Abstract
AIMS: The Academic Research Consortium (ARC) has proposed international criteria to standardize the definition of high bleeding risk (HBR) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In this context, Japan has also established its own guidelines, that is, the Japanese version of HBR (J-HBR) criteria. However, the J-HBR criteria have not been fully validated, especially in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS: This bi-center registry included 1079 patients with acute MI undergoing primary PCI in a contemporary setting. Patient bleeding risks were evaluated using the ARC-HBR and J-HBR criteria. The primary endpoint was rates of major bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5) at 1 year. RESULTS: Of the 1079 patients, 505 (46.8%) and 563 (52.2%) met the ARC-HBR and J-HBR criteria, respectively. Patients who met the J-HBR criteria were found to have a higher rate of major bleeding events at 1 year than those who did not (12.8% vs. 3.3%, p＜0.001). When patients were scored and stratified using the J-HBR major and minor criteria, risks of major bleedings were progressively increased with the increase in the number of J-HBR criteria. In the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the ARC-HBR and J-HBR significantly predicted subsequent major bleedings after PCI, with ARC-HBR having greater predictive ability than J-HBR. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of the patients with acute MI undergoing primary PCI in Japan met the J-HBR criteria. Although the J-HBR criteria successfully identified patients who were likely to develop major bleeding events after primary PCI, the superiority of J-HBR to ARC-HBR in predicting bleeding outcomes warrants further investigation.