Development, Validation, and Comparative Assessment of an International Scoring System to Determine Risk of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Emergency medicine updates: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a condition commonly seen in the emergency department (ED). Therefore, it is important for emergency clinicians to be aware of the current evidence regarding the diagnosis and management of this disease.

OBJECTIVE

This paper evaluates key evidence-based updates concerning UGIB for the emergency clinician.

DISCUSSION

UGIB most frequently presents with hematemesis. There are numerous causes, with the most common peptic ulcer disease, though variceal bleeding in particular can be severe. Nasogastric tube lavage for diagnosis is not recommended based on the current evidence. A hemoglobin transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL is recommended (8 g/dL in those with myocardial ischemia), but patients with severe bleeding and hemodynamic instability require emergent transfusion regardless of their level. Medications that may be used in UGIB include proton pump inhibitors, prokinetic agents, and vasoactive medications. Antibiotics are recommended for those with cirrhosis and suspected variceal bleeding. Endoscopy is the diagnostic and therapeutic modality of choice and should be performed within 24 h of presentation in non-variceal bleeding after resuscitation, though patients with variceal bleeding may require endoscopy within 12 h. Transcatheter arterial embolization or surgical intervention may be necessary. Intubation should be avoided if possible. If intubation is necessary, several considerations are required, including resuscitation prior to induction, utilizing preoxygenation and appropriate suction, and administering a prokinetic agent. There are a variety of tools available for risk stratification, including the Glasgow Blatchford Score.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of literature updates can improve the ED care of patients with UGIB.

Application of Antithrombotic Drugs in Different Age-Group Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Objective

This study aimed at exploring the safety and timing of antithrombotic drugs in different age-group patients with UGIB.

Methods

An observational study retrospectively based on the single-center database with 713 patients with UGIB.

Result

Among the 713 patients, 62.13% were elderly patients (aged > 60 years) and the mortality was 2.9%. In elderly patients with UGIB, we found that previous medication history, resumption of medication, and time of resumption did not affect the in-hospital mortality. The resumption of anticoagulants increased the risk of rebleeding. The independent risk factors of mortality were CHF, cirrhosis, creatine kinase, and albumin. The independent risk factors of rebleeding were the application of anticoagulants during hospitalization, variceal bleeding, black stool, red blood cells (lab), platelets (lab), and heart rate.

Conclusions

In UGIB patients, a history of antiplatelet or antithrombotic drugs and the use of antiplatelet drugs after UGIB did not affect the patient's prognosis. In elderly UGIB patients, although antithrombotic drugs did not increase the risk of death, the increased risk of rebleeding after resumption of use deserved careful treatment. It was safe to recover anticoagulant drugs as soon as possible in young UGIB patients.

External validation of the Oakland Score to assess safe hospital discharge among adult patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding in a single New Zealand Centre

BACKGROUND

Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common reason for hospital admission. However, the majority resolve spontaneously and only a minority require inpatient intervention. We aimed to describe the epidemiology and aetiology of acute LGIB admissions in our institution. We also aimed to validate the Oakland Score, which can identify patients at low risk of adverse outcome from LGIB, in our population and determine the proportion who could have safely avoided admission.

METHODS

Using the prospective, validated Otago Clinical Audit database (DIVA), we searched for adult patients admitted to Dunedin Hospital with a primary diagnosis of LGIB between January 2013 and December 2020. We retrieved data to calculate the Oakland Score and details of inpatient treatment from the electronic patient record. We excluded patients admitted electively, admissions related to inflammatory bowel disease, and those with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

RESULTS

We identified 761 patients of which 501 met inclusion criteria (56% male, median age 76 years, 82% NZ European). Overall, 72% were managed with observation or diagnostic endoscopy, 32% received blood products, and 7% required haemostatic intervention to control bleeding. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the Oakland Score was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.81-0.89). A cut-off score of ≤10 predicted a 95% probability of safely avoiding admission. This equates to saving 30 bed-days annually.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients admitted with LGIB are managed conservatively. The Oakland Score could be used as a stratification tool to safely reduce the admission rate.

