Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 20, 2026

The WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 28, 2012
Comparison of bleeding risk scores in patients with atrial fibrillation: insights from the RE-LY trial
M Proietti1,2, Z Hijazi3,4, U Andersson4
1Department of Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties, Sapienza-University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Insights
The ORBIT score best predicted bleeding risk in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients compared to HAS-BLED, ATRIA, and HEMORR2HAGES. All scores showed interactions with bleeding risk for dabigatran versus warfarin.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Pharmacology
- Clinical Risk Assessment
Background:
- Oral anticoagulation is crucial for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) but carries bleeding risks.
- Several risk scores exist to predict bleeding events in AF patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the performance of four contemporary clinical bleeding risk scores.
- Evaluate scores in 18,113 AF patients randomized to dabigatran or warfarin in the RE-LY trial.
Main Methods:
- HAS-BLED, ORBIT, ATRIA, and HEMORR2HAGES scores were calculated at baseline.
- Major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated.
- Performance was assessed using discrimination and calibration metrics.
Main Results:
- Over 2 years, 1182 (6.5%) major bleeding events occurred.
- The ORBIT score demonstrated superior discrimination for major, life-threatening, and intracranial bleeding compared to HAS-BLED.
- Significant interactions were found between bleeding scores (ORBIT, ATRIA, HEMORR2HAGES) and bleeding risk with dabigatran 150 mg BD versus warfarin.
Conclusions:
- The ORBIT score exhibited the best discrimination and calibration among the evaluated bleeding risk scores.
- All assessed scores showed variable interactions with bleeding risk associated with dabigatran or warfarin.
Background:
Oral anticoagulation is the mainstay of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF), but must be balanced against the associated bleeding risk. Several risk scores have been proposed for prediction of bleeding events in patients with AF.
Objectives:
To compare the performance of contemporary clinical bleeding risk scores in 18 113 patients with AF randomized to dabigatran 110 mg, 150 mg or warfarin in the RE-LY trial.
Methods:
HAS-BLED, ORBIT, ATRIA and HEMORR2 HAGES bleeding risk scores were calculated based on clinical information at baseline. All major bleeding events were centrally adjudicated.
Results:
There were 1182 (6.5%) major bleeding events during a median follow-up of 2.0 years. For all the four schemes, high-risk subgroups had higher risk of major bleeding (all P < 0.001). The ORBIT score showed the best discrimination with c-indices of 0.66, 0.66 and 0.62, respectively, for major, life-threatening and intracranial bleeding, which were significantly better than for the HAS-BLED score (difference in c-indices: 0.050, 0.053 and 0.048, respectively, all P < 0.05). The ORBIT score also showed the best calibration compared with previous data. Significant treatment interactions between the bleeding scores and the risk of major bleeding with dabigatran 150 mg BD versus warfarin were found for the ORBIT (P = 0.0019), ATRIA (P < 0.001) and HEMORR2 HAGES (P < 0.001) scores. HAS-BLED score showed a nonsignificant trend for interaction (P = 0.0607).
Conclusions:
Amongst the current clinical bleeding risk scores, the ORBIT score demonstrated the best discrimination and calibration. All the scores demonstrated, to a variable extent, an interaction with bleeding risk associated with dabigatran or warfarin.
More Related Videos
28:13Catheter Ablation in Combination With Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: February 26, 2013
08:10Estimating Bilateral Atrial Function by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Feature Tracking in Patients with Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation
Published on: July 20, 2022
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Relative Risk