Prospective comparison of three risk scoring systems in non‐variceal and variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Thanapirom, Kessarin; Ridtitid, Wiriyaporn; Rerknimitr, Rungsun; Thungsuk, Rattikorn; Noophun, Phadet; Wongjitrat, Chatchawan; Luangjaru, Somchai; Vedkijkul, Padet; Lertkupinit, Comson; Poonsab, Swangphong; Ratanachu‐ek, Thawee; Hansomburana, Piyathida; Pornthisarn, Bubpha; Thongbai, Thirada; Mahachai, Varocha; Treeprasertsuk, Sombat

doi:10.1111/jgh.13222

Cited by 36 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These reports also indicate that the Rockall score was predictive of both rebleeding and mortality in patients with variceal bleed to a lesser degree when compared to patients with non-variceal bleed. [14][15][16] Even other scores like GBS may not perform as well in the setting of variceal bleeding. 16 The limitations of the present study include the fact that it is a single center studydone at a large tertiary care center which may not represent the usual clinical strata dealt at first referral institutions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[14][15][16] Even other scores like GBS may not perform as well in the setting of variceal bleeding. 16 The limitations of the present study include the fact that it is a single center studydone at a large tertiary care center which may not represent the usual clinical strata dealt at first referral institutions. Also, the study used only one clinical score and therefore no comparison is available with other scores in use.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Utility of clinical and complete Rockall score in Indian patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Sharma¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is an important gastroenterological emergency. Role of Rockall score in stratification of risk of mortality and rebleeding in Indian patients is uncertain. Methods: This study was prospectively conducted on 175 consecutive patients admitted with AUGIB who were 18 years or above. The clinical Rockall score and complete scores calculated at admission and after endoscopy were analyzed for association with the outcome (rebleeding and mortality) for both variceal and non-variceal bleeding. Results: The mean age of the patients was 48.4±16.4 years and 78.9% were males. History of inake of NSAIDs in patients of AUGIB was present in 13.7% and of antiplatelets in 13.7%. Variceal bleed was the most common etiology (45.7%) followed by peptic ulcer disease (24.0%). Overall rates of surgery, rebleed and mortality were 6.9%, 22.9% and 20% respectively. Both clinical and complete Rockall risk scoring systems were useful tools for stratifying patients with AUGIB into high and low risk categories for mortality. However, for the prediction of rebleed, the complete Rockall scoring system was found to be better than the clinical scoring system. These scoring systems performed much better in predicting the outcomes in non-variceal bleed than in patients with variceal bleed. Multivariate analysis showed that patients with age ≥65 years and albumin <3 g/dl were at an increased risk of mortality. Conclusion: Rockall scoring can be used to stratify patients with AUGIB and is more useful in non-variceal bleeding.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Utility of clinical and complete Rockall score in Indian patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Sharma¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 Concerning adults with UGIB, reliable predictive scoring systems (Rockall, Blatchford, and Addenbrooke) exist to identify which patients are high risk (of mortality, repeat bleeding, need for blood transfusion, and surgical intervention) and enable predictions for endoscopic intervention. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] There are scoring systems specifically for particular hemorrhagic lesions, such as the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score, which associate with peptic ulcer bleeding. 15,16 Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is an emergency that needs early endoscopic treatment; thus, immediate evaluation of the patients is required.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of risk factors and development of scoring system to predict severity of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in children

Zheng

Jiang

Jia

et al. 2018

J of Gastro and Hepatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aim Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a rare and potentially life‐threatening condition in children. Herein, clinical features and risk factors in children with upper gastrointestinal bleeding were analyzed, and a clinical scoring system was constructed to assess severity. Methods This retrospective cohort study involved 224 children hospitalized with upper gastrointestinal bleeding between January 2012 and April 2018. Demographic data, clinical information, and laboratory test results on admission were statistically examined. Results Out of 224 upper gastrointestinal bleeding cases, 76 were diagnosed as severe and 148 as mild cases according to the rate of blood loss and severity. Severe group was significantly different from mild group in 23 items including age, number of patients aged more than 7 years, and so forth (P < 0.01 or P < 0.05). Positive detection rate of bleeding etiology was gradually decreased (P < 0.01) in relation to delay in timing of endoscopy. Analysis of logistic regression evinced five independent risk factors for severe cases to be associated with poor consciousness, hemoglobin < 80 g/L, hemoglobin drop of > 20 g/L, hematochezia, and anemic appearance (P < 0.01 or P < 0.05). Using these five parameters, a number of scoring models were tested. The most predictive resulted in a scoring system constructed with a total of 16 and a cutoff for intervention of 8. Conclusions Amalgamation of risk factors with the scoring system plays an important role in assessing upper gastrointestinal bleeding severity in children.

show abstract

“…The scoring systems for UGIB were primarily developed and tested in cohorts with predominant non-variceal UGIB, and Rout et al as well as some previous studies show us that these scores may not perform as well for patients with variceal UGIB [17]. Rout et al also did not find a single scoring system, which gives all the requisite prognostic information.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Which one scores better?

Dhir

Shah

2019

Indian J Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prospective comparison of three risk scoring systems in non‐variceal and variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Abstract: In contrast to non-variceal UGIB, the GBS, FRS, and PRS were not precise scores for assessing the need for therapy, mortality, and re-bleeding during admission in variceal UGIB.

Cited by 36 publications

References 24 publications

Utility of clinical and complete Rockall score in Indian patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Utility of clinical and complete Rockall score in Indian patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Analysis of risk factors and development of scoring system to predict severity of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in children

Scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Which one scores better?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About