A Comparison of the Clinical Impact of Bleeding Measured by Two Different Classifications Among Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes

ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to determine the association between Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) and Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries (GUSTO) bleeding and clinical outcomes.BackgroundThere are limited data on the relative utility of either scale at predicting clinical outcomes in patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS).MethodsPooled data from two randomized trials of patients with ACS (n = 15,454) were analyzed to determine the association between TIMI and GUSTO bleeding and 30-day and 6-month death/myocardial infarction (MI) using Cox proportional hazards modeling that included bleeding as a time-dependent covariate.ResultsThere was a stepwise increase in the adjusted hazard of 30-day death/MI with worsening GUSTO bleeding (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval], GUSTO mild 1.20 [1.05 to 1.37]; moderate 3.28 [2.88 to 3.73]; severe 5.57 [4.33 to 7.17]), and an increased risk with all three levels of TIMI bleeding (TIMI minimal 1.84 [1.63 to 2.08]; TIMI minor 1.64 [1.31 to 2.04]; major 1.45 [1.23 to 1.70]). When both bleeding scales were included in the same model, the risk with GUSTO bleeding persisted; however, the association between TIMI bleeding and outcome was no longer significant.ConclusionsBoth scales identify ACS patients with bleeding complications at risk for adverse outcomes. In a model that included both definitions, the risk with GUSTO bleeding persisted while the risk with TIMI bleeding did not. This suggests that bleeding assessed with clinical criteria is more important than that assessed by laboratory criteria in terms of outcomes. Future clinical trials should consider using a combination of the GUSTO bleeding scale and the need for transfusion to assess bleeding complications.