Most GIB events were Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2-equivalent (hemoglobin decrease <3 g/dL). Notably, the use of OACs at PCI discharge, bleeding complications within 72 h, and preprocedural anemia were significantly correlated with an increased GIB risk.

Conclusions

The real-world incidence of LGI is two times higher than that of UGI in CAD patients undergoing PCI, and most events are mild. OAC use at PCI discharge is the strongest potential risk factor for GIB development.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经皮冠状动脉介入治疗冠心病后消化道出血的发生率和风险因素比较:日本庆应义塾心血管登记的启示
背景在接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的冠状动脉疾病(CAD)患者中,抗血小板药物的使用对于预防血栓事件至关重要。然而,由于存在危及生命的出血并发症风险,因此需要仔细监测。在出血并发症方面,对于出院后长期观察期间发生的胃肠道出血(GIB),对患者背景和胃肠道出血(GIB)风险的评估仍然有限。方法所有因紧急、急诊或择期指征接受 PCI 治疗的 CAD 患者均纳入庆应义塾医院间心血管研究(JCD-KiCS)-PCI 登记(2009 年 1 月至 2017 年 12 月),并在 PCI 出院后随访 2 年。在 JCD-KiCS PCI 登记中,8864 名患者(中位数[四分位数间距[IQR]]年龄:非 GIB:69.0 岁 [16 岁],上 GIB(UGI):72.0 岁 [15.5 岁],下 GIB(LGI):73.0 岁 [IQR: 13 岁])根据住院要求 GIB 的发生情况进行了分类。分析了患者特征和有关这些 GIB 事件的详细信息,包括部位(上消化道与下消化道)和出血严重程度。在非 GIB 组(n = 8734)、UGI 组(n = 36)和 LGI 组(n = 85)中,双联抗血小板疗法(DAPT)和三联疗法的使用率有显著差异(DAPT [阿司匹林 + P2Y12 (氯吡格雷/普拉格雷/ticlopidine)],非 GIB 组为 64 [76.2 %],而 UGI 组为 64 [76.2 %]:LGI 组 64 [76.2 %] vs UGI 组 24 [68.6 %] vs 非 GIB 组 7330 [84.6 %];三联疗法 [阿司匹林 + P2Y12(氯吡格雷/普拉格雷/ticlopidine)] + 口服抗凝剂 (OAC)(华法林/直接口服抗凝剂 [DOAC]):LGI 组 17 [20.2 %] vs UGI 组 8 [22.9 %] vs 非 GIB 组 836 [9.6 %; p <0.001)。在 LGI 组和 UGI 组中,分别有 2 例(2.4%)和 2 例(5.7%)患者使用了阿司匹林和华法林,但未与 DOAC 联用。PCI术后2年的GIB住院率为1.4%(LGI,1.0%;UGI,0.4%)。LGI 最常见的原因是结肠憩室出血(43.5%),UGI 最常见的原因是十二指肠溃疡(21.9%)。LGI组和UGI组在PCI术后2年的累积风险方面没有发现明显差异(log-rank p = 0.97)。大多数 GIB 事件都是出血学术研究联盟 2 类事件(血红蛋白下降 <3 g/dL)。值得注意的是,PCI 出院时使用 OAC、72 h 内出血并发症和术前贫血与 GIB 风险增加显著相关。PCI 出院时使用 OAC 是 GIB 发生的最大潜在风险因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Thrombosis research
Thrombosis research 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
14.60
自引率
4.00%
发文量
364
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: Thrombosis Research is an international journal dedicated to the swift dissemination of new information on thrombosis, hemostasis, and vascular biology, aimed at advancing both science and clinical care. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original research, reviews, editorials, opinions, and critiques, covering both basic and clinical studies. Priority is given to research that promises novel approaches in the diagnosis, therapy, prognosis, and prevention of thrombotic and hemorrhagic diseases.
期刊最新文献
Efficacy and safety of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid for the prevention of thromboembolic events in individuals positive for antiphospholipid antibodies: A systematic review and meta-analysis Lupus-associated hypoprothrombinemia syndrome in children: Differences between post-infectious and autoimmune forms Editorial Board DOAC Score for prediction of major bleeding in patients with venous thromboembolism: Findings from the RIETE registry The contact system in chronic kidney disease and hemodialysis – A cross-sectional study
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1