RESUMEN

Background: The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a simple marker of systemic inflammatory responses. The present study aims to evaluate the prognostic significance of the NLR on admission day in predicting outcomes for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), which is a prevalent medical emergency. Methods: 726 patients who were admitted to our clinic between January 2019 and December 2022 diagnosed with UGIB, and who underwent necessary examinations, were included in the study. The patients' Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS), Full Rockall Score (FRS), and NLR levels were calculated at the first admission. Outcomes were defined as in-hospital mortality, need for blood transfusion, surgical treatment and endoscopic therapy. Patients were categorized into four groups using NLR quartile levels to compare their clinical characteristics, Glasgow Blatchford Score, Full Rockall Score levels, and prognosis. Secondary, we modified FRS and GBS by adding NLR, respectively. We used area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) to assess the accuracy of risk prediction for NLR, NLR-GBS, and NLR-FRS improved models. Results: Of 726 patients, 6% died in hospital, 23.9% received endoscopic interventon, 4.8% received surgical treatment, and 46.4% received transfusion therapy. Multifactorial logistic regression showed that a high level of NLR was a risk factor for death in patients with UGIB (p = 0.028). NLR, GBS, FRS, NLR-GBS, and NLR-FRS have sufficient accuracy in predicting inpatient mortality, endoscopic treatment, and transfusion treatment, and the differences are statistically significant (p < 0.05). In the comprehensive prediction of adverse outcomes, NLR-GBS has the highest AUROC, and in predicting inpatient mortality, NLR-FRS has the highest AUROC. Conclusion: For UGIB patients, a high NLR was strongly associated with high risk UGIB. Combined testing with the GBS and FRS can achieve good predictive results, which is valuable in guiding the pre-screening and triage of emergency nursing care and clinical treatment to ensure that patients receive rapid and effective treatment and improve the quality of care.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the performance of the Oakland, Glasgow-Blatchford, and AIMS65 scores in predicting the clinical outcomes of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted from July 2020 to July 2021. Patients admitted with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding were enrolled. The Oakland, Glasgow-Blatchford, and AIMS65 scores were calculated. The primary outcome was validating the performance of the scores in predicting severe LGIB; secondary outcomes were comparing the performance of the scores in predicting the need for blood transfusion, hemostatic interventions, in-hospital rebleeding, and mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for all outcomes. The associations between all three scores and the primary outcomes were calculated using multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Patients with acute LGIB (n = 150) were enrolled (88 [58.7%] men and mean age: 63.6 ± 17.3 years). The rates of severe LGIB, need for blood transfusion, hemostatic intervention, in-hospital rebleeding, and in-hospital mortality were 54.7%, 79.3%, 10.7%, and 3.3%, respectively. The Oakland and Glasgow-Blatchford scores had comparable performance in predicting severe LGIB, need for blood transfusion, and mortality, outperforming the AIMS65 score. All scores were suboptimal for predicting hemostatic interventions and rebleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the predictive performances of the Oakland score and the GBS are excellent and comparable for severe LGIB, the need for blood transfusion, and in-hospital mortality in patients with acute LGIB. Thus, GBS could be considered as an alternative predictive score for stratification of the patients with acute LGIB.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIM: This study investigates the effectiveness of bedside ultrasonography in predicting blood transfusion requirements in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). It focuses on evaluating the inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter, IVC collapsibility index (CI), and stroke volume (SV) as ultrasonographic measures. METHODS: A hundred adult patients enrolled in this prospective clinical study. The patients were divided into two groups (group 1: only saline administered group, group 2: saline and blood administered group). IVC diameter, IVC CI, and SV were measured at the time of admission and after treatment. RESULTS: At the initial admission, group 1 exhibited an IVC CI of 20.4% and an SV of 65.0 mL, whereas group 2 displayed an IVC CI of 26.6% and an SV of 58.0 mL. Upon analyzing the relationship between the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) and SV, we identified a significant negative correlation (r = -0.7350; P < 0.001). Similarly, a weak negative correlation was observed between the Rockall score (RS) and SV (r = -0.4718; P < 0.001). It is worth noting that patients with UGIB require blood transfusion if their SV falls below 62.5 mL, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 89.1% and a 95% confidence interval (CI) ranging from 82.8% to 95.4%. CONCLUSION: IVC CI and SV can be used as parameters to predict the need for blood transfusion in the ED in patients with UGIB.