Validation of Glasgow-Blatchford Score in Predicting Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

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

Predictive value of albumin-bilirubin score combined with Glasgow-Blatchfordscale in the short-term prognosis of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage / 中国医师进修杂志

Objective:To investigate the predictive value of albumin-bilirubin score combined with Glasgow-Blatchfordscale(GBS) in the short-term prognosis of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.Methods:Eighty-one patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage who were treated in JingzhouHospital Affiliated to Yangtze University from May 2020 to May 2022 were selected as the research subjects, according to the prognosis of patients within 30 d, they were divided into poor prognosis group (35 cases) and fair prognosis group (46 cases). Clinical data were collected and the levels of albumin (ALB), creatinine (Cr), hemoglobin (Hb), total bilirubin (TBIL), urea nitrogen (BUN) and the scores of ALBI, GBS were compared between the two groups. The independent risk factors of short-term prognosis in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage were analyzed by Logistic multivariate regression analysis. The predictive value of ALBI score and GBS score for short-term prognosis of acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage was evaluated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were drawn, and the area under the curve was calculated and compared.Results:There were no significant differences in baseline data such as gender, heart rate, systolic blood pressure, smoking history, drinking history, drug use, syncope, mental changesand comorbidities between the two groups ( P>0.05). The age in the poor prognosis group was higher than that in the fair prognosis group: (65.60 ± 7.90) years vs. (62.60 ± 7.50) years, there was statistical difference ( P<0.05). The levels of BUN, TBIL and GBS scores in the poor prognosis group were higher than those in the fair prognosis group: (9.86 ± 2.94) mmol/L vs.(8.56 ± 2.66) mmol/L, (20.70 ± 12.31) μmol/L vs. (11.71 ± 8.11) μmol/L, (10.77 ± 1.59) scores vs. (7.91 ± 1.91) scores; the levels of Hb, Cr, ALB and ALBI scores were lower than those in the fair prognosis group: (74.97 ± 16.47) g/L vs.(84.01 ± 19.44) g/L, (65.72 ± 12.08) μmol/L vs. (70.37 ± 11.52) μmol/L, (25.67 ± 4.30) g/L vs. (32.62 ± 5.07) g/L, (0.75 ± 0.47) scores vs. (1.37 ± 0.43) scores, there were statistical differences ( P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that ALB, TBIL and ALBI, GSB scores were independent risk factors for death within 30 din patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage ( P<0.05). ROC curve analysis showed that the area under the curve of ALBI score and GBS score were 0.922 and 0.875, while the area under the curve of combined was 0.958, the sensitivity was 94.29%, and the specificity was 84.78%, which were significantly higher than predicted alone ( Z = 1.87, 2.44; P<0.05). Conclusions:ALBI score combined with GBS has good predictive value for short-term prognosis in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

The effect of the shock index and scoring systems for predicting mortality among geriatric patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a prospective cohort study

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.

Comparação dos escores não endoscópicos para a previsão de resultados em doentes com sangramento gastrointestinal alto na emergência de um hospital de referência em cuidados terciários: um estudo de coorte prospectivo / Comparison of non-endoscopic scores for the prediction of outcomes in patients of upper gastrointestinal bleed in an emergency of a tertiary care referral hospital: a prospective cohort study

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.

Riesgo de resangrado en hemorragia digestiva alta según la escala de Glasgow-Blatchford: herramienta de triaje / Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage re-bleeding risk according to the Glasgow-Blatchford scale: a triage tool

