+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Use of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score to predict bleeding complications in patients with unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention



Use of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score to predict bleeding complications in patients with unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention



Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics 28(3): 242-249



Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) is a prognostic score developed for managing the high risk of cardiac events immediately after unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI). In Asian populations that have a higher rate of bleeding complications, data about TIMI score are lacking. Using a Japanese multicenter registry, we investigated the impact of utilizing TIMI score in UA/NSTEMI patients, focusing on bleeding complications. The TIMI score was calculated for 587 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for UA/NSTEMI (2008-2010). They were classified into low-risk (TIMI score 0-2, N = 268, 45.6 %), intermediate-risk (TIMI score 3-4, N = 264, 45.0 %) and high-risk (TIMI score 5-7, N = 55, 9.4 %) groups; patient characteristics for each group were statistically analyzed. The patients in the higher TIMI score group were older (p < 0.001), had lower GFR (p = 0.021) and hemoglobin level after PCI (p < 0.001), and severe coronary disease pattern (p = 0.014 and p = 0.023, respectively, for left main and three-vessel disease). The TIMI score was significantly associated with requirement of blood transfusion (low-risk, moderate-risk, and high-risk groups: 1.1, 4.2, and 7.3 %, respectively; p = 0.021), and the incidence of access site bleeding (1.1, 2.7, and 5.5 %, p = 0.112). The TIMI score might aid in subjectively quantifying the risk of in-hospital complication rates such as access site bleeding.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 036746219

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 23361950

DOI: 10.1007/s12928-013-0162-3


Related references

Simple risk algorithm to predict serious bleeding in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: RISK-PCI bleeding score. Circulation Journal 77(7): 1719-1727, 2013

Effect of sex difference in clinical presentation (stable coronary artery disease vs unstable angina pectoris or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction vs ST-elevation myocardial infarction) on 2-year outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Journal of Interventional Cardiology 31(1): 5, 2018

Rapid Early Triage by Leukocytosis and the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Risk Score for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Observational Study. Medicine 95(7): E2857, 2016

Can risk stratification using TIMI score of unstable angina/non-ST elevation myocardial infarction predict short-term outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention?. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 39(5 Suppl. A): 39A, 2002

Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) risk score remains relevant in the era of field triage of patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. International Journal of Cardiology 166(1): 255-257, 2013

Association of initial thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade with mortality among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a National Registry of Myocardial Infarction-5 (NRMI-5) analysis. American Heart Journal 162(1): 178-183, 2011

Impact of Clinical Presentation (Stable Angina Pectoris vs Unstable Angina Pectoris or Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction vs ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) on Long-Term Outcomes in Women Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents. American Journal of Cardiology 116(6): 845-852, 2015

A population-based evaluation of the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score for unstable angina and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. Clinical Cardiology 27(2): 74-78, 2004

Validation of the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction risk score for unstable angina pectoris and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the TIMI III registry. American Journal of Cardiology 90(3): 303-305, 2002

Re-evaluating risk factors for periprocedural complications during percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: who may benefit from more intensive antiplatelet therapy?. Current Opinion in Cardiology 24(1): 88-94, 2009

The thrombolysis in myocardial infarction risk score in unstable angina/non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 41(4 Suppl. S): 89S-95S, 2003

CRUSADE bleeding risk score validation for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Thrombosis Research 132(6): 652-658, 2013

Comparison of outcomes of patients ≥ 80 years of age having percutaneous coronary intervention according to presentation (stable vs unstable angina pectoris/non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction vs ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction). American Journal of Cardiology 108(10): 1395-1400, 2011

Twelve-month clinical outcomes of acute non-ST versus ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with reduced preprocedural thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Coronary Artery Disease 29(5): 416-422, 2018

Does SYNTAX score predict in-hospital outcomes in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention?. Kardiologia Polska 72(9): 806-813, 2014