Division of Endoscopy and Ultrasonography, Department of Clinical Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Kawasaki Medical School General Medical Center, Okayama, Japan.
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Japan.
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2021 Jan;56(1):86-93. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2020.1847316. Epub 2020 Nov 17.
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.
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.
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.
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.
随着内镜止血领域的技术进步,胃肠道(GI)出血患者的预后得到了改善。然而,很少有研究报告胃肠道出血患者的临床过程。本研究旨在评估下消化道出血(LGIB)与上消化道出血(UGIB)患者的临床结局差异,以及与预后相关的因素。
回顾性分析因 GI 出血而行急诊内镜检查的患者。使用格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德(GB)、AIMS65 和 NOBLADS 评分评估 GI 出血的严重程度。急诊内镜后明显再次出血和/或缺铁性贫血持续存在的患者被认为存在再出血。
我们回顾了 1697 例连续患者,并将其分为 UGIB(1054 例)和 LGIB(643 例)组。UGIB 组患者的再出血比例明显高于 LGIB 组,UGIB 组患者的死亡率明显高于 LGIB 组。多变量分析显示,GB 评分≥12 和 AIMS65 评分≥2 与 UGIB 组的再出血显著相关,而 NOBLADS 评分≥4 与 LGIB 组的再出血显著相关。值得注意的是,急诊内镜的影响因 GI 出血部位而异。
UGIB 患者的临床过程明显差于 LGIB 患者。急诊内镜的影响因 GI 出血部位而异。