Resumen Introducción: Con la escala de Glasgow-Blatchford (EG-B) se califica mediante datos clínicos, el riesgo de resangrado después de hemorragia del tubo digestivo alto (HTDA); y con las escalas de Forrest y Dagradi, mediante endoscopia. Objetivo: Evaluar la capacidad de la EG-B para identificar riesgo de resangrado a 30 días después de una HTDA; el estándar de oro de comparación fue la endoscopia. Método: Se analizaron 129 expedientes de pacientes con HTDA y endoscopia. Se cuantificaron las escalas de Glasgow-Blatchford, Forrest y Dagradi; se calculó sensibilidad, especificidad y área bajo la curva ROC (ABC-ROC) del riesgo de resangrado reportado por EG-B. Resultados: La EG-B identificó a 53 pacientes con riesgo bajo de resangrado (41.09 %) y 76 con riesgo alto (58.91 %). Con la endoscopia se identificó a 107 pacientes con hemorragia no variceal (82.94 %), 98 con riesgo bajo (89.9 %) y 11 con riesgo alto (10.09 %); además, 22 pacientes con hemorragia variceal (17.05 %), 12 con riesgo bajo (54.54 %) y 10 con riesgo alto (45.45 %). La EG-B mostró sensibilidad de 0.857, especificidad de 0.462 y ABC-ROC de 0.660. Conclusiones: La EG-B es sencilla, objetiva y útil para identificar riesgo de resangrado después de HTDA; se sugiere como herramienta de triaje en urgencias.

Abstract Introduction: The Glasgow-Blatchford scale (GBS) classifies the risk of re-bleeding after upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) using clinical data, whereas the Forrest and Dagradi scales do it by endoscopy. Objective: To assess GBS’s ability to identify re-bleeding risk within 30 days of an UGIB, using endoscopy as the gold standard for comparison. Method: 129 medical records of patients with UGIB and endoscopy were analyzed. The Glasgow-Blatchford, Forrest and Dagradi scales were quantified; sensitivity, specificity and area under the ROC curve (AUC-ROC) of GBS-reported re-bleeding risk were calculated. Results: GBS identified 53 patients with low re-bleeding risk (41.09 %) and 76 with high risk (58.91 %). Endoscopy identified 107 patients with non-variceal bleeding (82.94 %): 98 with low risk (89.9 %) and 11 with high risk (10.09 %); in addition, it identified 22 patients with variceal hemorrhage (17.05 %): 12 with low risk (54.54 %) and 10 with high risk (45.45 %). GBS showed a sensitivity of 0.857, specificity of 0.462 and an AUC-ROC of 0.660. Conclusions: GBS is simple, objective and useful to identify the risk of re-bleeding after UGIB; it is suggested as a triage tool in the emergency department.

Comparison of prediction of outcomes in upper GI bleed using non-endoscopic scoring systems

Background: Several scoring systems have been designed for risk stratification and prediction of outcomes in upper GI bleed. Endoscopy plays a major role in the diagnostic and therapeutic management of UGIB patients. However not all patients with UGIB need endoscopy. The objective of the present study was compared the prediction of mortality using different scoring systems in patients with upper GI bleed. A decision tool with a high sensitivity would be able to identify high and low risk patients and for judicious utilization of available resources.Methods: 100 patients were assessed with respect to their clinical parameters, organ dysfunction, pertinent laboratory parameters and five risk assessment scores i.e. clinical Rockall, Glasgow Blatchford, ALBI, PALBI and AIMS65 were calculated.Results: For prediction of outcomes, AIMS65 was superior to the others (AUROC of 0.889), followed by the GBS (AUROC of 0.869), followed by clinical Rockall score (AUROC 0.815), followed by ALBI score (AUROC of 0.765), followed by PALBI score (AUROC of 0.714) all values being statistically significant.Conclusions: The AIMS65 score is best in predicting the mortality in patients with upper GI bleed. The optimum cut off being >2. Though GBS may be better in predicting the need for intervention, it is inferior in predicting the mortality. The newer scores like ALBI and PALBI are inferior to AIMS65 and GBS in predicting mortality.

Comparative study on Glasgow-Blatchford score and full Rockall score system in predicting clinical outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding / 天津医药

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.

Comparison of AIMS65 Score and Other Scoring Systems for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Koreans with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

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.