• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

CHAMPS 评分预测急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者死亡率的价值。

CHAMPS score in predicting mortality of patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

机构信息

University of Health Sciences, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Department of Emergency Medicine - Istanbul, Turkey.

University of Health Sciences, Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, Department of General Surgery - Istanbul, Turkey.

出版信息

Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2023 Apr 14;69(4):e20221052. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20221052. eCollection 2023.

DOI:10.1590/1806-9282.20221052
PMID:37075441
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10176634/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥2, in-hospital onset, albumin <2.5 g/dL, altered mental status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥2, steroid use score in predicting mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and compare it with the Glasgow-Blatchford score; the albumin, international normalized ratio; alteration in mental status, systolic blood pressure, and age 65 score; the age, blood tests, and comorbidities score; and Complete Rockall score.

METHODS

The data of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding who visited the emergency department during the study period were obtained from the hospital automation system by using the classification of disease codes and analyzed in this retrospective study. Adult patients with endoscopically confirmed nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding were included in the study. Patients with bleeding from the tumor, bleeding after endoscopic resection, or missing data were excluded. The prediction accuracy of the Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2, in-hospital onset, albumin < 2.5 g/dL, altered mental status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2, steroid use score was calculated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and compared with that of Glasgow-Blatchford score, the albumin, international normalized ratio; alteration in mental status, systolic blood pressure, and age 65 score, the age, blood tests, and comorbidities score, and Complete Rockall score.

RESULTS

A total of 805 patients were included in the study, and the in-hospital mortality rate was 6.6%. The performance of the Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2, in-hospital onset, albumin < 2.5 g/dL, altered mental status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2, steroid use score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.812, 95%CI 0.783-0.839) was better than Glasgow-Blatchford score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.683, 95%CI 0.650-0.713, p=0.008), and similar to the the age, blood tests, and comorbidities score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.829, 95%CI 0.801-0.854, p=0.563), the albumin, international normalized ratio; alteration in mental status, systolic blood pressure, and age 65 score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.794, 95%CI 0.764-0.821, p=0.672), and Complete Rockall score (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.761, 95%CI 0.730-0.790, p=0.106).

CONCLUSION

The performance of the Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 2, in-hospital onset, albumin < 2.5 g/dL, altered mental status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≥ 2, steroid use score in predicting in-hospital mortality for our study population is better than Glasgow-Blatchford score and similar to the the age, blood tests, and comorbidities score, the albumin, international normalized ratio; alteration in mental status, systolic blood pressure, and age 65 score, and Complete Rockall score.

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d195/10176634/7a26873fdb88/1806-9282-ramb-69-04-e20221052-gf01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d195/10176634/7a26873fdb88/1806-9282-ramb-69-04-e20221052-gf01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d195/10176634/7a26873fdb88/1806-9282-ramb-69-04-e20221052-gf01.jpg
摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估 Charlson 合并症指数≥2、住院时发病、白蛋白<2.5g/dL、精神状态改变、东部肿瘤协作组体能状态≥2、使用类固醇评分在预测非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者死亡率方面的表现,并将其与 Glasgow-Blatchford 评分进行比较;比较白蛋白、国际标准化比值;精神状态改变、收缩压和年龄 65 评分;年龄、血液检查和合并症评分;以及完整 Rockall 评分。

方法

通过使用疾病分类代码从医院自动化系统中获取研究期间在急诊科就诊的急性上消化道出血患者的数据,并在这项回顾性研究中进行分析。纳入内镜证实为非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的成年患者。排除肿瘤出血、内镜切除后出血或数据缺失的患者。使用受试者工作特征曲线下面积计算 Charlson 合并症指数≥2、住院时发病、白蛋白<2.5g/dL、精神状态改变、东部肿瘤协作组体能状态≥2、使用类固醇评分的预测准确性,并与 Glasgow-Blatchford 评分、白蛋白、国际标准化比值;精神状态改变、收缩压和年龄 65 评分、年龄、血液检查和合并症评分、完整 Rockall 评分进行比较。

结果

共纳入 805 例患者,院内死亡率为 6.6%。Charlson 合并症指数≥2、住院时发病、白蛋白<2.5g/dL、精神状态改变、东部肿瘤协作组体能状态≥2、使用类固醇评分(受试者工作特征曲线下面积 0.812,95%CI 0.783-0.839)的表现优于 Glasgow-Blatchford 评分(受试者工作特征曲线下面积 0.683,95%CI 0.650-0.713,p=0.008),与年龄、血液检查和合并症评分(受试者工作特征曲线下面积 0.829,95%CI 0.801-0.854,p=0.563)、白蛋白、国际标准化比值;精神状态改变、收缩压和年龄 65 评分(受试者工作特征曲线下面积 0.794,95%CI 0.764-0.821,p=0.672)和完整 Rockall 评分(受试者工作特征曲线下面积 0.761,95%CI 0.730-0.790,p=0.106)相似。

结论

Charlson 合并症指数≥2、住院时发病、白蛋白<2.5g/dL、精神状态改变、东部肿瘤协作组体能状态≥2、使用类固醇评分在预测本研究人群的院内死亡率方面的表现优于 Glasgow-Blatchford 评分,与年龄、血液检查和合并症评分、白蛋白、国际标准化比值;精神状态改变、收缩压和年龄 65 评分和完整 Rockall 评分相似。

