Physicians' Academy for Cardiovascular Education

HAS-BLED score better predicts major bleeding in anticoagulated AF patients

Literature - Roldán V, Marín F, Manzano-Fernández S et al. - J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Sep 13

The HAS-BLED score has better prediction accuracy for major bleeding than the CHADS2 or CHA2DS2-VASc scores In anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation.

Roldán V, Marín F, Manzano-Fernández S et al.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Sep 13. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.08.1623. [Epub ahead of print]


Different stroke risk stratification schemes exist for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients [1], such as the CHADS2 (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age >75, Diabetes mellitus, and prior Stroke or TIA [Doubled])  score [2]. The more recent CHA2DS2-VASc Cardiac failure or dysfunction, Hypertension, Age ≥75 [Doubled], Diabetes, Stroke [Doubled] – Vascular disease, Age 65-74 and Sex category [Female]) score focuses more on the initial identification of ‘truly low risk’ identification as the initial decision-making step [1,3,4].
Since stroke risk and bleeding risk are closely related, the CHADS2 score closely correlates with bleeding rate [5,6]. As a result, clinicians sometimes use the CHADS2 score or the CHA2DS2-VASc score as an indicator of bleeding risk. This could lead to low use of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with high scores in these risk assessments [7-9].
Specific bleeding risk scores have been developed for patients with AF [10]. The HAS-BLED score (Hypertension, Abnormal Renal/Liver Function, Stroke, Bleeding History or Predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/Alcohol Concomitantly) is now recommended in European and Canadian AF guidelines to estimate major bleeding risk in AF patients on anticoagulation [4, 10-12]. HAS-BLED has been shown to be a better predictor of serious bleeding both in clinical trial cohorts [13] and ‘real world’ clinical practice [14,15]. In addition, it is the only risk score that can predict intracranial bleeding in AF [13] and non-AF patients [16].
This study tested the hypothesis that the specific bleeding risk score HAS-BLED has better predictive value for major bleeding than CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc in AF patients on anticoagulation (with acenocoumarol and with a consistent INR between 2.0 and 3.0 over the past 6 months). 1370 patients were included and followed for a median time of 996 (IQR: 802-1254) days. 114 patients presented with a major bleeding event, of which 31 intracranial.

Main results

  • Univariate analysis showed predictive value of both the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores for bleeding events, with HR: 1.31 (95% CI:1.14-1.52; p<0.001) and HR: 1.22 (95% CI: 1.09-1.37; p=0.001),respectively. The HAS-BLED score was more predictive for major bleeds, with HR: 1.94 (95% CI: 1.66-2.28; p<0.001).
  • The C-statistics for HAS-BLED (mean 0.69 + SD 0.03, P<0.001) and the multivariable model (0.71 + ).03, P<0.001) were significantly higher than those for CHADS2 (0.59 + 0.03, P=0.002) or CHA2DS2-VASc (0.58 + 0.03, P=0.006) (P<0.001 for both comparisons).
  • After adjustment for HAS-BLED score, both CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc lost their significance in predictive value in the multivariate analysis.
  • Both net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) showed that the HAS-BLED score was more accurately associated with major bleeding episodes than with both of the other scores.


This study confirms the hypothesis that the HAS-BLED score is of modest but significantly better predictive value than stroke stratification scores CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc, for major bleeding events in anticoagulated AF patients. Consequently, the well-validated and user-friendly HAS-BLED score should be used, while use of the other scores should be avoided to assess high bleeding risk.


1. Lip GY. Stroke and bleeding risk assessment in atrial fibrillation: when, how, and why? Eur Heart J. 2012 doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehs435
2. Gage BF, Waterman AD, Shannon W, et al. Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation. JAMA 2001;285:2864-2870.
3. Lip GY, Nieuwlaat R, Pisters R et al. Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor-based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest 2010; 137:263-72.
4. Camm AJ, Lip GY, De Caterina R, et al; ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. 2012 focused update of the ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: An update of the 2010 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation. Developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association. Eur Heart J 2012; 33:2719-2747.
5. Poli D, Antonucci E, Marcucci R, et al. Risk of bleeding in very old atrial fibrillation patients on warfarin:
relationship with ageing and CHADS2 score. Thromb Res 2007;121:347-52.
6. Hylek EM, Evans-Molina C, Shea C, et al. Major hemorrhage and tolerability of warfarin in the first year of therapy among elderly patients with atrial fibrillation. Circulation 2007;115:2689-96.
7. Kirchhof P, Nabauer M, Gerth A, et al; AFNET registry investigators. Impact of the type of centre on management of AF patients: surprising evidence for differences in antithrombotic therapy decisions. Thromb Haemost. 2011;105:1010-23.
8. Wilke T, Groth A, Mueller S, et al. Oral anticoagulation use by patients with atrial fibrillation in Germany. Adherence to guidelines, causes of anticoagulation under-use and its clinical outcomes, based on claims-data of 183,448 patients. Thromb Haemost 2012;107:1053-65.
9. Holt TA, Hunter TD, Gunnarsson C, et al. Risk of stroke and oral anticoagulant use in atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional survey. Br J Gen Pract 2012;62:e710-7.
10. Lip GY, Andreotti F, Fauchier L, et al; European Heart Rhythm Association. Bleeding risk assessment and management in atrial fibrillation patients. Executive Summary of a Position Document from the European Heart Rhythm Association [EHRA], endorsed by the European Society of Cardiology [ESC] Working Group on Thrombosis. Thromb Haemost 2011; 106: 997-1011.
11. Pisters R, Lane DA, Nieuwlaat R, et al. A Novel User-Friendly Score (HAS-BLED) To Assess 1-Year Risk of Major Bleeding in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: The Euro Heart Survey. Chest 2010; 138:1093-100.
12. Skanes AC, Healey JS, Cairns JA, et al; Canadian Cardiovascular Society Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines
Committee. Focused 2012 update of the Canadian Cardiovascular Society atrial fibrillation guidelines: recommendations for stroke prevention and rate/rhythm control. Can J Cardiol. 2012;28:125-36.
13. Apostolakis S, Lane DA, Guo Y, et al. Performance of the HEMORR(2)HAGES, ATRIA, and HAS-BLED bleeding risk-prediction scores in nonwarfarin anticoagulated atrial fibrillation patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:386-7.
14. Roldan V, Marín F, Fernández H, et al. Predictive value of the HAS-BLED and ATRIA bleeding scores for the
risk of serious bleeding in a “real-world” population with atrial fibrillation receiving anticoagulant therapy. Chest 2013;143:179-84.
15. Lip GY, Banerjee A, Lagrenade I, et al. Assessing the risk of bleeding in patients with atrial fibrillation: the Loire Valley Atrial Fibrillation project. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 2012;5:941-8.
16. Lip GY, Lin HJ, Hsu HC et al. Comparative assessment of the HAS-BLED score with other published bleeding risk scoring schemes for intracranial haemorrhage risk in a non-atrial fibrillation population: The Chin-Shan Community Cohort Study. Int J Cardiol 2013

Find this article on Pubmed

Share this page with your colleagues and friends: