Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 256

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Incidence and Predictors of Bleeding After Contemporary Thrombolytic Therapy for Myocardial Infarction

Open access
Berkowitz, Scott D., Granger, Christopher B., Pieper, Karen S., Lee, Kerry L., Gore, Joel M., Simoons, Maarten, Armstrong, Paul W., Topol, Eric J., Califf, Robert M.·1997·Circulation

Abstract

Background Although the benefit of thrombolytic therapy in reducing mortality in acute myocardial infarction is well established, the types of bleeding and risk factors for bleeding are less well described in large trials. Methods and Results We analyzed the baseline characteristics, outcomes, and incidence of bleeding by location, severity, and treatment assignment among 41 021 patients in the GUSTO-I trial of thrombolysis for acute myocardial infarction. Of the 40 903 patients for whom there were complete data, 1.2% suffered severe bleeding and 11.4% experienced moderate hemorrhage at a variety of sites. The most common sources of bleeding were procedure related. The thrombolytic regimen was strongly related to the incidence of bleeding; comparatively more bleeding was seen with the therapies of streptokinase plus intravenous heparin and the streptokinase and tissue plasminogen activator plus intravenous heparin combination. In multivariate analysis, the four most powerful independent predictors of hemorrhage were older age, lighter body weight, female sex, and African ancestry; they remained the most important predictors of bleeding when multivariate analysis was performed on patients who did not undergo invasive procedures. The presence of serious hemorrhage was associated with other undesirable outcomes (recurrent events, left ventricular dysfunction, arrhythmia, or stroke). Conclusions Important predictors of bleeding in this population are increased age, lighter weight, female sex, African ancestry, and experiencing invasive procedures. Other nonhemorrhagic adverse clinical outcomes were associated with moderate and severe bleeding, which was in turn associated with increased length of hospital stay and mortality at 30 days.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.95.11.2508

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 256

Metadata

Authors
Berkowitz, S. D., Granger, C. B., Pieper, K. S., Lee, K. L., Gore, J. M., Simoons, M., Armstrong, P. W., Topol, E. J., & Califf, R. M.
Venue
Circulation
Published
1997-06-03
Volume
95
Issue
11
Pages
2508-2516
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2092213174
Cited by
256
References
0
FWCI
5.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Incidence and Predictors of Bleeding After Contemporary Thrombolytic Therapy for Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.95.11.2508
The paper
Berkowitz, S. D., Granger, C. B., Pieper, K. S., Lee, K. L., Gore, J. M., Simoons, M., Armstrong, P. W., Topol, E. J., & Califf, R. M. (1997). Incidence and Predictors of Bleeding After Contemporary Thrombolytic Therapy for Myocardial Infarction. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.95.11.2508

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.