Chang Arunchai, Ouejiaraphant Chokethawee, Akarapatima Keerati, Rattanasupa Attapon, Prachayakul Varayu
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hatyai Hospital, Songkhla, Thailand.
Department of Internal Medicine, Hatyai Hospital, Songkhla, Thailand.
Clin Endosc. 2021 Mar;54(2):211-221. doi: 10.5946/ce.2020.068. Epub 2020 Jul 16.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: This study aimed to determine the performance of the AIMS65 score (AIMS65), Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), and Rockall score (RS) in predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), and to compare the results between patients with nonvariceal UGIB (NVUGIB) and those with variceal UGIB (VUGIB).
We conducted a prospective observational study between March 2016 and December 2017. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed for all outcomes for comparison. The associations of all three scores with mortality were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Of the total of 337 patients with UGIB, 267 patients (79.2%) had NVUGIB. AIMS65 was significantly associated (odds ratio [OR], 1.735; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.148-2.620), RS was marginally associated (OR, 1.225; 95% CI, 0.973-1.543), but GBS was not associated (OR, 1.017; 95% CI, 0.890-1.163) with mortality risk in patients with UGIB. However, all three scores accurately predicted all other outcomes (all p<0.05) except rebleeding (p>0.05). Only AIMS65 precisely predicted mortality, the need for blood transfusion and the composite endpoint (all p<0.05) in patients with VUGIB.
AIMS65 is superior to GBS and RS in predicting mortality in patients with UGIB, and also precisely predicts the need for blood transfusion and the composite endpoint in patients with VUGIB. No scoring system could satisfactorily predict rebleeding in all patients with UGIB.
背景/目的:本研究旨在确定AIMS65评分(AIMS65)、格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德评分(GBS)和罗卡尔评分(RS)在预测上消化道出血(UGIB)患者预后方面的表现,并比较非静脉曲张性UGIB(NVUGIB)患者和静脉曲张性UGIB(VUGIB)患者的结果。
我们在2016年3月至2017年12月期间进行了一项前瞻性观察研究。对所有结局进行受试者工作特征曲线分析以进行比较。使用多因素逻辑回归分析评估所有三个评分与死亡率的关联。
在总共337例UGIB患者中,267例(79.2%)为NVUGIB。AIMS65与死亡率风险显著相关(比值比[OR],1.735;95%置信区间[CI],1.148 - 2.620),RS有边缘相关性(OR,1.225;95% CI,0.973 - 1.543),但GBS与UGIB患者的死亡率风险无关(OR,1.017;95% CI,0.890 - 1.163)。然而,除再出血(p>0.05)外,所有三个评分均准确预测了所有其他结局(所有p<0.05)。只有AIMS65能准确预测VUGIB患者的死亡率、输血需求和复合终点(所有p<0.05)。
在预测UGIB患者的死亡率方面,AIMS65优于GBS和RS,并且还能准确预测VUGIB患者的输血需求和复合终点。没有评分系统能够令人满意地预测所有UGIB患者的再出血情况。