Evaluation of the effectiveness of clinical classifications in patients who apply to the emergency department with upper gastrointestinal system bleeding (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2013
Background: The pre-endoscopic Rockall Score (RS) and the Glasgow-Blatchford Scores (GBS) can help risk stratify patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed who are seen in the Emergency Department (ED). The RS and GBS have yet to be validated in a United States patient population for their ability to discriminate which ED patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed do not need endoscopic hemostasis. Objective: We sought to determine whether patients who received a score of zero on either score (the lowest risk) in the ED still required upper endoscopic hemostasis during hospitalization. Methods: Retrospective electronic medical record chart review was performed during a 3-year period (2007)(2008)(2009) to identify patients with suspected upper gastrointestinal bleed by ED final diagnosis of gastrointestinal hemorrhage and related terms at a single urban academic ED. The RS and GBS were calculated from ED chart abstraction and the hospital records of admitted patients were queried for subsequent endoscopic hemostasis. Results: Six hundred and ninety patients with gastrointestinal bleed were identified and 86% were admitted to the hospital. One hundred and twenty-two patients had an RS equal to zero; 67 (55%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 46-63%) of these patients were admitted to the hospital and 11 (16%; 95% CI 9-27%) received endoscopic hemostasis. Sixty-three patients had a GBS equal to zero; 15 (24%; 95% CI 15-36%) were admitted to the hospital and 2 (13%; 95% CI 4-38%) received endoscopic hemostasis. Conclusions: Some patients who were identified as lowest risk by the GBS or RS still received endoscopic hemostasis during hospital admission. These clinical decision rules may be insufficiently sensitive to predict which patients do not require endoscopic hemostasis. Ó 2013 Published by Elsevier Inc.
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine, 2015
Background: GBS, MEWS, and PER scoring systems are not commonly used for patients presenting to emergency department with GIS bleeding. This study aimed to determine the value of MEWS, GBS, and PER scores in predicting bleeding at follow-up, endoscopic therapy and blood transfusion need, mortality, and rebleeding within a 1-month period. Methods: A total of 202 consecutive patients with upper GIS bleeding between July 2013 and November 2014 were prospectively enrolled in the study. The relationship between MEWS, GBS, and PER scores and hospital outcome, bleeding at follow-up, endoscopic therapy, transfusion need, rebleeding, and death were examined. Results: The study included a total of 202 subjects, with 84 (41.6 %) females and 118 (58.4 %) males. There was a significant correlation between GBS, MEWS, and PER scores and hospital outcomes (p <0.004, p <0.001, p <0.001, respectively). A GBS score greater than 11 succesfully predicted bleeding at follow-up (p = 0.0237). GBS score's sensitivity for predicting endoscopic therapy was greater than those of other scoring systems. The discriminatory power of each scoring system was significant for predicting transfusion (p <0.0001, p = 0.0470, and p = 0.0014, respectively). A GBS score greater than 13, a MEWS score greater than 2, and a PER score greater than 3 predicted death. A PER score greater than 3 predicted rebleeding (p <0.0001). Conclusion: The scoring systems in question can be easily calculated in patients presenting to ED with upper GIS bleeding and may be beneficial for risk stratification, determination of transfusion need, prediction of rebleeding, and decisions of hospitalization or discharge.
Internet Journal of Medical Update - EJOURNAL
Upper gastrointestinal bleed is defined as bleeding proximal to the ligament of Treitz. The aim of this study was to know the cause of upper GI bleed, prognosis of the patients and role of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB). A study of 140 cases was carried out in the Shree Krishna Hospital and Pramukh Swami Medical College, Karamsad in India between January 2014 and June 2015. All patients were selected by the detailed history and physical examination. Patients with signs and symptoms suggestive of upper GI bleeding such as hematemesis, melena, blood in the nasogastric tubes, and profuse hematochezia were included in the study. Endoscopy was performed in all patients. Rockall scoring system was used to predict the mortality in patients with upper GI bleeding. We use descriptive statistics for analysis. It was found that upper GI bleed was more common in males than females, and was more prevalent in elderly individuals. The most common symptom was found to be hematemesis followed by abdominal pain. The most common cause was portal hypertension, which has a direct correlation with alcohol addiction. UGIE has both diagnostic as well as therapeutic role in UGIB. This study showed that upper GI bleeding was more common in male patients with the most common cause being portal hypertension. We observed that Mallory-Weiss tear had a particular association with NSAIDs. In our study, the Rockall scoring system was seen to predict the mortality in patients with upper GI bleeding. Endoscopy was both diagnostic and therapeutic and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL/Glue) was performed for esophageal and/fundic varices and adrenaline injection for peptic ulcer bleeding and Mallory-Weiss tear.
