Dataset Information

Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To compare the predictive accuracy and clinical utility of five risk scoring systems in the assessment of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Design

International multicentre prospective study.

Setting

Six large hospitals in Europe, North America, Asia, and Oceania.

Participants

3012 consecutive patients presenting over 12 months with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Main outcome measures

Comparison of pre-endoscopy scores (admission Rockall, AIMS65, and Glasgow Blatchford) and post-endoscopy scores (full Rockall and PNED) for their ability to predict predefined clinical endpoints: a composite endpoint (transfusion, endoscopic treatment, interventional radiology, surgery, or 30 day mortality), endoscopic treatment, 30 day mortality, rebleeding, and length of hospital stay. Optimum score thresholds to identify low risk and high risk patients were determined.

Results

The Glasgow Blatchford score was best (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) 0.86) at predicting intervention or death compared with the full Rockall score (0.70), PNED score (0.69), admission Rockall score (0.66, and AIMS65 score (0.68) (all P<0.001). A Glasgow Blatchford score of ?1 was the optimum threshold to predict survival without intervention (sensitivity 98.6%, specificity 34.6%). The Glasgow Blatchford score was better at predicting endoscopic treatment (AUROC 0.75) than the AIMS65 (0.62) and admission Rockall scores (0.61) (both P<0.001). A Glasgow Blatchford score of ?7 was the optimum threshold to predict endoscopic treatment (sensitivity 80%, specificity 57%). The PNED (AUROC 0.77) and AIMS65 scores (0.77) were best at predicting mortality, with both superior to admission Rockall score (0.72) and Glasgow Blatchford score (0.64; P<0.001). Score thresholds of ?4 for PNED, ?2 for AIMS65, ?4 for admission Rockall, and ?5 for full Rockall were optimal at predicting death, with sensitivities of 65.8-78.6% and specificities of 65.0-65.3%. No score was helpful at predicting rebleeding or length of stay.

Conclusions

The Glasgow Blatchford score has high accuracy at predicting need for hospital based intervention or death. Scores of ?1 appear the optimum threshold for directing patients to outpatient management. AUROCs of scores for the other endpoints are less than 0.80, therefore their clinical utility for these outcomes seems to be limited.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16235737.

SUBMITTER: Stanley AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5217768 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study.

Stanley Adrian J AJ Laine Loren L Dalton Harry R HR Ngu Jing H JH Schultz Michael M Abazi Roseta R Zakko Liam L Thornton Susan S Wilkinson Kelly K Khor Cristopher J L CJ Murray Iain A IA Laursen Stig B SB

BMJ (Clinical research ed.) 20170104

<h4>Objective</h4> To compare the predictive accuracy and clinical utility of five risk scoring systems in the assessment of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.<h4>Design</h4> International multicentre prospective study.<h4>Setting</h4> Six large hospitals in Europe, North America, Asia, and Oceania.<h4>Participants</h4> 3012 consecutive patients presenting over 12 months with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4> Comparison of pre-endoscopy scores (admission ...[more]

PMID: 28053181

Similar Datasets

Project description:DescriptionThis update of the 2010 International Consensus Recommendations on the Management of Patients With Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB) refines previous important statements and presents new clinically relevant recommendations.MethodsAn international multidisciplinary group of experts developed the recommendations. Data sources included evidence summarized in previous recommendations, as well as systematic reviews and trials identified from a series of literature searches of several electronic bibliographic databases from inception to April 2018. Using an iterative process, group members formulated key questions. Two methodologists prepared evidence profiles and assessed quality (certainty) of evidence relevant to the key questions according to the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. Group members reviewed the evidence profiles and, using a consensus process, voted on recommendations and determined the strength of recommendations as strong or conditional.RecommendationsPreendoscopic management: The group suggests using a Glasgow Blatchford score of 1 or less to identify patients at very low risk for rebleeding, who may not require hospitalization. In patients without cardiovascular disease, the suggested hemoglobin threshold for blood transfusion is less than 80 g/L, with a higher threshold for those with cardiovascular disease. Endoscopic management: The group suggests that patients with acute UGIB undergo endoscopy within 24 hours of presentation. Thermocoagulation and sclerosant injection are recommended, and clips are suggested, for endoscopic therapy in patients with high-risk stigmata. Use of TC-325 (hemostatic powder) was suggested as temporizing therapy, but not as sole treatment, in patients with actively bleeding ulcers. Pharmacologic management: The group recommends that patients with bleeding ulcers with high-risk stigmata who have had successful endoscopic therapy receive high-dose proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy (intravenous loading dose followed by continuous infusion) for 3 days. For these high-risk patients, continued oral PPI therapy is suggested twice daily through 14 days, then once daily for a total duration that depends on the nature of the bleeding lesion. Secondary prophylaxis: The group suggests PPI therapy for patients with previous ulcer bleeding who require antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy for cardiovascular prophylaxis.

Project description:BackgroundUpper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is one of the most common, high risk emergency disorders in the western world. Almost nothing has been reported on longer term prognosis following upper GI bleeding. The aim of this study was to establish mortality up to three years following hospital admission with upper GI bleeding and its relationship with aetiology, co-morbidities and socio-demographic factors.MethodsSystematic record linkage of hospital inpatient and mortality data for 14 212 people in Wales, UK, hospitalised with upper GI bleeding between 1999 and 2004 with three year follow-up to 2007. The main outcome measures were mortality rates, standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) and relative survival.ResultsMortality at three years was 36.7% overall, based on 5215 fatalities. It was highest for upper GI malignancy (95% died within three years) and varices (52%). Compared with the general population, mortality was increased 27-fold during the first month after admission. It fell to 4.3 by month four, but remained significantly elevated during every month throughout the three years following admission. The most important independent prognostic predictors of mortality at three years were older age (mortality increased 53 fold for people aged 85 years and over compared with those under 40 years); oesophageal and gastric/duodenal malignancy (48 and 32 respectively) and gastric varices aetiologies (2.8) when compared with other bleeds; non-upper GI malignancy, liver disease and renal failure co-morbidities (15, 7.9 and 3.9); social deprivation (29% increase for quintile V vs I); incident bleeds as an inpatient (31% vs admitted with bleeding) and male patients (25% vs female).ConclusionOur study shows a high late as well as early mortality for upper GI bleeding, with very poor longer term prognosis following bleeding due to malignancies and varices. Aetiologies with the worst prognosis were often associated with high levels of social deprivation.

Dataset Information

Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Main outcome measures

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets