RESUMEN
Objective To evaluate the predictive value of Admission-Rockall Score (aRS), Full-Rockall Score ( fRS ), Glasgow-Blatchford Score ( GBS ) and AIMS65 scoring systems for rebleeding, mortality, transfusion and clinical intervention of patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding ( ANVUGIB). Methods A retrospective study was performed on the data of 294 ANVUGIB inpatients in the Department of Gastroenterology of Tianjin Medical University General Hospital from January 2015 to September 2016. Each patient was graded using the four scoring systems. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve ( AUC) about rebleeding, mortality, blood transfusion and clinical intervention was calculated using each system. Results For predicting rebleeding, fRS (AUC＝0. 696) and GBS (AUC＝0. 697) were both superior to aRS (AUC＝0. 609, P＜0. 05) and AIMS65 (AUC＝0. 571, P＜0. 05), and there was no significant difference on AUC between fRS and GBS (P＞0. 05). For predicting mortality, the AUC of aRS, fRS, GBS and AIMS65 were 0. 755, 0. 791, 0. 818, and 0. 780, respectively, and there were no significant differences (P＞0. 05). There were no significant differences in the predicting transfusion among four scoring systems, and the AUC was 0. 625, 0. 626, 0. 697 and 0. 658, respectively. Regarding clinical intervention treatment, fRS (AUC＝0. 661) was superior than that of aRS (AUC＝0. 520, P＜0. 05) and AIMS65 (AUC＝0. 545, P＜0. 05), and the AUC of GBS and three other scoring systems had no significant differences (P＞0. 05). Conclusion The four scoring systems are all with good predicting value on mortality of patients with ANVUGIB, while not on other aspects including rebleeding, transfusion and clinical intervention. fRS has a slightly better value on prediction of rebleeding and clinical intervention, and GBS is slightly better on prediction of rebleeding.
RESUMEN
Objective To investigate the accuracy of prognosis risk assessment and clinical applicability of Rockall (RS) and Blatchford scoring system (BRS) for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB). Methods From January 2009 to December 2009, the clinical date 195 ANVUGIB patients who met the standards with complete information and treated in The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University were recorded. Each patient's scores of RS and BRS were calculated for risk stratification. Patients were followed up for 30 days after discharged.Death or the prognosis of disease in 30 days after discharged was considered as clinical study endpoints.Checked prognostic capacity of these two scoring system. Results In the 195 patients, there were 150 years, mean age was 53.97±18.34 years. 90 patients' age was over sixty (elderly group), 105 less than sixty (non-elderly group). 182 patients survived (93.3%), while 13 dead (6.7%). In survival patients, 11were re-bleeding (5.6 %). Mortality ( 12.2 %, 11/90), the percentage of patients with comorbidities (43.3%, 39/90) and taking aspirin (24. 4%, 22/90) were higher in elderly patients than non-elderly patients (1.9%, 2/105; 16.2%, 17/105; 11.4%, 12/105 respectively)(P＜0.05).The AUC of RS in predicting risk of death was 0.742 (P=0.004) and re-bleeding was 0.469 (P=0.101). For BRS score system, the AUC of predicting risk of death was 0. 493 (P= 0. 067)and rebleeding was 0.341(P=0.092). The RS score was positively correlated with length of hospital stay,however there was no statistically significant between BRS score and length of hospital stay.Conclusion RS score system was good at predicting the risk of death, and the score was positively correlated with length of hospital stay. While it was poor in predicting the risk of re-bleeding. BRS performed poorly in predicting the risk of both death and re-bleeding, so it was not suitable for predicting the risk of hospitalized patients.