Strengths and limitations of risk stratification tools for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Despite advances in the management of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), associated morbidity and mortality remain significant. Most patients, however, will experience favorable outcomes without a need for hospital-based interventions. Risk assessment scores may assist in such early risk-stratification. These scales may optimize identification of low-risk patients, resulting in better resource utilization, including a reduced need for early endoscopy and fewer hospital admissions. The aim of this article is to provide an updated detailed review of risk assessment scores in UGIB.

AREA COVERED

A literature review identified past and currently available pre-endoscopic risk assessment scores for UGIB, with a focus on low-risk prediction. Strengths and weaknesses of the different scales are discussed as well as their impact on clinical decision-making.

EXPERT OPINION

The current evidence supports using the Glasgow Blatchford Score as it is the most accurate tool available when attempting to identify low-risk patients who can be safely managed on an outpatient basis. Currently, no risk assessment tool appears accurate enough in confidently classifying patients as high risk. Future research should utilize more standardized methodologies, while favoring interventional trial designs to better characterize the clinical impact attributable to the use of such risk stratification schemes.

Utility of the CANUKA Scoring System in the Risk Assessment of Upper GI Bleeding

BACKGROUND

The Canada-United Kingdom-Adelaide (CANUKA) score was developed to stratify patients who experience upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) to predict who could be discharged from the emergency department. Our aim was to determine if the CANUKA score could be utilized for UGIB in-patients undergoing endoscopy in predicting adverse outcomes. We additionally sought to establish a CANUKA score cut point to predict adverse outcomes and in-hospital mortality and compare this to established scoring systems.

METHODS

Between January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019 all patients who underwent upper endoscopy after admission for UGIB were identified. We assigned a CANUKA score and compared the area under the receiver operating curve to established scoring systems.

RESULTS

Our data set included 641 patients, with a mean age of 59.5±14.5 years. A CANUKA score ≥10 was associated with an adverse outcome [unadjusted odds ratio, 3.08 (1.79, 5.27)]. No patients experienced an adverse outcome with a CANUKA score <4. No patients died with a CANUKA score <6. Those with a CANUKA score of <10 had an in-hospital mortality of 2.1% compared with 6.8% for those with a score ≥10 ( P =0.008). AIMS65 had the best area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.809) for predicting mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The CANUKA score may serve utility as a predictor of adverse outcomes and mortality in patients admitted with UGIB undergoing endoscopy. Future studies, ideally prospective and multicenter, will be needed to validate its clinical utility.

A Review of Risk Scores within Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency. Thorough initial assessment and appropriate resuscitation are essential to stabilise the patient. Risk scores provide an important tool to discriminate between lower- and higher-risk patients. Very low-risk patients can be safely discharged for out-patient management, while higher-risk patients can receive appropriate in-patient care. The Glasgow Blatchford Score, with a score of 0-1, performs best in the identification of very low-risk patients who will not require hospital based intervention or die, and is recommended by most guidelines to facilitate safe out-patient management. The performance of risk scores in the identification of specific adverse events to define high-risk patients is less accurate, with no individual score performing consistently well. Ongoing developments in the use of machine learning models and artificial intelligence in predicting poor outcomes in UGIB appear promising and will likely form the basis of dynamic risk assessment in the future.

External validation of Glasgow-Blatchford, modified Glasgow-Blatchford and CANUKA scores to identify low-risk patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in emergency departments: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a medical emergency with an approximate mortality of 10%, which results in a high hospitalisation rate. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) is recommended to identify low-risk patients who can be discharged from the emergency department (ED). A modified GBS (mGBS) and CANUKA score have recently been proposed but have not been well studied. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of GBS, mGBS or CANUKA score could identify patients at low risk of death or need for intervention.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective study was performed including patients with suspected UGIB visiting the ED of Saint-Antoine hospital (Paris, France) from January 2016 to December 2018. Demographic and medical data needed to calculate GBS and CANUKA were collected, as well as outcomes data. Need for intervention was defined as the need for blood transfusion, endoscopic haemostasis or rebleeding within 7 days. In-hospital mortality was also collected. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were measured for the score thresholds of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 386 patients were included. Median age was 60 years (38-78), 65.3% (n=252) were male and 60% (n=233) were hospitalised. A GBS≤1, mGBS=0 and CANUKA≤2 categorised 24.9%, 18.2% and 18.9% of patients as low risk, respectively. There was a need for intervention in 2.2%, 4.6% and 0% of those patients categorised as low risk by GBS, mGBS and CANUKA, respectively. No deaths occurred in the patients identified as low risk, regardless of the score used. All scores had a high sensitivity and negative predictive value.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with UGIB, the use of a GBS≤1 or CANUKA score ≤2 appears to be safe for identifying patients at low risk of death or need for intervention.

The Accuracy of Pre-Endoscopic Scores for Mortality Prediction in Patients with Upper GI Bleeding and No Endoscopy Performed

(1) Background: The assessment of mortality and rebleeding rate in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is essential, and several prognostic scores have been proposed. Some patients with UGIB did not undergo endoscopy, either because they refused the procedure, suffered from alcohol withdrawal symptoms or altered general status, or because the bleeding was severe enough to cause death before the endoscopy. The mortality risk in the subgroup of patients without endoscopy is poorly evaluated in the literature. (2) Methods: The purpose of the study was to identify the most useful scores for the assessment of in-hospital mortality in patients with UGIB with no endoscopy performed and no known etiology. A total of 198 patients with UGIB and no endoscopy performed were admitted between January 2017 and December 2021 and the accuracy of 12 prognostic scores and the Charlson comorbidity index for in-hospital mortality prediction were analyzed, as well as Child-Pugh Turcotte (CPT) and Meld scores in patients with cirrhosis. (3) Results: The mortality rate was 37.9%, higher than in variceal (21.9%, p < 0.0001) and non-variceal bleeding (7.4%, p < 0.0001). The most accurate scores by AUC were the International Bleeding score (INBS, 0.844), Glasgow Blatchford (0.783), MAP score (0.78), Iino (0.766), AIM65 and modified N-score (0.745 each), modified Glasgow-Blatchford (0.73), H3B2 and N-score (0.701); Rockall, Baylor, and T-score had an AUC below 0.7. MELD score was superior to CPT in patients with cirrhosis (AUC 0.811 versus 0.670). (4) Conclusions: The mortality rate in UGIB with no endoscopy was higher than in both variceal and non-variceal bleeding and was higher in the pandemic period but with no statistical significance (45.3% versus 32.14%, p = 0.0586), mainly because of positive cases. Only one case of rebleeding was noted; the hospitalization period was significantly shorter. The most accurate score was International Bleeding Score; the MELD score had a higher but moderate accuracy compared with CPT in patients with cirrhosis.

Derivation and validation of a novel risk score to predict need for haemostatic intervention in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (London Haemostat Score)

BACKGROUND

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is a common medical emergency, which takes up considerable healthcare resources. However, only approximately 20%-30% of bleeds require urgent haemostatic intervention. Current standard of care is for all patients admitted to hospital to undergo endoscopy within 24 hours for risk stratification, but this is difficult to achieve in practice, invasive and costly.

AIM

To develop a novel non-endoscopic risk stratification tool for AUGIB to predict the need for haemostatic intervention by endoscopic, radiological or surgical treatments. We compared this with the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS).

DESIGN

Model development was carried out using a derivation (n=466) and prospectively collected validation cohort (n=404) of patients who were admitted with AUGIB to three large hospitals in London, UK (2015-2020). Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify variables that were associated with increased or decreased chances of requiring haemostatic intervention. This model was converted into a risk scoring system, the London Haemostat Score (LHS).

RESULTS

The LHS was more accurate at predicting need for haemostatic intervention than the GBS, in the derivation cohort (area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) 0.82; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.86 vs 0.72; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.77; p<0.001) and validation cohort (AUROC 0.80; 95% CI 0.75 to 0.85 vs 0.72; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.78; p<0.001). At cut-off scores at which LHS and GBS identified patients who required haemostatic intervention with 98% sensitivity, the specificity of the LHS was 41% vs 18% with the GBS (p<0.001). This could translate to 32% of inpatient endoscopies for AUGIB being avoided at a cost of only a 0.5% false negative rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The LHS is accurate at predicting the need for haemostatic intervention in AUGIB and could be used to identify a proportion of low-risk patients who can undergo delayed or outpatient endoscopy. Validation in other geographical settings is required before routine clinical use.

Expert consensus on emergency procedures for portal hypertension bleeding (2022)

Expert consensus proposes an emergency treatment protocol for portal hypertension bleeding. Herein, the emergency treatment procedures, which include first aid, medical, interventional, and surgical treatments, are described. In addition, the indications, contraindications, operating norms, precautions, and prevention of complications of portal hypertension are described to optimize the first aid process.

Nursing Value Analysis and Risk Assessment of Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding Using Multiagent Reinforcement Learning Algorithm

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) indicates an issue in the digestive system. Blood can be found in feces or vomiting; however, it is not always visible, even if it makes the stool appear darkish or muddy. The bleeding can range in harshness from light to severe and can be dangerous. It is advised that nursing value analysis and risk assessment of patients with GIB is essential, but existing risk assessment techniques function inconsistently. Machine learning (ML) has the potential to increase risk evaluation. For evaluating risk in patients with GIB, scoring techniques are ineffective; a machine learning method would help. As a result, we present а unique machine learning-based nursing value analysis and risk assessment framework in this research to construct a model to evaluate the risk of hospital-based interventions or mortality in individuals with GIB and make a comparison to that of other rating systems. Initially, the dataset is collected, and preprocessing is done. Feature extraction is done using local binary patterns (LBP). Classification is performed using a fuzzy support vector machine (FSVM) classifier. For risk assessment and nursing value analysis, machine learning-based prediction using a multiagent reinforcement algorithm is employed. For improving the performance of the proposed system, we use spider monkey optimization (SMO) algorithm. The performance metrics like classification accuracy, area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC), area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and precision are analyzed and compared with the traditional approaches. In individuals with GIB, the suggested technique had a good-excellent prognostic efficacy, and it outperformed other traditional models.

Comparing the Performance of the ABC, AIMS65, GBS, and pRS Scores in Predicting 90-day Mortality Or Rebleeding Among Emergency Department Patients with Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Prospective Multicenter Study

Background and Objectives

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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; P<0.001) and 0.711 (95% CI 0.663-0.757; P<0.001), respectively, compared to the AIMS-65 (AUC, 0.672; 95% CI, 0.624-0.721; P<0.001) and GBS (AUC, 0.624; 95% CI, 0.569-0.679; P<0.001) scores. In predicting rebleeding in 90 days, the AUC of all scores did not exceed 0.70.

Conclusion

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.