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: This study aimed to compare the prognostic value of ABC, Glasgow-Blatchford, Rockall and AIMS65 scoring systems in predicting rebleeding rate within 30 days after endoscopic treatment of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 93 patients with ANVUGIB were selected as the study subjects and they were divided into groups according to whether there was rebleeding in the 30 days' follow-up period. 7 patients with rebleeding within 30 days were included in the rebleeding group, and the other 86 patients without rebleeding were included in the non-rebleeding group. RESULTS: By drawing ROC curve, we found that ABC scoring system had the highest accuracy (area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65]) in predicting rebleeding within 30 days compared with the AIMS65 (0.56; P < 0.001), RS (0.51; P < 0.001), and GBS (0.61; P < 0.001). ABC scoring system showed the highest risk of rebleeding in 30 days. When the 4 scoring standards were judged as medium-high risk patients, the efficacy of the ABC scoring system in predicting the risk of rebleeding at 30 days for ANVUGIB was found to be the best in diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive evaluation showed that ABC score had the highest prediction accuracy. The negative differential significance of each evaluation method was great, that is, the risk of rebleeding was generally low when judged as low risk patients, while the value of predicting rebleeding was limited when judged as medium and high risk patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Albumin, international normalized ratio (INR), mental status, systolic blood pressure, age >65 years (AIMS65), Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (GBS) and modified GBS (mGBS) are three pre-endoscopy scoring systems used in the risk stratification of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The utility of such scoring systems in a population is estimated by their accuracy and calibration in the population. We aimed at validating and comparing the accuracy of the three scoring systems in predicting clinical outcomes including in-hospital mortality, need for blood transfusion, endoscopic treatment and rebleeding risk. METHOD: We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort study on patients with UGIB at a tertiary care center in India over 12 months. Clinical and laboratory data was collected from all patients admitted with UGIB. All patients were risk stratified using AIMS65, GBS and mGBS. The clinical outcome examined were: in-hospital mortality, requirement of blood transfusion, need for endoscopic treatment and rebleeding during hospital stay. The area under receiver-operating curve (AUROC) was calculated to assess the performance and calibration curves (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit curve) were plotted to examine how accurately the model describes the data of all three scoring systems. RESULTS: Total 260 patients were included in the study, of which 236 (90.8%) were males. As many as 144 (55.4%) patients required blood transfusion and 64 (30.8%) required endoscopic treatment. While the incidence of rebleeding was 7.7%, in hospital mortality was 15.4%. Of 208 who underwent endoscopy, the most common causes identified were varices (49%) and gastritis (18.2%), followed by ulcer (11%), Mallory-Weiss tear (8.1%), portal hypertensive gastropathy (6.7%), malignancy (4.8%) and esophageal candidiasis (1.9%). The median AIMS65 score was 1, GBS 7 and mGBS 6. The area under curve (AUROC) for AIMS65, GBS and mGBS was (0.77, 0.73,0.70), (0.75, 0.82,0.83), (0.56, 0.58,0.83), (0.81, 0.94,0.53) for in-hospital mortality, blood transfusion requirement, endoscopic treatment and rebleeding prediction, respectively. CONCLUSION: GBS and mGBS are superior to AIMS65 in predicting the requirement of blood transfusion and rebleeding risk, whereas in-hospital mortality was better predicted by AIMS 65. Both scores performed poorly in predicting the need of endoscopic treatment. An AIMS65 of 0,1 and a GBS of ≤ 1 are not associated with significant adverse events. A poor calibration of the scores in our population points to the lack of generalizability of these scoring systems.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Non-endoscopic risk scores, Glasgow Blatchford (GBS) and admission Rockall (Rock), are limited by poor specificity. The aim of this study was to develop an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) for the non-endoscopic triage of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB), with mortality as a primary outcome. Methods: Four machine learning algorithms, namely, Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA), Quadratic Discriminant Analysis (QDA), logistic regression (LR), K-Nearest Neighbor (K-NN), were performed with GBS, Rock, Beylor Bleeding score (BBS), AIM65, and T-score. Results: A total of 1,096 NVUGIB hospitalized in the Gastroenterology Department of the County Clinical Emergency Hospital of Craiova, Romania, randomly divided into training and testing groups, were included retrospectively in our study. The machine learning models were more accurate at identifying patients who met the endpoint of mortality than any of the existing risk scores. AIM65 was the most important score in the detection of whether a NVUGIB would die or not, whereas BBS had no influence on this. Also, the greater AIM65 and GBS, and the lower Rock and T-score, the higher mortality will be. Conclusion: The best accuracy was obtained by the hyperparameter-tuned K-NN classifier (98%), giving the highest precision and recall on the training and testing datasets among all developed models, showing that machine learning can accurately predict mortality in patients with NVUGIB.

