ABSTRACT
Background : Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding is a common emergency with varying degrees of severity. Haemorrhage is managed by Therapeutic Endoscopy, Radiological Intervention or Surgery and Blood Transfusion which are available only in Tertiary Care Centre. So, when patient presents in primary healthcare setting, it is important to recognize the patients who need this treatment. Glasgow-Blatchford Score is a score which is used for this purpose. The purpose of this research was to validate its reliability in identifying such high-risk patients. Materials and Methods : This study was prospective and observational, conducted in Medical College and Hospital, from December, 2017 to May, 2019. All adult patients presenting to Emergency Department with sudden onset Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding were included. Glasgow-Blatchford Score was computed. Patients were followed up till their discharge (or death) from the hospital. The therapeutic management needed and its relationship with the score and treatment modalities were noted. Area under Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve was calculated. Results : Total 100 patients were included in study. 85% were male and 15% were female. Glasgow-Blatchford Score was found as a good predictor in discriminating patients. Patients with score 14. Interventional radiology or surgery was never used. The area under ROC Curve was 0.738 suggesting fair reliability. Conclusion : Glasgow-Blatchford Score is good predicting tool in cases of Upper Gastrointestinal bleeding and patients with score >7 should be transferred to speciality centres
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is an important cause of mortality and morbidity among geriatric patients. OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether the shock index and other scoring systems are effective predictors of mortality and prognosis among geriatric patients presenting to the emergency department with complaints of upper GI bleeding. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective cohort study in an emergency department in Bursa, Turkey. METHODS: Patients over 65 years admitted to a single-center, tertiary emergency service between May 8, 2019, and April 30, 2020, and diagnosed with upper GI bleeding were analyzed. 30, 180 and 360-day mortality prediction performances of the shock index and the Rockall, Glasgow-Blatchford and AIMS-65 scores were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients who met the criteria were included in the study. The shock index (P < 0.001) and AIMS-65 score (P < 0.05) of the patients who died within the 30-day period were found to be significantly different, while the shock index (P < 0.001), Rockall score (P < 0.001) and AIMS-65 score (P < 0.05) of patients who died within the 180-day and 360-day periods were statistically different. In the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for predicting 360-day mortality, the area under the curve (AUC) value was found to be 0.988 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.971-1.000; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The shock index measured among geriatric patients with upper GI bleeding at admission seems to be a more effective predictor of prognosis than other scoring systems.
ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Traditionally peptic ulcer disease was the most common cause of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleed but with the changing epidemiology; other etiologies of UGI bleed are emerging. Many scores have been described for predicting outcomes and the need for intervention in UGI bleed but prospective comparison among them is scarce. OBJECTIVE: This study was planned to determine the etiological pattern of UGI bleed and to compare Glasgow Blatchford score, Pre-Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) as predictors of outcome. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study 268 patients of UGI bleed were enrolled and followed up for 8 weeks. Glasgow Blatchford score, Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and MEWS were calculated for each patient, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve for each score was compared. RESULTS: The most common etiology for UGI bleed were gastroesophageal varices 150 (63.55%) followed by peptic ulcer disease 29 (12.28%) and mucosal erosive disease 27 (11.44%). Total 38 (15.26%) patients had re-bleed and 71 (28.5%) patients died. Overall, 126 (47%) patients required blood component transfusion, 25 (9.3%) patients required mechanical ventilation and 2 (0.74%) patients required surgical intervention. Glasgow Blatchford score was the best in predicting the need for transfusion (cut off - 10, AUC-ROC= 0.678). Whereas AIMS65 with a score of ≥2 was best in predicting re-bleed (AUC-ROC=0.626) and mortality (AUC-ROC=0.725). CONCLUSION: Gastrointestinal bleed was most commonly of variceal origin at our tertiary referral center in Northern India. AIMS65 was the best & simplest score with a score of ≥2 for predicting re-bleed and mortality.