Eurasian Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2017
Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleed is a common life-threatening condition seen in the emergency department (ED) (1-3). A careful assessment is mandatory to determine the risk of re-bleeding or death (3). The incidence of UGI bleeding is 50-170 per 100,000 people per year (4). The American College of Gastroenterology practice guideline (5) advises that risk assessment should be done to aid the clinician in making the all-important decision regarding the disposition of the patient (6). Not all UGI bleeds require an emergency intervention (7, 8). Even though patients with UGI bleed are admitted and managed with inpatient care and endoscopy, this approach is controversial due to the use of a substantial number of resources. Various risk scoring methods for UGI bleeding have been generated and used to predict the need for intervention or survival and to develop a standard management strategy (7, 9-14). An endoscopy-based triage is suggested to reduce cost and stay in hospitals (15), but it is rarely practiced due to the regular unavailability of emergency endoscopy. In such places, a scoring system dependent on clinical features would be desirable for the ED physician (16, 17). The Glasgow-Blatchford risk score (11) (GBS) and the pre-and post-endoscopic Rockall score (7) have been compared to predict clinical outcomes such as 30-day mortality, the need for hospital-based intervention, blood transfusion, the likelihood of re-bleeding, surgical intervention and, the suitability for early discharge. Despite its limitations, the GBS (11, 18) is still comparable or better than the Rockall score (19-23), and encouraging GBS use in routine risk stratification. The AIMS-65 score was derived from a comprehensive database and validated to predict inpatient mortality (14). The AIMS-65 is sim
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 2012
Objective. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) has been validated to select severe patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH). The aim was to compare the yield of the triage based on the GBS with an endoscopist' decision to perform an urgent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) in newly admitted patients and inpatients with UGIH in the setting of an endoscopy on-duty service in 13 tertiary care centers. Material and methods. During a 6-month period, GBS and patient data were collected for all patients with non-variceal UGIH for whom an UGIE was requested in emergency. If patients experienced severe endoscopic lesion, surgery or death, they were categorized as patients who had been at need for urgent UGIE. Results. The 102 UGIH patients included (mean age 62, men 73%) had a median GBS of 12 (range 0-21), significantly lower for new patients compared with inpatients (11, range 0-21 vs. 14, range 2-21, respectively, p = 0.001). If triage for urgent UGIE had followed the GBS, no more patients would have had an urgent UGIE compared with what endoscopists performed (99/102 (97%) vs. 92/102 (90%), respectively, p = 0.09). Sensitivity for the detection of patients who needed an UGIE was no different with the GBS than endoscopists (98% vs. 98%, respectively, p = 0.10) and both showed insufficient specificity (4% and 19%, respectively). Conclusions. The GBS does not detect more patients at need for urgent UGIE than on-duty endoscopists. Both methods lead to numerous unjustified UGIEs. A score that would equally help endoscopists in their decision to intervene urgently is still warranted.
Arquivos de Gastroenterologia
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...
SBMU publishing, 2018
Introduction: Screening of high risk patients and accelerating their treatment measures can reduce the burden of the disease caused by acute upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. This study aimed to compare the full and modified Glasgow-Blatchford Bleeding Score (GBS and mGBS) in prediction of in-hospital outcomes of upper GI bleeding. Methods: In the present retrospective cross-sectional study, the accuracy of GBS and mGBS models were compared in predicting the outcome of patients over 18 years of age with acute upper GI bleeding confirmed via endoscopy, presenting to the emergency departments of 3 teaching hospitals during 4 years. Results: 330 cases with the mean age of 59.07 ± 19.00 years entered the study (63.60% male). Area under the curve of GBS and mGBS scoring systems were 0.691 and 0.703, respectively, in prediction of re-bleeding (p = 0.219), 0.562 and 0.563 regarding need for surgery (p = 0.978), 0.549 and 0.542 for endoscopic intervention (p = 0.505), and 0.767 and 0.770 regarding blood transfusion (p = 0.753). Area under the ROC curve of GBS scoring system regarding need for hospitalization in intensive care unit (0.589 vs. 0.563; p = 0.035) and mortality (0.597 vs. 0.564; p = 0.011) was better but the superiority was not clinically significant. Conclusion: GBS and mGBS scoring systems have similar accuracy in prediction of the probability of re-bleeding, need for blood transfusion, surgery and endoscopic intervention, hospitalization in intensive care unit, and mortality of patients with acute upper GI bleeding.
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, 2004
Background: The aim of this study was to develop a risk score system for identification of patients with upper-GI hemorrhage who are suitable for outpatient management. Methods: From a prospective cohort of 983 consecutive patients with upper-GI hemorrhage not associated with portal hypertension, 581 cases that did not meet pre-established criteria for admission were selected, and a logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with two adverse outcomes: recurrent bleeding and/or the need for emergency surgery. The risk score system was developed by using the beta coefficients of the logistic model, and its performance was evaluated. The results of this model were combined with pre-established criteria for admission to build a simplified scoring system for identification of patients who can be managed safely on an outpatient basis. Results: Chronic alcoholism, active malignancy, prior upper digestive tract surgery, wasting syndrome, hemodynamic compromise, duodenal ulcer as the cause of upper-GI hemorrhage, and hemorrhage of unknown cause were independently associated with a greater risk of unfavorable outcomes in the group that did not meet pre-established criteria for admission. The logistic model showed a high capacity for discrimination (C statistic: 0.87) and good calibration (p value for Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, 0.62), with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 64%. The simplified score had a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 29% for adverse outcomes, and sensitivity of 78% and specificity of 38% for mortality. Conclusions: The score system developed in this study may be helpful in deciding between hospitalization and outpatient management for patients with upper-GI hemorrhage, but it remains to be validated in patient groups other than those used for its development. (Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:772-81.) PATIENTS AND METHODS
Gastroenterology Research, 2015
Background: Scoring tools to predict need for intervention, re-bleeding and mortality of upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) have been developed. It is inconclusive whether these tools are also appropriate for UGIH severity and/or urgency triage. The objective of the study was to compare the performances of the Blatchford score, the Rockall score, and the UGIH score on UGIH severity triage. Methods: Retrospective 3-year data of UGIH patients (2009-2011) were collected. Patients were assigned to each of the three scoring systems based on their clinical characteristics required for the scoring systems. The score ranges of each scoring system were transformed into the same scale from 0 to 100. The score performances were compared by diagnostic indices, graphically presented with area under receiver operating curve (AuROC), discrimination curves, and statistically tested with Chi-squared tests. Results: When focusing on the diagnostic indices, the local UGIH had similar sensitivity to, but better specificity than the Blatchford score in detecting mild UGIH. The sensitivity was better than and the specificity was less than the Blatchford score in detecting severe UGIH. The local UGIH score was better than the pre-endoscopic Rockall in almost all diagnostic indices. Focusing overall performances, the local UGIH score classified patients non-significantly better than the Blatchford: 89.3% vs. 87.9% for mild (P = 0.243), 87.2% vs. 85.0% for severe (P = 0.092), but significantly classified better than the pre-endoscopic Rockall score: 89.3% vs. 76.4% for mild (P < 0.001), and 87.2% vs. 81.2% for severe (P < 0.001). When exploring the discrimination curves, the Blatchford score classified more patients into the mild categories, and less into the severe categories than the local UGIH score. In contrast, the pre-endoscopic Rockall score classified less patients into the mild, but more into the severe than the local UGIH score. Conclusion: Triaging UGIH patients into three severity levels in order to decide or set for endoscopy should apply the scoring system specifically developed for that purpose. Adopting other scores developed for other purposes may result in under-and/or over-estimations. The local UGIH score classified patients into three severity levels to help indicate endoscopy more efficiently than the Blatchford score and the preendoscopic Rockall score which was developed for different purposes.
International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences
Background: Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage is defined as any bleeding from a site in the gastrointestinal tract proximal to the ligament of Treitz (fore-gut). Patients with Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage present with a wide range of clinical severity ranging from trivial bleeds to fulminant and lethal exsanguinations. It is associated with multiple risk factors and multiple co-morbid condition. Methods: A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital. A total of 56 patients who were subjected to endoscopy and were studied for 6 months. Appropriate statistical method had been applied wherever needed. Results: In the studied population among 56 patients, most common cause of UGIB was variceal bleed 45 (80%); most common of age group with variceal bleed belonged to 40-59 years, Grade III varices were most commonly found 23 (52%). The mean Rockall score was 4.7 which indicated that most patients belong to moderate risk group. The need of packed red bl...