Glasgow Blatchford, pre-endoscopic Rockall and AIMS65 scores show no difference in predicting rebleeding rate and mortality in variceal bleeding

A Nomogram Model for Prediction of Mortality Risk of Patients with Dangerous Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Two-center Retrospective Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to establish a nomogram model to predict the mortality risk of patients with dangerous upper gastrointestinal bleeding (DUGIB), and identify high-risk patients who require emergent therapy.

METHODS

From January 2020 to April 2022, the clinical data of 256 DUGIB patients who received treatments in the intensive care unit (ICU) were retrospectively collected from Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University (n=179) and the Eastern Campus of Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University (n=77). The 179 patients were treated as the training cohort, and 77 patients as the validation cohort. Logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the independent risk factors, and R packages were used to construct the nomogram model. The prediction accuracy and identification ability were evaluated by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, C index and calibration curve. The nomogram model was also simultaneously externally validated. Decision curve analysis (DCA) was then used to demonstrate the clinical value of the model.

RESULTS

Logistic regression analysis showed that hematemesis, urea nitrogen level, emergency endoscopy, AIMS65, Glasgow Blatchford score and Rockall score were all independent risk factors for DUGIB. The ROC curve analysis indicated the area under curve (AUC) of the training cohort was 0.980 (95%CI: 0.962-0.997), while the AUC of the validation cohort was 0.790 (95%CI:0.685-0.895). The calibration curves were tested for Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit for both training and validation cohorts (P=0.778, P=0.516).

CONCLUSION

The developed nomogram is an effective tool for risk stratification, early identification and intervention for DUGIB patients.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure is independently associated with higher mortality for cirrhotic patients with acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage: Retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (AEVH) is a common complication of cirrhosis and might precipitate multi-organ failure, causing acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF).

AIM

To analyze if the presence and grading of ACLF as defined by European Society for the Study of the Liver-Chronic Liver Failure (EASL-CLIF) is able to predict mortality in cirrhotic patients presenting AEVH.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study executed in Hospital Geral de Caxias do Sul. Data from medical records from 2010 to 2016 were obtained by searching the hospital electronic database for patients who received terlipressin. Medical records were reviewed in order to determine the diagnosis of cirrhosis and AEVH, including 97 patients. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used for univariate analysis and a stepwise approach to the Cox regression for multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

All- cause mortality for AEVH patients was 36%, 40.2% and 49.4% for 30-, 90- and 365-day, respectively. The prevalence of ACLF was 41.3%. Of these, 35% grade 1, 50% grade 2 and 15% grade 3. In multivariate analysis, the non-use of non-selective beta-blockers, presence and higher grading of ACLF and higher Model for End-Stage Liver Disease scores were independently associated with higher mortality for 30-day with the addition of higher Child-Pugh scores for 90-day period.

CONCLUSION

Presence and grading of ACLF according to the EASL-CLIF criteria was independently associated with higher 30- and 90-day mortality in cirrhotic patients admitted due to AEVH.

Association of inferior vena cava diameter ratio with outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding

Objective

To examine the association of inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter ratio measured using computed tomography with outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB).

Methods

A single-center retrospective observational study was conducted on consecutive patients with GIB who presented to the emergency department. The IVC diameter ratio was calculated by dividing the maximum transverse and anteroposterior diameters perpendicular to it. The association of the IVC diameter ratio with outcomes was examined using multivariable logistic regression analysis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUC) of the IVC diameter ratio was calculated, and the sensitivity and specificity, including the cutoff values, were computed.

Results

In total, 585 patients were included in the final analysis. The in-hospital mortality rate was 4.6% (n=27). The IVC diameter ratio was significantly associated with higher in-hospital mortality in multivariable logistic regression analysis (odds ratio, 1.793; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.239–2.597; P=0.002). The AUC of the IVC diameter ratio for in-hospital mortality was 0.616 (95% CI, 0.498–0.735). With a cutoff of the IVC diameter ratio (≥2.1), the sensitivity and specificity for predicting in-hospital mortality were 44% (95% CI, 26%–65%) and 71% (95% CI, 67%–75%), respectively.

Conclusion

The IVC diameter ratio was independently associated with in-hospital mortality in patients with GIB. However, the AUC of the IVC diameter ratio for in-hospital mortality was low.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of risk scores in prediction for the clinical outcomes in patients with acute variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is a life-threatening condition that needs risk stratification to guide clinical treatment. Which risk system could reflect the prognosis more accurately remains controversial. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the predictive value of GBS, AIMS65, Rockall (clinical Rockall score and full Rockall score), CTP and MELD.