Novel and Simple Criteria for Predicting Mortality of Peptic Ulcer Disease

Objective Conventional risk scores of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) are based on many parameters, and their application in clinical practice is therefore limited. The aim of this study was to establish simple and reliable criteria for predicting PUD-associated mortality. Methods A total of 499 patients with PUD were divided into 2 groups: the training cohort (n=333) and the validation cohort (n=166). To minimize selection bias due to missing values, we used imputed datasets generated by the multiple imputation method (training-cohort dataset, n=33,300; validation-cohort dataset, n=16,600). Results In the training-cohort dataset, the heart rate-to-systolic blood pressure ratio (HR/SBP) and serum albumin (s-Alb) level were significant independent predictive factors for mortality according to the multivariate analysis [HR/SBP, odds ratio (OR): 1.72; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.06-2.80, p=0.028; s-Alb, OR: 0.23, 95% CI, 0.11-0.51, p<0.001]. The model comprising HR/SBP and s-Alb was able to detect mortality due to PUD with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.855. In the validation-cohort dataset, this model also showed good efficacy with an AUC of 0.835. The novel criteria combining HR/SBP and s-Alb developed by a decision tree analysis showed 73.3% sensitivity and 87.6% specificity for predicting mortality in the total-cohort dataset. Our criteria were superior to the Glasgow Blatchford and Rockall scores and similar to the AIMS65 and Progetto Nazionale Emorragia Digestiva scores for predicting mortality. Conclusion The combination of the HR/SBP ratio and s-Alb level is a good predictor of mortality in patients with PUD.

Biocompatible and antibacterial soy protein isolate/quaternized chitosan composite sponges for acute upper gastrointestinal hemostasis

Innovative biomedical applications have high requirements for biomedical materials. Herein, a series of biocompatible, antibacterial and hemostatic sponges were successfully fabricated for the treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGB). Quaternized chitosan (QC) and soy protein isolate (SPI) were chemically cross-linked to obtain porous SPI/QC sponges (named SQS-n, with n = 30, 40, 50 or 60 corresponding to the weight percentage of the QC content). The chemical composition, physical properties and biological activity of SQS-n were investigated. SQS-n could support the adhesion and proliferation of L929 cells while triggering no obvious blood toxicity. Meanwhile, SQS-n exhibited good broad-spectrum antibacterial activity against both gram-positive bacteria (Staphylococcus aureus) and gram-negative bacteria (Escherichia coli). The in vivo hemostatic effect of SQS-n was evaluated using three different bleeding models. The results revealed that SQS-50 performed best in reducing blood loss and hemostatic time. The overall hemostatic effect of SQS-50 was comparable to that of a commercial gelatin sponge. The enhanced antibacterial and hemostatic activities of SQS-n were mainly attributed to the QC component. In conclusion, this work developed a QC-functionalized hemostatic sponge that is highly desirable for innovative biomedical applications, such as AUGB.

The Prognosis Analysis of Liver Cirrhosis with Acute Variceal Bleeding and Validation of Current Prognostic Models: A Large Scale Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Acute variceal bleeding is a major cause of death in liver cirrhosis. This large scale retrospective cohort study aims to analyze the prognosis of patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding and to validate the current prognostic models.

Methods

Patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding were enrolled from Jan 2019 to March 2020. The independent prognostic factors for in-hospital death were identified by logistic regression analyses. Area under curves (AUCs) was compared among Child-Pugh, cirrhosis acute gastrointestinal bleeding (CAGIB) score, and model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) scores.

Results

Overall, 379 patients with liver cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding were consecutively evaluated. The majority of the patients were males (59.1%) and the mean age of all patients were 53.7 ± 1.3 years (range 14-89). Hepatitis B virus (HBV) was the most common underlying cause of liver cirrhosis (54.1%). 72 (19%) patients had hepatocellular carcinoma. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that age, HCC, WBC, total serum bilirubin, serum creatinine, and ALT were independently associated with in-hospital death. And the odds ratios (ORs) for in-hospital death were 1.066 (95% CI 1.017-1.118, P = 0.008), 7.19 (95% CI 2.077-24.893, P = 0.001), 1.123 (95% CI 1.051-1.201, P = 0.001), 1.014 (95% CI 1.005-1.023, P = 0.003), 1.012 (95% CI 1.004-1.021, P = 0.006), and 1.005 (95% CI 1.000-1.009, P = 0.036), respectively. In the whole cohort with HCC patients, the AUCs of Child-Pugh, CAGIB, MELD and NLR scores were 0.842 (95% CI 0.801-0.878), 0.840 (95% CI 0.799-0.876), 0.798 (95% CI 0.754-0.838), and 0.688 (95% CI 0.639-0.735), respectively. The differences were statistically significant between Child-Pugh and NLR scores (P = 0.0118), and between CAGIB and NLR scores (P = 0.0354).