RESUMEN

(1) Background: The assessment of mortality and rebleeding rate in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is essential, and several prognostic scores have been proposed. Some patients with UGIB did not undergo endoscopy, either because they refused the procedure, suffered from alcohol withdrawal symptoms or altered general status, or because the bleeding was severe enough to cause death before the endoscopy. The mortality risk in the subgroup of patients without endoscopy is poorly evaluated in the literature. (2) Methods: The purpose of the study was to identify the most useful scores for the assessment of in-hospital mortality in patients with UGIB with no endoscopy performed and no known etiology. A total of 198 patients with UGIB and no endoscopy performed were admitted between January 2017 and December 2021 and the accuracy of 12 prognostic scores and the Charlson comorbidity index for in-hospital mortality prediction were analyzed, as well as Child-Pugh Turcotte (CPT) and Meld scores in patients with cirrhosis. (3) Results: The mortality rate was 37.9%, higher than in variceal (21.9%, p < 0.0001) and non-variceal bleeding (7.4%, p < 0.0001). The most accurate scores by AUC were the International Bleeding score (INBS, 0.844), Glasgow Blatchford (0.783), MAP score (0.78), Iino (0.766), AIM65 and modified N-score (0.745 each), modified Glasgow-Blatchford (0.73), H3B2 and N-score (0.701); Rockall, Baylor, and T-score had an AUC below 0.7. MELD score was superior to CPT in patients with cirrhosis (AUC 0.811 versus 0.670). (4) Conclusions: The mortality rate in UGIB with no endoscopy was higher than in both variceal and non-variceal bleeding and was higher in the pandemic period but with no statistical significance (45.3% versus 32.14%, p = 0.0586), mainly because of positive cases. Only one case of rebleeding was noted; the hospitalization period was significantly shorter. The most accurate score was International Bleeding Score; the MELD score had a higher but moderate accuracy compared with CPT in patients with cirrhosis.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) is a common emergency and a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. An early and accurate assessment at admission is essential to estimate the severity of each case, assisting in the management of patients. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) is currently recommended for risk stratification of UGB in the emergency department (ED), helping triage patients to in-hospital vs. ambulatory management. The aim of this study was to test the validity of the GBS in an ED. METHODS: Patients who presented to the ED with a diagnosis of UGB between 2017 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: The mean GBS value of the 149 patients included in the study was 10.3. Of the patients, 4.3% had values ≤1 and 8.7% had values ≤3. The sensitivity and negative predictive value for intervention needs (98.9% and 91.7%) and complications in 30 days (100% and 100%) remained high with a threshold ≤3. In the receiver operating characteristic curves, GBS presented an area under the curve of 0.883 and 0.625, regarding the need for intervention and complications in 30 days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In our population, the threshold ≤2, and eventually ≤3, allows the identification of twice as many low-risk patients, manageable as outpatients, without significant increases in intervention needs or complications in 30 days.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) has important morbidity and mortality. Predicting high-risk patients for mortality and rebleeding is necessary for a treatment plan. In the present study, we aimed to define the epidemiological and etiological characteristics of patients presenting with nonvariceal UGB and to observe mortality and morbidity rates. We also aimed to compare Rockall and Glasgow-Blatchford scoring systems in predicting rebleeding and mortality. METHODS: Subjects presenting with nonvariceal UGB over a 3-year period were included. Demographic characteristics, symptoms, and signs on physical examination, laboratory data, endoscopic signs and diagnosis, interventions during hospitalization and follow-up period were recorded. Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scores were calculated for every participant at the first day of the admission. RESULTS: A total of 709 patients were enrolled in the study. A total of 490 of them (69.1%) were men. The mean age of the women and men was 60.7±1.2 and 58.6± 0.7 years, respectively. Melena was the most common presenting symptom. Duodenal ulcer (31%), gastric ulcer (20.7%), and erosive disease (17.6%) were the most common causes of bleeding. History of use of aspirin and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use were present in 63.7% of the subjects. All patients were followed up for 30th-day mortality. Overall, rebleeding and mortality rates were 11% and 7%, respectively. A Rockall score greater than 6 was the most important predictor of mortality (odds ratio:39.1) and rebleeding (odds ratio:4.7). CONCLUSION: Nonvariceal UGB patients with a Rockall score greater than 6 should undergo aggressive endoscopic treatment and inpatient care.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

