External validation of the OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD risk score after endovascular revascularisation

<b></b> <i>Background:</i> The OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD bleeding risk score was developed to assess the bleeding risk in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), however its performance in patients treated exclusively with endovascular revascularisation has not yet been tested. We aimed to externally validate the bleeding risk score for this patient cohort. <i>Patients and methods:</i> A retrospective observational study, analysing the data of all PAD patients successfully treated with endovascular revascularisation in a single centre within a five-year period. The performance of the Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model, upon which the OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD bleeding risk score is based, was tested using calibration methods, discrimination, and a scaled Brier score for overall performance. The OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD bleeding risk score was calculated for all patients, classifying them into the four respective risk groups. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for all risk groups and discrimination was tested using log-rank tests. <i>Results:</i> While discrimination of the CPH model was adequate, calibration of the model was poor and the scaled Brier score was 3.27% (95% CI 0.65%-4.40%). Of the 1,434 patients, 33 (2.3%) experienced a major bleeding event. The frequency of bleeding was 0.4% in the low risk group (3/736 patients), 0.8% in the low-to-moderate risk group (2/243 patients), 5.8% in the moderate-to-high risk group (15/258 patients), and 6.6% in the high risk group (13/197 patients). The OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD score successfully discriminated each of the two lower bleeding risk groups from one of the two higher risk groups, but failed to discriminate among the two lower risk groups and the two higher risk groups, respectively. <i>Conclusions:</i> Although the OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD score did not stratify patients into the four respective risk groups, it allowed discrimination between the low risk patients and the high risk patients. It could therefore become a useful tool for predicting major bleeding events in patients with PAD after endovascular revascularisation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
VASA
Published
2024-11-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1024/0301-1526/a001159
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Peripheral Artery Disease Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.15
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

External validation of the OAC3-PAD risk score after endovascular revascularisation

Vinko Boc, Kevin Pelicon, Klemen Petek, Nataša Kejžar et al.
2 citations
VASA
Peripheral Artery Disease Management
1.15
article

External validation of the OAC3-PAD risk score after endovascular revascularisation

Vinko Boc, Kevin Pelicon, Klemen Petek, Nataša Kejžar, Anja Boc, Aleš Blinc
article en
2 citations

Abstract

<b></b> <i>Background:</i> The OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD bleeding risk score was developed to assess the bleeding risk in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD), however its performance in patients treated exclusively with endovascular revascularisation has not yet been tested. We aimed to externally validate the bleeding risk score for this patient cohort. <i>Patients and methods:</i> A retrospective observational study, analysing the data of all PAD patients successfully treated with endovascular revascularisation in a single centre within a five-year period. The performance of the Cox proportional hazards (CPH) model, upon which the OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD bleeding risk score is based, was tested using calibration methods, discrimination, and a scaled Brier score for overall performance. The OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD bleeding risk score was calculated for all patients, classifying them into the four respective risk groups. Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for all risk groups and discrimination was tested using log-rank tests. <i>Results:</i> While discrimination of the CPH model was adequate, calibration of the model was poor and the scaled Brier score was 3.27% (95% CI 0.65%-4.40%). Of the 1,434 patients, 33 (2.3%) experienced a major bleeding event. The frequency of bleeding was 0.4% in the low risk group (3/736 patients), 0.8% in the low-to-moderate risk group (2/243 patients), 5.8% in the moderate-to-high risk group (15/258 patients), and 6.6% in the high risk group (13/197 patients). The OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD score successfully discriminated each of the two lower bleeding risk groups from one of the two higher risk groups, but failed to discriminate among the two lower risk groups and the two higher risk groups, respectively. <i>Conclusions:</i> Although the OAC<sup>3</sup>-PAD score did not stratify patients into the four respective risk groups, it allowed discrimination between the low risk patients and the high risk patients. It could therefore become a useful tool for predicting major bleeding events in patients with PAD after endovascular revascularisation.

VASAVol. 54(1)
University of Ljubljana (SI), Ljubljana University Medical Centre (SI)
Reduced inequalities, Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 19%
Peripheral Artery Disease Management
1.15
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.