Conclusion

Child-Pugh and CAGIB scores showed better predictive performance for prognosis of patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding than NLR scores.

External Validation of the Oakland Score to Assess Safe Hospital Discharge Among Adult Patients With Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the US

Importance

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB), which manifests as blood in the colon or anorectum, is a common reason for hospitalization. In most patients, LGIB stops spontaneously with no in-hospital intervention. A risk score that could identify patients at low risk of experiencing adverse outcomes could help improve the triage process and allow greater numbers of patients to receive outpatient management of LGIB.

Objective

To externally validate the Oakland Score, which was previously developed using a score threshold of 8 points to identify patients with LGIB who are at low risk of adverse outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter prognostic study was conducted in 140 US hospitals in the Hospital Corporation of America network. A total of 46 179 adult patients (aged ≥16 years) admitted to the hospital with a primary diagnosis of LGIB between June 1, 2016, and October 15, 2018, were initially identified using diagnostic codes. Of those, 51 patients were excluded because they were more likely to have upper gastrointestinal bleeding, leaving a study population of 46 128 patients with LGIB. For the statistical analysis of the Oakland Score, an additional 8061 patients were excluded because they were missing data on Oakland Score components or clinical outcomes, resulting in 38 067 patients included in the analysis. The study used area under the receiver operating characteristic curves with 95% CIs for external validation of the model. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each score threshold (≤8 points, ≤9 points, and ≤10 points). Data were analyzed from October 16, 2018, to September 4, 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Identification of patients who met the criteria for safe discharge from the hospital and comparison of the performance of 2 score thresholds (≤8 points vs ≤10 points). Safe discharge was defined as the absence of blood transfusion, rebleeding, hemostatic intervention, hospital readmission, and death.

Results

Among 46 128 adult patients with LGIB, the mean (SD) age was 70.1 (16.5) years; 23 091 patients (50.1%) were female. Of those, 22 074 patients (47.9%) met the criteria for safe discharge from the hospital. In this group, the mean (SD) age was 67.9 (18.1) years, and 11 056 patients (50.1%) were female. In the statistical analysis of the Oakland Score, which included only the 38 067 patients with complete data, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for safe discharge was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.87-0.87). An Oakland Score threshold of 8 points or lower identified 3305 patients (8.7%), with a sensitivity and specificity for safe discharge of 98.4% and 16.0%, respectively. Extension of the Oakland Score threshold to 10 points or lower identified 6770 patients (17.8%), with a sensitivity and specificity for safe discharge of 96.0% and 31.9%, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, the Oakland Score consistently identified patients with acute LGIB who were at low risk of experiencing adverse outcomes and whose conditions could safely be managed without hospitalization. The score threshold to identify low-risk patients could be extended from 8 points or lower to 10 points or lower to allow identification of a greater proportion of low-risk patients.

British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG)-led multisociety consensus care bundle for the early clinical management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Medical care bundles improve standards of care and patient outcomes. Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is a common medical emergency which has been consistently associated with suboptimal care. We aimed to develop a multisociety care bundle centred on the early management of AUGIB. Commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG), a UK multisociety task force was assembled to produce an evidence-based and consensus-based care bundle detailing key interventions to be performed within 24 hours of presentation with AUGIB. A modified Delphi process was conducted with stakeholder representation from BSG, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, Society for Acute Medicine and the National Blood Transfusion Service of the UK. A formal literature search was conducted and international AUGIB guidelines reviewed. Evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool and statements were formulated and subjected to anonymous electronic voting to achieve consensus. Accepted statements were eligible for incorporation into the final bundle after a separate round of voting. The final version of the care bundle was reviewed by the BSG Clinical Services and Standards Committee and approved by all stakeholder groups. Consensus was reached on 19 statements; these culminated in 14 corresponding care bundle items, contained within 6 management domains: Recognition, Resuscitation, Risk assessment, Rx (Treatment), Refer and Review. A multisociety care bundle for AUGIB has been developed to facilitate timely delivery of evidence-based interventions and drive quality improvement and patient outcomes in AUGIB.