RESUMO CONTEXTO: Tradicionalmente, a doença úlcera péptica era a causa mais comum de sangramento digestivo alto, mas com a mudança da epidemiologia, outras etiologias do sangramento do trato digestivo alto estão emergindo. Muitas pontuações têm sido descritas para prever resultados e a necessidade de intervenção na hemorragia gastrointestinal superior, mas a comparação prospectiva entre elas é escassa. OBJETIVO: Este estudo foi planeado para determinar o padrão etiológico de pacientes com hemorragia digestiva alta e comparar os escores de Glasgow Blatchford, o Rockall pré-endoscopia, o AIMS65 e o Early Warning modificado (MEWS) como preditores do resultado. MÉTODOS: Neste estudo prospetivo de coorte, 268 pacientes com sangramento digestivo alto foram acompanhados durante 8 semanas. Os escores Glasgow Blatchford, Rockall pré-endoscopia, AIMS65 e MEWS foram calculados para cada paciente, e a área sob a curva (AUC-ROC) para cada pontuação foi comparada. RESULTADOS: A etiologia mais comum para a hemorragia gastrointestinal alta foi varizes gastroesofágicas 150 (63,55%), seguida de úlcera péptica 29 (12,28%) e de doença erosiva de mucosa 27 (11,44%). No total, 38 (15,26%) doentes voltaram a sangrar e 71 (28,5%) doentes morreram. No total, 126 (47%) doentes necessitaram de transfusão de componentes sanguíneos, 25 (9,3%) necessitaram de ventilação mecânica e 2 (0,74%) destes doentes necessitaram de intervenção cirúrgica. O escore de Glasgow Blatchford foi o melhor na previsão da necessidade de transfusão (corte - 10, AUC-ROC =0,678). Enquanto o AIMS65 com uma pontuação de ≥2 foi o melhor na previsão de ressangramento (AUC-ROC =0,626) e mortalidade (AUC-ROC =0,725). CONCLUSÃO: O sangramento gastrointestinal alto mais comum é de origem varicosa em centro de referência terciária. O AIMS65 é o melhor escore simples, com uma pontuação de ≥2 para prever o ressangramento e a mortalidade.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) with full Rockall score system (full RS) in predicting clinical outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding(UGIB).Methods Four hundred hospitalized UGIB patients were enrolled in this study in Baoji Central Hospital from March 2014 to June 2016. Patients were scored by full RS and GBS,respectively.The receiver operating characteristic(ROC)curve analysis was used to compare the predictive values of the two score systems for mortality,re-bleeding,transfusion,ICU admission and endoscopic intervention. Results Thirty-eight cases were lost in follow-up. The one-month mortality rate, re-bleeding rate, blood transfusion rate, ICU admission rate and endoscopic intervention rate of 362 patients were 11.6%, 9.4%, 17.7%, 13.3% and 16.0%, respectively. GBS showed better predictive values in ICU admission (AUC=0.731, P=0.009), re-bleeding (AUC=0.707, P=0.019), blood transfusion (AUC=0.704, P=0.021) and endoscopic intervention (AUC=0.742, P=0.006). Full RS showed better predictive values in one-month mortality (AUC=0.681, P=0.040). There was significant difference in predicting value of clinical outcomes of UGIB by ROC curve between GBS and full-RS systems (P<0.05). Conclusion The GBS system is more suitable for predicting clinical outcomes of ICU admission, re-bleeding, blood transfusion and endoscopic intervention in patients of UGIB.The full-RS system is more suitable for predicting one-month mortality of UGIB patients.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/AIMS: The AIMS65 score has not been sufficiently validated in Korea. The objective of this study was to compare the AIMS65 and other scoring systems for the prediction of various clinical outcomes in Korean patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). METHODS: The AIMS65 score, clinical and full Rockall scores (cRS and fRS) and Glasgow-Blatchford (GBS) score were calculated in patients with NVUGIB in a single center retrospectively. The performance of these scores for predicting mortality, rebleeding, transfusion requirement, and endoscopic intervention was assessed by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: Of the 523 patients, 3.4% died within 30 days, 2.5% experienced rebleeding, 40.0% required endoscopic intervention, and 75.7% needed transfusion. The AIMS65 score was useful for predicting the 30-day mortality, the need for endoscopic intervention and for transfusion. The fRS was superior to the AIMS65, GBS, and cRS for predicting endoscopic intervention and the GBS was superior to the AIMS65, fRS, and cRS for predicting the transfusion requirement. CONCLUSIONS: The AIMS65 score was useful for predicting the 30-day mortality, transfusion requirement, and endoscopic intervention in Korean patients with acute NVUGIB. However, it was inferior to the GBS and fRS for predicting the transfusion requirement and endoscopic intervention, respectively.