(1) Background: Predicting which patients with upper gastro-intestinal bleeding (UGIB) will receive intervention during urgent endoscopy can allow for better triaging and resource utilization but remains sub-optimal. Using machine learning modelling we aimed to devise an improved endoscopic intervention predicting tool. (2) Methods: A retrospective cohort study of adult patients diagnosed with UGIB between 2012−2018 who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) during hospitalization. We assessed the correlation between various parameters with endoscopic intervention and examined the prediction performance of the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) and the pre-endoscopic Rockall score for endoscopic intervention. We also trained and tested a new machine learning-based model for the prediction of endoscopic intervention. (3) Results: A total of 883 patients were included. Risk factors for endoscopic intervention included cirrhosis (9.0% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.01), syncope at presentation (19.3% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.01), early EGD (6.8 h vs. 17.0 h, p < 0.01), pre-endoscopic administration of tranexamic acid (TXA) (43.4% vs. 31.0%, p < 0.01) and erythromycin (17.2% vs. 5.6%, p < 0.01). Higher GBS (11 vs. 9, p < 0.01) and pre-endoscopy Rockall score (4.7 vs. 4.1, p < 0.01) were significantly associated with endoscopic intervention; however, the predictive performance of the scores was low (AUC of 0.54, and 0.56, respectively). A combined machine learning-developed model demonstrated improved predictive ability (AUC 0.68) using parameters not included in standard GBS. (4) Conclusions: The GBS and pre-endoscopic Rockall score performed poorly in endoscopic intervention prediction. An improved predictive tool has been proposed here. Further studies are needed to examine if predicting this important triaging decision can be further optimized.

RESUMEN

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.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: The role of urgent endoscopy in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH) remains controversial. We designed a retrospective study to compare the outcomes between urgent endoscopy (within 12 h) and non-urgent endoscopy for patients with NVUGIH. METHODS: A total of 540 hospitalized patients with NVUGIH were included in our study. Patients who received endoscopy within 12 h or after 12 h were divided into two groups, the urgent and non-urgent endoscopy groups, respectively. The clinical outcomes including rebleeding, mortality, endoscopic re-intervention, need for emergency surgery and interventional radiotherapy were compared between the groups. Patients with Glasgow-Blatchford scores (GBS) <12 and ≥12 were defined as the lower- and high-risk groups, respectively, and the predictors of rebleeding and mortality in both groups were analyzed individually. RESULTS: Patients with NVUGIH in the urgent endoscopy group had a higher rate of rebleeding (27.6% vs. 16.9%, P=0.003) and blood transfusion (73.2% vs. 55.5%, P<0.001) than those in the non-urgent endoscopy group, while the mortality and the length of hospitalization were not significantly different between the groups (P>0.05). For lower-risk patients, urgent endoscopy was independently associated with a higher likelihood of rebleeding (adjusted OR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.03-2.88), while it was not associated with in-hospital mortality. However, the urgent need for endoscopy was not associated with rebleeding and inhospital mortality in high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: Endoscopy within 12 h did not provide any advantage in the outcomes of patients with NVUGIH, and may even lead to an increased rebleeding rate in lower-risk patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common complication in renal transplant recipients. However, the risk stratification value of bleeding scoring systems in these patients is unclear, and data regarding risk factors are limited. METHODS: Clinical data of renal transplant recipients in The Third Xiangya hospital were collected. The predictive ability of Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS), pre-endoscopy Rockall score (pRS), and AIMS65 score were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Risk factors of UGIB were analyzed using binary logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 220 patients were enrolled, of which 55 with UGIB. Endoscopy improved the overall survival rate of patients. Glasgow Blatchford score (AUROC 0.868) performed best at predicting UGIB patients who need intervention or death, with a threshold of 10, sensitivity and specificity were 82.4% and 70%, respectively. In terms of predicting mortality, the GBS score was comparable with AIMS65 score (p = 0.30) and pRS score (p = 0.42). Viral hepatitis, intravenous hormone usage, low platelet count, and low albumin level were significant factors associated with UGIB. CONCLUSIONS: The Glasgow Blatchford score (AUROC 0.868) was best at predicting the need for intervention or death. However, their ability to predict mortality was limited, with AUROC less than 0.8. Our study also identified four independent risk factors for renal transplant recipients with UGIB.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction: Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH) often leads to systematic hospitalization and emergency endoscopy. However, in most cases, it does not constitute an immediate life threat. This study aimed to evaluate the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) in predicting the need for transfusions, and/or endoscopic or surgical treatments. Materials and methods: We conducted a retrospective monocentric study including 91 patients admitted in the general surgery department of the Hospital La Rabta Tunis for a NVUGIH.Univariate analysis was performed with the Student t-test for continuous variables and with the Chi-square test for categorical variables. For a cut-off point of 9, we calculated the sensibility and the sensitivity of the GBS to predict the need for transfusions and/or hemostatic procedure. Results: During the study period, 91 patients were admitted for NVUGIH. Sixty-one patients (67%) were transfused. Seven patients (7.7%) underwent emergency surgery and two patients had endoscopic hemostasis.The predictive factors for the use of transfusion and/or hemostasic treatments were: Age >50 years, ASA score, HR ≥ 90 bpm, pallor, Hb ≤ 9,5 g/dl, Urea ≥9,7 mmol/L.For a cut-off of 9 points of the GBS, sensitivity was 85.71% and specificity 92.86%. The positive predictive value was 96%. The negative predictive value was 74%. Conclusion: The main interest of the GBS lies in dispatching the patients between intensive care units for therapeutic intervention (if GBS> = 9) and ordinary hospitalization for surveillance (if GBS <9). It then makes it possible to rationalize the management of patients with digestive hemorrhage to identify those requiring hospital treatments (transfusion, endoscopic treatment, or surgery).

