Literature DB >> 27356670

Glasgow Blatchford, pre-endoscopic Rockall and AIMS65 scores show no difference in predicting rebleeding rate and mortality in variceal bleeding.

Ivan Budimir3, Marina Gradišer2, Marko Nikolić1, Neven Baršić1, Neven Ljubičić1, Dominik Kralj1, Ivan Budimir3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of the Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS), pre-endoscopic Rockall score (PRS) and AIMS65 score in predicting specific clinical endpoints following variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2013, we retrospectively analyzed 225 consecutive hospitalized patients managed for endoscopically confirmed UGIH.
RESULTS: A total of 225 patients (mean age 61.3 years), mostly diagnosed with alcoholic cirrhosis (195/86.7%), presented with variceal UGIH during the study period. Rebleeding occurred in 22 (9.8%) patients and 30-day mortality was 39 (17.3%). Initial hemostasis was achieved with N-butyl cyanoacrylate (151/79.1%) and endoscopic variceal ligation (40/20.9%), while secondary rebleeding prophylaxis in 110 (48.9%) patients was accomplished using endoscopic variceal ligation (92%). The majority of patients died from the underlying disease, while 12 (30.8%) died from bleeding. Median hospital stay was 6 (1-35) days. There was no statistically significant difference among AIMS65, GBS and PRS in predicting mortality (AUROC 0.70 vs. 0.64 vs. 0.66) or rebleeding rates (AUROC 0.74 vs. 0.60 vs. 0.67). The GBS was superior in predicting the need for blood transfusion compared to AIMS65 score (AUROC 0.75 vs. 0.61, p = 0.01) and PRS (AUROC 0.75 vs. 0.58, p = 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS: The AIMS65, GBS and PRS scores are comparable but not useful for predicting outcome in patients with variceal UGIH because of poor discriminative ability. The GBS is superior in predicting the need for transfusion compared to AIMS65 score and PRS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blood transfusion; esophageal and gastric varices; gastrointestinal endoscopy; gastrointestinal hemorrhage; liver cirrhosis; mortality

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27356670     DOI: 10.1080/00365521.2016.1200138

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0036-5521            Impact factor:   2.423


  11 in total

1.  Comparing AIMS65 Score With MEWS, qSOFA Score, Glasgow-Blatchford Score, and Rockall Score for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Cirrhotic Patients With Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Authors:  Yi-Chen Lai; Ming-Szu Hung; Yu-Han Chen; Yi-Chuan Chen
Journal:  J Acute Med       Date:  2018-12-01

2.  Association of inferior vena cava diameter ratio with outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  Namwoo Jo; Jaehoon Oh; Hyunggoo Kang; Tae Ho Lim; Byuk Sung Ko
Journal:  Clin Exp Emerg Med       Date:  2022-06-10

3.  Comparison of AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring approaches in predicting the risk of in-hospital death among emergency hospitalized patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective observational study in Nanjing, China.

Authors:  Lei Gu; Fei Xu; Jie Yuan
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-06-28       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Validation of a new risk score system for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  Min Seong Kim; Hee Seok Moon; In Sun Kwon; Jae Ho Park; Ju Seok Kim; Sun Hyung Kang; Jae Kyu Sung; Eaum Seok Lee; Seok Hyun Kim; Byung Seok Lee; Hyun Yong Jeong
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-06-17       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  Risk Factors for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients.

Authors:  Tianyu Chi; Quchuan Zhao; Peili Wang
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2021-03-08       Impact factor: 2.260

6.  Prospective Comparison of the AIMS65 Score, Glasgow-Blatchford Score, and Rockall Score for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Variceal and Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Authors:  Arunchai Chang; Chokethawee Ouejiaraphant; Keerati Akarapatima; Attapon Rattanasupa; Varayu Prachayakul
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2020-07-16

7.  Application of chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment score for the predication of mortality after esophageal variceal hemorrhage post endoscopic ligation.

Authors:  Ming-Wun Wong; Ming-Jen Chen; Huan-Lin Chen; Yu-Chi Kuo; I-Tsung Lin; Chia-Hsien Wu; Yuan-Kai Lee; Chun-Han Cheng; Ming-Jong Bair
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Scoring systems for peptic ulcer bleeding: Which one to use?

Authors:  Ivan Budimir; Sanja Stojsavljević; Neven Baršić; Alen Bišćanin; Gorana Mirošević; Sven Bohnec; Lora Stanka Kirigin; Tajana Pavić; Neven Ljubičić
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-11-07       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Risk stratification in acute variceal bleeding: Far from an ideal score.

Authors:  Carla Luiza de Souza Aluizio; Ciro Garcia Montes; Glaucia Fernanda Soares Ruppert Reis; Cristiane Kibune Nagasako
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 2.365

10.  Prediction model of emergency mortality risk in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Lan Chen; Han Zheng; Saibin Wang
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.