相似文献

1
CHAMPS score in predicting mortality of patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.CHAMPS 评分预测急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者死亡率的价值。
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2023 Apr 14;69(4):e20221052. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20221052. eCollection 2023.
2
Comparison of AIMS65 and Glasgow Blatchford scores in predicting mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.AIMS65评分与格拉斯哥布莱奇福德评分在预测上消化道出血患者死亡率中的比较。
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2021 Jun;67(5):766-770. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20210580.
3
A simple prediction score for in-hospital mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者院内死亡的简易预测评分
J Gastroenterol. 2021 Aug;56(8):758-768. doi: 10.1007/s00535-021-01797-w. Epub 2021 Jun 18.
4
Validating the CHAMPS Score: A Novel and Reliable Prognostic Score of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.验证CHAMPS评分:一种新型且可靠的非静脉曲张性上消化道出血预后评分
Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2024 Jul 15;17:201-211. doi: 10.2147/CEG.S469218. eCollection 2024.
5
AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score and modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score in predicting outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding: An accuracy and calibration study.AIMS65、格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德出血评分和改良格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德出血评分对上消化道出血结局的预测作用:一项准确性和校准度研究。
Indian J Gastroenterol. 2023 Aug;42(4):496-504. doi: 10.1007/s12664-023-01387-z. Epub 2023 Jun 29.
6
Risk stratification in acute upper GI bleeding: comparison of the AIMS65 score with the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring systems.急性上消化道出血的风险分层:AIMS65 评分与格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德和罗克洛评分系统的比较。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 Jun;83(6):1151-60. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.10.021. Epub 2015 Oct 26.
7
Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study.上消化道出血患者风险评分系统的比较:国际多中心前瞻性研究
BMJ. 2017 Jan 4;356:i6432. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i6432.
8
AIMS65 scoring system is comparable to Glasgow-Blatchford score or Rockall score for prediction of clinical outcomes for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.AIMS65 评分系统在预测非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的临床结局方面可与 Glasgow-Blatchford 评分或 Rockall 评分相媲美。
BMC Gastroenterol. 2019 Jul 26;19(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12876-019-1051-8.
9
Age, blood tests and comorbidities and AIMS65 risk scores outperform Glasgow-Blatchford and pre-endoscopic Rockall score in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.对于上消化道出血患者,年龄、血液检查、合并症及AIMS65风险评分比格拉斯哥-布拉奇福德评分和内镜检查前罗卡尔评分表现更优。
World J Clin Cases. 2023 Jul 6;11(19):4513-4530. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v11.i19.4513.
10
Comparison of Two Scoring Systems in Predicting Outcomes in Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Taiwanese Population.两种评分系统对台湾人群非静脉曲张性上消化道出血预后预测的比较
J Acute Med. 2017 Sep 1;7(3):115-121. doi: 10.6705/j.jacme.2017.0703.004.

引用本文的文献

1
Validating the CHAMPS Score: A Novel and Reliable Prognostic Score of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.验证CHAMPS评分:一种新型且可靠的非静脉曲张性上消化道出血预后评分
Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2024 Jul 15;17:201-211. doi: 10.2147/CEG.S469218. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
Validation of the new ABC score for predicting 30-day mortality in gastrointestinal bleeding.新 ABC 评分预测胃肠道出血 30 天死亡率的验证。
BMC Gastroenterol. 2022 Jun 21;22(1):301. doi: 10.1186/s12876-022-02374-y.
2
European guidelines on the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding: where are emergency physicians?欧洲上消化道出血管理指南:急诊医生何在?
Eur J Emerg Med. 2022 Feb 1;29(1):7-8. doi: 10.1097/MEJ.0000000000000896.
3
Comparison of AIMS65 and Glasgow Blatchford scores in predicting mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
AIMS65评分与格拉斯哥布莱奇福德评分在预测上消化道出血患者死亡率中的比较。
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2021 Jun;67(5):766-770. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20210580.
4
A simple prediction score for in-hospital mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.非静脉曲张性上消化道出血患者院内死亡的简易预测评分
J Gastroenterol. 2021 Aug;56(8):758-768. doi: 10.1007/s00535-021-01797-w. Epub 2021 Jun 18.
5
ACG Clinical Guideline: Upper Gastrointestinal and Ulcer Bleeding.ACG 临床指南:上消化道和溃疡出血。
Am J Gastroenterol. 2021 May 1;116(5):899-917. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001245.
6
Tranexamic acid for gastrointestinal bleeding: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.氨甲环酸治疗胃肠道出血:一项随机临床试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Am J Emerg Med. 2021 Jul;45:269-279. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2020.08.062. Epub 2020 Aug 29.
7
ABC score: a new risk score that accurately predicts mortality in acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: an international multicentre study.ABC 评分:一种新的风险评分,可准确预测急性上、下消化道出血患者的死亡率:一项国际多中心研究。
Gut. 2021 Apr;70(4):707-716. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2019-320002. Epub 2020 Jul 28.
8
Clinical utility of pre-endoscopy risk scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.上消化道出血内镜检查前风险评分的临床实用性。
Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Dec;13(12):1161-1167. doi: 10.1080/17474124.2019.1698292.
9
Development and Validation of CAGIB Score for Evaluating the Prognosis of Cirrhosis with Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.CAGIB 评分用于评估急性胃肠道出血伴肝硬化患者预后的开发和验证:一项回顾性多中心研究。
Adv Ther. 2019 Nov;36(11):3211-3220. doi: 10.1007/s12325-019-01083-5. Epub 2019 Sep 11.
10
AIMS65 scoring system is comparable to Glasgow-Blatchford score or Rockall score for prediction of clinical outcomes for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.AIMS65 评分系统在预测非静脉曲张性上消化道出血的临床结局方面可与 Glasgow-Blatchford 评分或 Rockall 评分相媲美。
BMC Gastroenterol. 2019 Jul 26;19(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12876-019-1051-8.