RESUMEN

Aim: Different researches showed controversial results about the 'off-hours effect' in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). Materials & methods: A total of 301 patients with NVUGIB were divided into regular-hours group and off-hours group based on when they received endoscopic hemostasis, and the relationship of the clinical outcomes with off-hours endoscopic hemostasis was evaluated. Results: Patients who received off-hours endoscopy were sicker and more likely to experience worse clinical outcomes. Off-hours endoscopic hemostasis was a significant predictor of the composite outcome in higher-risk patients (adjusted OR: 4.63; 95% CI: 1.35-15.90). However, it did not associate with the outcomes in lower-risk patients. Conclusion: Off-hours effect may affect outcomes of higher-risk NVUGIB patients receiving endoscopic hemostasis (GBS ≥12).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Use of risk scores for early assessment of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is recommended by various guidelines. We compared Cologne-WATCH (C-WATCH) score with Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score (RS), and pre-endoscopic RS (p-RS). METHODS: Patients with UGIB between January and December 2017 were retrospectively analyzed for 30-day mortality and composite endpoints risk of complications and need for intervention using areas under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUROC). Subgroup analysis was conducted for patients with UGIB on admission and in-hospital UGIB. RESULTS: A total of 252 patients were identified (67.5% men, mean age 63.8 ± 14.9 years). In-hospital UGIB occurred in 49.6%. AUROCs for 30-day mortality, risk of complications, and need for intervention (not applicable to RS) were 0.684 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.606-0.763), 0.665 (95% CI: 0.594-0.735), and 0.694 (95% CI: 0.612-0.775) for C-WATCH score, 0.724 (95% CI: 0.653-0.796) and 0.751 (95% CI: 0.687-0.815) for RS, 0.652 (95% CI: 0.57-0.735), 0.653 (95% CI: 0.579-0.727), and 0.673 (95% CI: 0.602-0.745) for p-RS and 0.652 (95% CI: 0.572-0.732), 0.663 (95% CI: 0.592-0.734), and 0.752 (95% CI: 0.683-0.821) for GBS. RS outperformed pre-endoscopic scores in predicting risk of complications, while there were no significant differences between pre-endoscopic scores except GBS outperforming p-RS in predicting need for intervention. The subgroup analysis obtained similar results. Positive predictive values for patients with estimated low risk for all three endpoints (C-WATCH score ≤1, RS ≤2, p-RS <1, and GBS ≤1) were 89%, 69%, 78%, and 92%. CONCLUSION: C-WATCH score performed similar to the established pre-endoscopic risk scores in patients with UGIB regarding relevant patient-related endpoints with no significant differences between both the subgroups.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

