A comparative study of scoring systems that accurately predict the prognosis of lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Diagnostic accuracy of the Oakland score versus haemoglobin for predicting outcomes in lower gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) is a common cause of hospitalization. Recent guidelines recommend the use of prognostic scales for risk stratification. However, it remains unclear whether risk scores are more accurate than some simpler prognostic variables.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the predictive values of haemoglobin alone and the Oakland score for predicting outcomes in ALGIB patients.

DESIGN

Single-centre, retrospective study at a University Hospital. Data were extracted from the hospital's clinical records. The Oakland score was calculated at admission. Study outcomes were defined according to the original article describing the Oakland score: safe discharge (the primary Oakland score outcome), transfusion, rebleeding, readmission, therapeutic intervention and death. Area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve and accuracy using haemoglobin and the Oakland score were calculated for each outcome.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty-eight patients were included. Eighty-four (32.6%) needed transfusion, 50 (19.4%) presented rebleeding, 31 (12.1%) required therapeutic intervention, 20 (7.8%) were readmitted and six (2.3%) died. There were no differences in the AUROC curve values for haemoglobin versus the Oakland score with regard to safe discharge (0.82 (0.77-0.88) vs 0.80 (0.74-0.86), respectively) or to therapeutic intervention and death. Haemoglobin was significantly better for predicting transfusion and rebleeding, and the Oakland score was significantly better for predicting readmission.

CONCLUSION

In our study, the Oakland score did not perform better than haemoglobin alone for predicting the outcome of patients with ALGIB. The usefulness of risk scores for predicting outcomes in clinical practice remains uncertain.

External Validation of the Oakland Score for Predicting Safe Discharge in Patients Presenting With Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding at the William Harvey Hospital in the United Kingdom

Introduction Lower gastrointestinal bleeds (LGIB) are defined by having a bleeding point in the gastrointestinal tract beyond the ligament of Treitz. The most common causes include diverticular bleeds, tumours, and colitis. There are no National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines regarding safe discharge of patients with LGIB. The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness and safety of the Oakland score, as suggested by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines, in patients presenting with LGIB at William Harvey Hospital. Methods Patients with LGIB who presented to Accident & Emergency or inpatient referral from January to December 2023 were included in this retrospective study. Data was extracted from patients' Sunrise documentation. The Oakland score for each patient was calculated. Those with a score of ≤8 were deemed safe for discharge; those with a higher score were deemed unsuitable. Patients' admission, discharges, and adverse outcomes, such as representation, blood transfusion, or further intervention, were investigated. Patients with no adverse outcomes were deemed to have had a safe discharge. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for the Oakland score and adverse outcome (and therefore safe discharge) were calculated. Results A total of 123 patients were included. These led to a total of 144 LGIB presentations to the hospital. Twenty-nine patients had an Oakland score of ≤8; 21 (72.4%) cases were initially discharged with four representations (19.0%) and eight (27.6%) were admitted although none of these suffered from any adverse outcomes. For those who scored ≤8, 25 (86.2%) were therefore deemed to have had a safe discharge. A total of 115 had a score >8; 43 (37.4%) were initially discharged, 72 (62.6%) admitted and 41 (35.7%) experienced at least one adverse outcome including 16 (13.9%) representations, 21 (18.3%) blood transfusions, three (2.6%) surgical interventions and one (0.9%) endoscopic haemostasis. Out of the 115 cases which scored >8, 74 (64.3%) were deemed to have had a safe discharge. The AUROC for safe discharge was 0.84. Conclusion The Oakland score seems to be a safe and reliable tool for identifying LGIB patients who could be safely discharged home without hospital intervention. However, further research is required to assess whether a score of >8 could be used as many patients with a higher score did not experience adverse outcomes.

Scoring systems for risk stratification in upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Several scoring systems have been developed for both upper and lower GI bleeding to predict the bleeding severity and discriminate between low-risk patients, who may be suitable for outpatient management, and those who would likely need hospital-based interventions and are at high risk for adverse outcomes. Risk scores created to identify low-risk patients (namely the Glasgow Blatchford Score and the Oakland score) showed very good discriminative performances and their implementation has proven to be effective in reducing hospital admissions and healthcare burden. Conversely, the performances of risk scores in identifying specific adverse events to define high-risk patients are less accurate, and whether their integration into routine clinical practice has a tangible impact on patient management remains unproven. This review describes the existing risk score systems for GI bleeding, emphasizes key research findings, elucidates the circumstances in which their utilization can be beneficial, examines their constraints when considering routine clinical application, and discuss future development.