Prognostic value of risk scoring systems for cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Acute variceal bleeding is one of the deadliest complications of cirrhosis, with a high risk of in-hospital rebleeding and mortality. Some risk scoring systems to predict clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding have been developed. However, for cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding, data regarding the predictive value of these prognostic scores in predicting in-hospital outcomes are limited and controversial.

AIM

To validate and compare the overall performance of selected prognostic scoring systems for predicting in-hospital outcomes in cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding.

METHODS

From March 2017 to June 2019, cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding were retrospectively enrolled at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University. The clinical Rockall score (CRS), AIMS65 score (AIMS65), Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), modified GBS (mGBS), Canada-United Kingdom-Australia score (CANUKA), Child-Turcotte-Pugh score (CTP), model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) and MELD-Na were calculated. The overall performance of these prognostic scoring systems was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 330 cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding were enrolled; the rates of in-hospital rebleeding and mortality were 20.3% and 10.6%, respectively. For in-hospital rebleeding, the discriminative ability of the CTP and CRS were clinically acceptable, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) of 0.717 (0.648-0.787) and 0.716 (0.638-0.793), respectively. The other tested scoring systems had poor discriminative ability (AUROCs < 0.7). For in-hospital mortality, the CRS, CTP, AIMS65, MELD-Na and MELD showed excellent discriminative ability (AUROCs > 0.8). The AUROCs of the mGBS, CANUKA and GBS were relatively small, but clinically acceptable (AUROCs > 0.7). Furthermore, the calibration of all scoring systems was good for either in-hospital rebleeding or death.

CONCLUSION

For cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding, in-hospital rebleeding and mortality rates remain high. The CTP and CRS can be used clinically to predict in-hospital rebleeding. The performances of the CRS, CTP, AIMS65, MELD-Na and MELD are excellent at predicting in-hospital mortality.

Clinical utility of pre-endoscopy risk scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Introduction: Acute upper-gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is a common medical emergency, with an incidence of 103-172 per 100,000 in the United Kingdom (UK) and mortality of 2% to 10%. Early and accurate prediction of the severity of an AUGIB episode may help guide management, including in or outpatient management, level of care required, and timing of endoscopy. This article aims to address the clinical utility of the various pre-endoscopic risk assessment tools used in AUGIB.Areas covered: The authors undertook a literature review of the current evidence on the pre-endoscopic risk assessment scores. Additional the authors discuss the recently published novel risk assessment scores.Expert opinion: The evidence shows that GBS is the most clinically useful risk assessment score in correctly identifying very low-risk patients suitable for outpatient management. At present, research is ongoing to assess machine learning in the assessment of patients presenting with AUGIB. More research is needed but it shows promise for the future.

Risk stratification in upper and upper and lower GI bleeding: Which scores should we use?

Risk assessment is widely used in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) however no score accurately predicts all important clinical outcomes. This review discusses the performance of the Rockall score, pre-endsocopy Rockall score, Glasgow-Blatchford score, AIMS-65 and newer scores such as Progetto Nazionale Emorragia Digestiva and CANUKA scores. The quality of external validation varies considerably for each score. There is a relative lack of risk scores available for use in lower GI bleeding (LGIB) but recent developments have focussed on the identification of low risk patients. The BLEED, NOBLADS, Strate and Sengupta scores have been developed to predict severe bleeding or death, each with varying performance. The Oakland score has been developed to identify patients at low risk of adverse outcomes who may be suitable for outpatient management. The comparative performance of the LGIB scores and Rockall, Glasgow-Blatchford and AIMS-65 in the prediction of outcomes in LGIB is also discussed.