In the emergency departments (ED), the incidence of admission is increasing gradually due to gastrointestinal system (GIS) complications of hemodialysis (HD) patients. With this increasing number of patients, there are many classification systems developed in early risk assessment before endoscopy. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the Glasgow-Blatchford Score's (GBS) effectiveness in HD patients with suspected GIS hemorrhage in the ED.The files of 169 patients who received HD treatment were retrospectively reviewed. 64 patients who were examined and treated for reasons other than GIS hemorrhage in the ED were excluded, and the files of a total of 105 were analyzed retrospectively. The demographic characteristics and laboratory values of the patients were recorded from the patient files. When the patients were evaluated according to GBS parameters, a significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of pulse pressure, systolic blood pressure, hemoglobin value, melena, and accompanying comorbid diseases (p < 0.05). Of the 16 patients who presented to the ED due to syncope, 2 were in the GIS hemorrhage (+) group, and 14 patients were in the control group. In this study, we aimed to show that the increase in the number of admissions in the ED due to complications secondary to HD treatment and the accompanying serious changes in laboratory parameters may cause misleading results in patients with suspected GIS hemorrhage, and it is necessary to plan comprehensive and multi-center studies on new alternative scoring systems to GBS in specific patient groups such as HD patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

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.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the common causes of mortality and morbidity. The Rockall score (RS) and Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) are frequently used in determining the prognosis and predicting in-hospital adverse events, such as mortality, re-bleeding, hospital stay, and blood transfusion requirements. The quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is easy and swift to calculate. The commonly used scores and the qSOFA score were compared and why and when these scores are most useful was investigated. METHOD: 133 patients admitted to the emergency department with upper gastrointestinal bleeding over the period of a year, were evaluated in this retrospective study. The RS, GBS and qSOFA score were calculated for each patient, and their relationship with in-hospital adverse events, such as length of hospitalization, rebleeding, endoscopic treatment, blood transfusion requirements, and mortality, was investigated. RESULTS: The mean overall GBS was 9.72 ± 3.72 (0-19), while that of patients who did not survive was 14.0 ± 1.1 (13-16), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.901, a cutoff value of 12.5, and specificity (Spe) and sensitivity (Sen) of 1 and 0.82, respectively. The median value of the GBS, in terms of transfusion need, was 7.12 ± 4.01 (0-15). (AUC = 0.752, cut-off = 9.5, Spe = 0.79, Sen = 0.69). The median value of the qSOFA score, in terms of intensive care need, was 1.73 ± 0.7 (0-3) (AUC = 0.921, cut-off = 0.5, Spe = 0.93, Sen = 0.79). The RS median, in terms of re-bleeding, was 8.22 ± 0.97 (6-9). CONCLUSION: Early use of risk stratification scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding is important due to the high risk of morbidity and mortality. All scoring systems were effective in predicting mortality, the need for intensive care, and re-bleeding. The GBS had a greater predictive power in terms of mortality and transfusion need, the qSOFA score for intensive care need, and the RS for re-bleeding. The simpler, more efficient, and more easily calculated qSOFA score can be used to estimate the severity of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIM: With recent technological advances in the field of endoscopic hemostasis, the prognosis of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding has improved. However, few studies have reported on the clinical course of patients with GI bleeding. This study aimed to evaluate the differences in clinical outcomes of patients with lower GI bleeding (LGIB) compared with upper GI bleeding (UGIB) and the factors related to their prognosis. METHODS: Patients who had undergone emergency endoscopy for GI bleeding were retrospectively reviewed. The severity of GI bleeding was evaluated using the Glasgow-Blatchford (GB), AIMS65, and NOBLADS scores. Patients in whom obvious GI bleeding relapsed and/or iron deficiency anemia persisted after emergency endoscopy were considered to exhibit rebleeding. RESULTS: We reviewed 1697 consecutive patients and divided them into UGIB (1054 patients) and LGIB (643 patients) groups. The proportion of patients with rebleeding was significantly greater in the UGIB group than in the LGIB group; the mortality rate was significantly higher in the UGIB group than in the LGIB group. Multivariate analysis showed that a GB score ≥12 and an AIMS65 score ≥2 were significantly associated with rebleeding in the UGIB group, whereas a NOBLADS score ≥4 was significantly associated with rebleeding in the LGIB group. Notably, the influence of emergency endoscopy differed according to GI bleeding location. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical course was significantly worse in patients with UGIB than in patients with LGIB. The influence of emergency endoscopy differed according to GI bleeding location.

Asunto(s)