METHOD

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane library, WANGFANG and CNKI were searched. Twenty-eight articles were included in the study. The Meta-DiSc software and MedCalc software were used to pool the predictive accuracy.

RESULTS

Concerning in-hospital mortality, CTP, AIMS65, MELD, Full-Rockall and GBS had a pooled AUC of 0.824, 0.793, 0.788, 0.75 and 0.683, respectively. CTP had the highest sensitivity of 0.910 (95% CI: 0.864-0.944) with a specificity of 0.666 (95% CI: 0.635-0.696). AIMS65 had the highest specificity of 0.774 (95% CI: 0.749-0.798) with a sensitivity of 0.679 (95% CI: 0.617-0.736). For follow-up mortality, MELD, AIMS65, CTP, Clinical Rockall, Full-Rockall and GBS showed a pooled AUC of 0.798, 0.77, 0.746, 0.704, 0.678 and 0.618, respectively. CTP had the highest specificity (0.806, 95% CI: 0.763-0.843) with a sensitivity of 0.722 (95% CI: 0.628-0.804). GBS had the highest sensitivity 0.800 (95% CI: 0.696-0.881) with a specificity of 0.412 (95% CI: 0.368-0.457). As for rebleeding, no score performed particularly well.

CONCLUSIONS

No risk scores were ideally identified by our systematic review. CTP was superior to other risk scores in identifying AVB patients at high risk of death in hospital and patients at low risk within follow-up. Guidelines have recommended the use of GBS to risk stratification of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. However, if the cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding is suspected oesophageal and gastric varices, extra care should be taken. Because in this meta-analysis, the ability of GBS was limited.Key messageCTP was superior in identifying AVB patients at high risk of death in hospital and low risk within follow-up.GBS, though recommended by the Guidelines, should be cautiously used when assessing AVB patients.

Prediction model of emergency mortality risk in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective study

Background

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common presentation in emergency departments and carries significant morbidity worldwide. It is paramount that treating physicians have access to tools that can effectively evaluate the patient risk, allowing quick and effective treatments to ultimately improve their prognosis. This study aims to establish a mortality risk assessment model for patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding at an emergency department.

Methods

A total of 991 patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding between July 2016 and June 2019 were enrolled in this retrospective single-center cohort study. Patient demographics, parameters assessed at admission, laboratory test, and clinical interventions were extracted. We used the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression to identify predictors for establishing a nomogram for death in the emergency department or within 24 h after leaving the emergency department and a corresponding nomogram. The area under the curve of the model was calculated. A bootstrap resampling method was used to internal validation, and decision curve analysis was applied for evaluate the clinical utility of the model. We also compared our predictive model with other prognostic models, such as AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score, modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score, and Pre-Endoscopic Rockall Score.

Results

Among 991 patients, 41 (4.14%) died in the emergency department or within 24 h after leaving the emergency department. Five non-zero coefficient variables (transfusion of plasma, D-dimer, albumin, potassium, age) were filtered by the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis and used to establish a predictive model. The area under the curve for the model was 0.847 (95% confidence interval [0.794–0.900]), which is higher than that of previous models for mortality of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The decision curve analysis indicated the clinical usefulness of the model.

Conclusions

The nomogram based on transfusion of plasma, D-dimer, albumin, potassium, and age effectively assessed the prognosis of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding presenting at the emergency department.

Risk Factors for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients

Background

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common critical disease with a certain fatality rate. Acute coronary syndrome (ACS), another critical ill condition, is a regular occurrence in the UGIB. We identified risk factors for ACS in UGIB.

Methods

676 patients diagnosed with UGIB were enrolled retrospectively. We assessed the occurrence of ACS in UGIB patients and identified the risk factors for ACS by logistic regression analysis and random forest analysis.

Results

After propensity score matching (PSM), the ACS group (n = 69) and non-ACS group (n = 276) were analyzed. Logistic regression analysis showed that syncope (P = 0.001), coronary heart disease history (P = 0.001), Glasgow Blatchford score (P ≤ 0.001), Rockall risk score (P = 0.004), red blood cell distribution width (RDW) (P ≤ 0.001), total bilirubin (TBil) (P = 0.046), fibrinogen (P ≤ 0.001), and hemoglobin (P = 0.001) had important roles in ACS patients. With Mean Decrease Gini (MDG) sequencing, fibrinogen, RDW, and hemoglobin were ranked the top three risk factors associated with ACS. In ROC analysis, fibrinogen (AUC = 0.841, 95% CI: 0.779-0.903) and RDW (AUC = 0.826, 95% CI: 0.769-0.883) obtained good discrimination performance. According to sensitivity > 80%, the pAUC of fibrinogen and RDW were 0.077 and 0.101, respectively, and there was no significant difference (P = 0.326). However, according to specificity > 80%, the pAUC of fibrinogen was higher than that of RDW (0.126 vs. 0.088, P = 0.018).

