Outcomes in Patients Stratified by PRECISE-DAPT Versus DAPT Scores After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

The optimal length of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains debated. Current guidelines recommend individualized treatment with consideration of risk scores. We sought to evaluate the degree of agreement in treatment recommendations and the ability to predict ischemic and bleeding complications of the PRECISE-DAPT (predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy) and DAPT scores. Consecutive patients receiving 12 months of DAPT were grouped based on score treatment recommendation at the time of PCI: PRECISE-DAPT prolonged or shortened (PRECISE DAPT <25 vs ≥25) and DAPT prolonged or shortened (DAPT ≥2 vs <2). One-year ischemic and bleeding outcomes were compared for each group. In 451 patients, the PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT score recommendations were concordant in 56.7% of patients (Cohen's kappa for agreement of k = 0.139, 95% confidence interval 0.065 to 0.212). There was no difference in composite major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events between patients with high versus low PRECISE-DAPT or DAPT scores. In patients with a high PRECISE-DAPT score versus a low score, there was an increased incidence of 1-year all-cause mortality (2.13% vs 0%, p = 0.04) and an increase in bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium ≥3a: 17.0% vs 2.8%; p <0.001; Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3b/c and 5: 8.5% vs 1.4%; p = 0.001). There were no differences in rates of mortality or bleeding for patients with high versus low DAPT scores. In conclusion, when applied at the baseline, the PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT scores frequently make discordant DAPT duration recommendations. The PRECISE-DAPT, but not the DAPT score, demonstrated associations with all-cause mortality and bleeding in patients prescribed 12 months of DAPT after PCI.