Suppr超能文献

急性静脉曲张出血的风险分层:远非理想评分。

Risk stratification in acute variceal bleeding: Far from an ideal score.

机构信息

Divisao de Gastroenterologia, Departamento de Clinica Medica, Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (FCM/UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, BR.

出版信息

Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2021 Jun 28;76:e2921. doi: 10.6061/clinics/2021/e2921. eCollection 2021.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) results from rupture of esophageal or gastric varices. It is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. Nevertheless, it remains unclear how to predict adverse outcomes and identify high-risk patients. In variceal hemorrhage, high Child-Turcotte-Pugh (Child) and Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) scores are associated with a worse prognosis. The Rockall system (Rockall), Glasgow-Blatchford (Blatchford), and AIMS65 scores have been validated for risk stratification for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding; however, their use is controversial in AVB. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of Child, MELD, Rockall, Blatchford, and AIMS65 scores in risk stratification for rebleeding and/or mortality associated with AVB.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital over 42 months. The outcomes were 6-week rebleeding and mortality. The AUROC was calculated for each score (1-0.9, 0.9-0.8, and 0.8-0.7, indicating excellent, good, and acceptable predictive power, respectively).

RESULTS

In total, 222 patients were included. Six-week rebleeding and mortality rates were 14% and 18.5%, respectively. No score was useful for discriminating patients at a higher risk of rebleeding. The AUROCs were 0.59, 0.57, 0.61, 0.63, and 0.56 for Rockall, Blatchford, AIMS65, Child, and MELD scores, respectively. Prediction of 6-week mortality based on Rockall (AUROC 0.65), Blatchford (AUROC=0.60), and AIMS65 (AUROC=0.67) scores were also not considered acceptable. The AUROCs for predicting mortality were acceptable for Child and MELD scores (0.72 and 0.74, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Rockall, Blatchford, and AIMS65 scores are not useful for predicting 6-week rebleeding or mortality in patients with AVB. Child and MELD scores can identify patients at higher risk for 6-week mortality but not for 6-week rebleeding.

摘要

目的

急性静脉曲张出血(AVB)是由食管或胃静脉曲张破裂引起的。这是门静脉高压的一种危及生命的并发症。然而,目前尚不清楚如何预测不良后果并识别高危患者。在静脉曲张出血中,较高的 Child-Turcotte-Pugh(Child)和终末期肝病模型(MELD)评分与预后较差相关。Rockall 系统(Rockall)、格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德(Blatchford)和 AIMS65 评分已被验证可用于非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的风险分层;然而,其在 AVB 中的应用存在争议。本研究旨在比较 Child、MELD、Rockall、Blatchford 和 AIMS65 评分在预测 AVB 相关再出血和/或死亡率方面的表现。

方法

这是一项在一家三级护理医院进行的回顾性研究,历时 42 个月。结果为 6 周内再出血和死亡率。为每个评分计算 AUROC(1-0.9、0.9-0.8 和 0.8-0.7,分别表示优秀、良好和可接受的预测能力)。

结果

共纳入 222 例患者。6 周内再出血和死亡率分别为 14%和 18.5%。没有评分可用于区分再出血风险较高的患者。Rockall、Blatchford、AIMS65、Child 和 MELD 评分的 AUROCs 分别为 0.59、0.57、0.61、0.63 和 0.56。基于 Rockall(AUROC 0.65)、Blatchford(AUROC=0.60)和 AIMS65(AUROC=0.67)评分预测 6 周死亡率也不理想。Child 和 MELD 评分预测死亡率的 AUROCs 可接受(分别为 0.72 和 0.74)。

结论

Rockall、Blatchford 和 AIMS65 评分不能用于预测 AVB 患者 6 周内再出血或死亡率。Child 和 MELD 评分可识别 6 周内死亡率较高的患者,但不能识别 6 周内再出血的患者。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4f04/8221560/141101c6c2b5/cln-76-e2921-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验