Conclusion

Fibrinogen and RDW were important risk factors for ACS in UGIB. Additionally, combination with coronary heart disease, syncope, hemoglobin, and TBil played important roles in the occurrence of ACS. Meanwhile, it was also noted that Rockall score and Glasgow Blatchford score should be performed to predict the risk.

Comparison of the quick SOFA score with Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scores in predicting severity in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the common causes of mortality and morbidity. The Rockall score (RS) and Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) are frequently used in determining the prognosis and predicting in-hospital adverse events, such as mortality, re-bleeding, hospital stay, and blood transfusion requirements. The quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is easy and swift to calculate. The commonly used scores and the qSOFA score were compared and why and when these scores are most useful was investigated.

METHOD

133 patients admitted to the emergency department with upper gastrointestinal bleeding over the period of a year, were evaluated in this retrospective study. The RS, GBS and qSOFA score were calculated for each patient, and their relationship with in-hospital adverse events, such as length of hospitalization, rebleeding, endoscopic treatment, blood transfusion requirements, and mortality, was investigated.

RESULTS

The mean overall GBS was 9.72 ± 3.72 (0-19), while that of patients who did not survive was 14.0 ± 1.1 (13-16), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.901, a cutoff value of 12.5, and specificity (Spe) and sensitivity (Sen) of 1 and 0.82, respectively. The median value of the GBS, in terms of transfusion need, was 7.12 ± 4.01 (0-15). (AUC = 0.752, cut-off = 9.5, Spe = 0.79, Sen = 0.69). The median value of the qSOFA score, in terms of intensive care need, was 1.73 ± 0.7 (0-3) (AUC = 0.921, cut-off = 0.5, Spe = 0.93, Sen = 0.79). The RS median, in terms of re-bleeding, was 8.22 ± 0.97 (6-9).

CONCLUSION

Early use of risk stratification scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding is important due to the high risk of morbidity and mortality. All scoring systems were effective in predicting mortality, the need for intensive care, and re-bleeding. The GBS had a greater predictive power in terms of mortality and transfusion need, the qSOFA score for intensive care need, and the RS for re-bleeding. The simpler, more efficient, and more easily calculated qSOFA score can be used to estimate the severity of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

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

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.

Prospective Comparison of the AIMS65 Score, Glasgow-Blatchford Score, and Rockall Score for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Variceal and Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Background/Aims

This study aimed to determine the performance of the AIMS65 score (AIMS65), Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), and Rockall score (RS) in predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), and to compare the results between patients with nonvariceal UGIB (NVUGIB) and those with variceal UGIB (VUGIB).

Methods

We conducted a prospective observational study between March 2016 and December 2017. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed for all outcomes for comparison. The associations of all three scores with mortality were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

Of the total of 337 patients with UGIB, 267 patients (79.2%) had NVUGIB. AIMS65 was significantly associated (odds ratio [OR], 1.735; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.148–2.620), RS was marginally associated (OR, 1.225; 95% CI, 0.973–1.543), but GBS was not associated (OR, 1.017; 95% CI, 0.890–1.163) with mortality risk in patients with UGIB. However, all three scores accurately predicted all other outcomes (all p<0.05) except rebleeding (p>0.05). Only AIMS65 precisely predicted mortality, the need for blood transfusion and the composite endpoint (all p<0.05) in patients with VUGIB.

Conclusions

AIMS65 is superior to GBS and RS in predicting mortality in patients with UGIB, and also precisely predicts the need for blood transfusion and the composite endpoint in patients with VUGIB. No scoring system could satisfactorily predict rebleeding in all patients with UGIB.

Risk stratification in acute variceal bleeding: Comparison of the AIMS65 score to established upper gastrointestinal bleeding and liver disease severity risk stratification scoring systems in predicting mortality and rebleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Risk stratification is recommended in all patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB). It remains unclear whether liver disease severity or upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) scoring algorithms offer superior predictive ability. We aimed to validate the AIMS65 score as a predictor of mortality in AVB, and to compare AIMS65 with established UGIB and liver disease severity risk stratification scores.

METHODS

International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes identified patients presenting with AVB to three tertiary centers over a 48-month period. Patients were risk-stratified using AIMS65, Rockall, pre-endoscopy Rockall, Child-Pugh, Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) and United Kingdom MELD (UKELD) scores. Primary outcomes were inpatient and 6-week mortality and inpatient rebleeding.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-three patients were included. Inpatient and 6-week mortality were 13.9% and 15.5% respectively. Prediction of inpatient mortality by AIMS65 (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUROC: 0.84]) was equivalent to UGIB (Rockall: 0.79, pre-Rockall: 0.78) and liver risk scores (MELD: 0.81, UKELD: 0.79, Child-Pugh: 0.78). AIMS65 score ≥3 best defined high- and low-risk groups for inpatient mortality (mortality 37.7% vs 4.9%). AIMS65 (AUROC: 0.62) was equivalent to UGIB risk scores (pre-Rockall: 0.64, Rockall: 0.70) in predicting inpatient rebleeding and superior to liver risk scores (MELD: 0.56, UKELD: 0.57, Child-Pugh: 0.60).

CONCLUSIONS

AIMS65 is equivalent to established UGIB and liver disease severity risk stratification scores in predicting mortality, and superior to liver scores in predicting rebleeding.

Validation of a new risk score system for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Recently, a new international bleeding score was developed to predict 30-day hospital mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, the efficacy of this newly developed scoring system has not been extensively investigated. We aimed to validate a new scoring system for predicting 30-day mortality in patients with non-variceal UGIB and determine whether a higher score is associated with re-bleeding, length of hospital stay, and endoscopic failure.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on 905 patients with acute non-variceal UGIB who were examined in our hospital between January 2013 and December 2017. Baseline characteristics, endoscopic findings, re-bleeding, admission, and mortality were reviewed. The 30-day mortality rate of the new international bleeding risk score was calculated using the receiver operating characteristic curves and compared to the pre-endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, Glasgow Blatchford score, and Progetto Nazionale Emorragia Digestiva score. To verify the variable for the 30-day mortality of the new scoring system, we performed multivariate logistic regression using our data and further analyzed the score items.

RESULTS

The new international bleeding scoring system showed higher receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve values in predicting mortality (area under ROC curve 0.958; [95% confidence interval (CI)]), compared with such as AIMS65 (AUROC, 0.832; 95%CI, 0.806-0.856; P < 0.001), PNED (AUROC, 0.865; 95%CI, 0.841-0.886; P < 0.001), Pre-RS (AUROC, 0.802; 95%CI, 0.774-0.827; P < 0.001), and GBS (AUROC, 0.765; 95%CI, 0.736-0.793; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis was performed using our data and showed that the 30-day mortality rate was related to multiple comorbidities, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, albumin, syncope at first visit, and endoscopic failure within 24 h during the first admission. In addition, in the high-score group, relatively long hospital stay, re-bleeding, and endoscopic failure were observed.

CONCLUSION

This is a preliminary report of a new bleeding score which may predict 30-day mortality better than the other scoring systems. High-risk patients could be screened using this new scoring system to predict 30-day mortality. The use of this scoring system seemed to improve the outcomes of non-variceal UGIB patients in this study, through proper management and intervention.

Different scoring systems to predict 6-week mortality in cirrhosis patients with acute variceal bleeding: a retrospective analysis of 202 patients

OBJECTIVE

Determine the optimal scoring system for evaluation of 6-week bleeding-related mortality in liver cirrhosis patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB). Prediction effects of six scoring systems, AIMS65 score, Glasgow-Blatchford (GBS) score, full Rockall (FRS) score, the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), the MELD-Na model and the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score were analyzed in this study.

METHODS

A total of 202 liver cirrhosis patients with AVB were enrolled between 1 January 2014, and 31 December 2014. All subjects were scored according to AIMS65, GBS, FRS, MELD, MELD-Na and CTP scoring systems on the first day of admission. The primary endpoint of the study was 6-week mortality. The prediction effect of these scoring systems for 6-week mortality was compared by ROC curve and the area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

The scores of nonsurvival group evaluated by the AIMS65, GBS, FRS, MELD, MELD-Na and CTP (2.6 ± 1.1, 12.9 ± 2.7, 6.6 ± 1.8, 26.9 ± 6.5, 31.6 ± 9.3, 9.6 ± 2.2, respectively) were higher than those of the survival group (1.2 ± 1.1, 10.2 ± 3.4, 5.1 ± 1.6, 21.0 ± 6.4, 22.8 ± 8.2, 7.7 ± 2.0, respectively) (p < .01). The values of AUC and Youden index of AIMS65 and MELD-Na scoring systems [(0.808, 0.453) and (0.781, 0.516), respectively] were superior to those of MELD (0.761, 0.454), CTP (0.748, 0.399), FRS (0.738, 0.358) and GBS scoring systems (0.726, 0.370).

