Liu Shuang, Zhang Xiaoming, Walline Joseph Harold, Yu Xuezhong, Zhu Huadong
Department of Emergency Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science, Beijing, China.
Department of Nursing, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Beijing, China.
J Transl Int Med. 2021 Jun 16;9(2):114-122. doi: 10.2478/jtim-2021-0026. eCollection 2021 Jun.
Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common problem that can cause significant morbidity and mortality. We aimed to compare the performance of the ABC score (ABC), the AIMS65 score (AIMS65), the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), and the pre-endoscopic Rockall score (pRS) in predicting 90-day mortality or rebleeding among patients with acute UGIB.
This was a prospective multicenter study conducted at 20 tertiary hospitals in China. Data were collected between June 30, 2020 and February 10, 2021. An area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis was used to compare the performance of the four scores in predicting 90-day mortality or rebleeding.
Among the 1072 patients included during the study period, the overall 90-day mortality rate was 10.91% (117/1072) and the rebleeding rate was 12.03% (129/1072). In predicting 90-day mortality, the ABC and pRS scores performed better with an AUC of 0.722 (95% CI 0.675-0.768; <0.001) and 0.711 (95% CI 0.663-0.757; <0.001), respectively, compared to the AIMS-65 (AUC, 0.672; 95% CI, 0.624-0.721; <0.001) and GBS (AUC, 0.624; 95% CI, 0.569-0.679; <0.001) scores. In predicting rebleeding in 90 days, the AUC of all scores did not exceed 0.70.
In patients with acute UGIB, ABC and pRS performed better than AIMS-65 and GBS in predicting 90-day mortality. The performance of each score is not satisfactory in predicting rebleeding, however. Newer predictive models are needed to predict rebleeding after UGIB.
急性上消化道出血(UGIB)是一个常见问题,可导致显著的发病率和死亡率。我们旨在比较ABC评分(ABC)、AIMS65评分(AIMS65)、格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德评分(GBS)和内镜前Rockall评分(pRS)在预测急性UGIB患者90天死亡率或再出血方面的表现。
这是一项在中国20家三级医院进行的前瞻性多中心研究。数据收集于2020年6月30日至2021年2月10日之间。采用受试者工作特征曲线(AUC)下面积分析来比较这四种评分在预测90天死亡率或再出血方面的表现。
在研究期间纳入的1072例患者中,总体90天死亡率为10.91%(117/1072),再出血率为12.03%(129/1072)。在预测90天死亡率方面,ABC和pRS评分表现更好,AUC分别为0.722(95%CI 0.675-0.768;<0.001)和0.711(95%CI 0.663-0.757;<0.001),相比之下,AIMS-65评分(AUC,0.672;95%CI,0.624-0.721;<0.001)和GBS评分(AUC,0.624;95%CI,0.569-0.679;<0.001)。在预测90天内再出血方面,所有评分的AUC均未超过0.70。
在急性UGIB患者中,ABC和pRS在预测90天死亡率方面比AIMS-65和GBS表现更好。然而,每种评分在预测再出血方面的表现都不尽人意。需要更新的预测模型来预测UGIB后的再出血。