Valvular & structural heart disease
Validation of the Valve Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk Definition in Patients Undergoing TAVR
Authors' conclusion
The VARC-HBR consensus offered a pragmatic approach to guide bleeding risk stratification in transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
Study context
- Population
- Patients undergoing TAVR9,267 (88.7%) with ≥1 Valve Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (VARC-HBR) criterion
- Participants
- 10,449 patients
- Comparison
- VARC-HBR bleeding risk categories
- Outcome
- BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding (periprocedural ≤30 days or late >30 days)
- Follow-up
- 1 year
Methodological detailsmulticentre
- Multicentre
Performance
As reported in the abstract
BARC 3 or 5 bleeding
- AUC
- 0.58
Further findings
| Outcome | HR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| All-cause mortality · 1 yearHigh riskvs Low risk | 1.33 (1.04–1.70) | |
| All-cause mortality · 1 yearVery high riskvs Low risk | 1.97 (1.53–2.53) | |
| 0.20.5125Hazard ratio (log scale) |
Original publication
Validation of the Valve Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk Definition in Patients Undergoing TAVR. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Published 30 October 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →