Treatment decisions are guided by the evaluation of ischemic and hemorrhagic risks, as determined by clinical scores (like CHADS2; CHA2DS2-VASc; HAS-BLED) that have been validated on varying populations through retrospective cohort studies. However, since their publication, these clinical scores have been criticized regarding their predictive value, the lack of precision in the definition of their component and the threshold defined for treatment decisions. Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated the interest of biomarkers in addition to clinical parameters to predict the risk of cardiovascular complications in AF. For example, preliminary data suggest that the dosage of Brain-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), N-terminal (NT) Pro-BNP, troponin, C-reactive protein (CRP), and all indicators whose levels increase independently of their usual causes may contribute to a better prediction of cardiovascular complications including all-cause mortality in NVAF. Of note, the rate of major bleeding events was very low (1.5 per cent among 3,978 patients from the Euro Heart Survey on AF with complete follow-up) in the HAS-BLED validation cohort.