CONCLUSIONS

AIMS65 and MELD-Na scoring systems are recommended for evaluation of 6-week bleeding-related mortality in liver cirrhosis patients with AVB.

Comparison of AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring approaches in predicting the risk of in-hospital death among emergency hospitalized patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective observational study in Nanjing, China

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the performance of AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford (GBS) and Rockall scores (RS) in predicting the death risk among emergency-hospitalized patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in regional China.

METHODS

A retrospective study was implemented between January 2014 and December 2015. Eligible participants were those who were hospitalized with UGIB. The outcome variable was in-hospital death, while explanatory variables were AIMS65, GBS and RS scores. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated to assess the association of AIMS65, GBS and RS with death risk using multivariate logistic regression models. The areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of three scoring systems were computed to compare their predictive power.

RESULTS

Among 799 UGIB participants, 674 were non-variceal bleeding (NVUGIB) and 125 variceal bleeding (VUGIB) patients. AIMS65 (OR = 14.72, 95% CI = 6.48, 33.43) and RS (OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.20, 2.13) were positively associated with the risk of in-hospital death. Moreover, AIMS65 (AUC = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.84, 0.98) performed the best in predicting in-hospital death, followed by RS (AUC = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.72, 0.86) and GBS (AUC = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.59, 0.83) among overall UGIB participants. AIMS65 was also the best indicator to predict in-hospital death among either NVUGIB participants (AUC = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.80, 0.98) or VUGIB participants (AUC = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.89, 1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

AIMS65, GBS and RS scoring approaches were all acceptable for predicting in-hospital death among UGIB patients irrespective of the subtype of UGIB in China. The AIMS65 might be the most powerful predictor.

Scoring systems for peptic ulcer bleeding: Which one to use?

AIM

To compare the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score (RS) and Baylor bleeding score (BBS) in predicting clinical outcomes and need for interventions in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.

METHODS

Between January 2008 and December 2013, 1012 consecutive patients admitted with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) were prospectively followed. The pre-endoscopic RS, BBS and GBS, as well as the post-endoscopic diagnostic scores (RS and BBS) were calculated for all patients according to their urgent upper endoscopy findings. Area under the receiver-operating characteristics (AUROC) curves were calculated for the prediction of lethal outcome, rebleeding, needs for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention, and the optimal cutoff values were evaluated.

RESULTS

PUB accounted for 41.9% of all upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding, 5.2% patients died and 5.4% patients underwent surgery. By comparing the AUROC curves of the aforementioned pre-endoscopic scores, the RS best predicted lethal outcome (AUROC 0.82 vs 0.67 vs 0.63, respectively), but the GBS best predicted need for hospital-based intervention or 30-d mortality (AUROC 0.84 vs 0.57 vs 0.64), rebleeding (AUROC 0.75 vs 0.61 vs 0.53), need for blood transfusion (AUROC 0.83 vs 0.63 vs 0.58) and surgical intervention (0.82 vs 0.63 vs 0.52) The post-endoscopic RS was also better than the post-endoscopic BBS in predicting lethal outcome (AUROC 0.82 vs 0.69, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The RS is the best predictor of mortality and the GBS is the best predictor of rebleeding, need for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention in patients with PUB. There is no one 'perfect score' and we suggest that these two tests be used concomitantly.

Development of a prognostic nomogram for cirrhotic patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a complication with a high mortality rate in critically ill patients presenting with cirrhosis. Today, there exist few accurate scoring models specifically designed for mortality risk assessment in critically ill cirrhotic patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (CICGIB). Our aim was to develop and evaluate a novel nomogram-based model specific for CICGIB.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Overall, 540 consecutive CICGIB patients were enrolled. On the basis of Cox regression analyses, the nomogram was constructed to estimate the probability of 30-day, 90-day, 270-day, and 1-year survival. An upper gastrointestinal bleeding-chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment (UGIB-CLIF-SOFA) score was derived from the nomogram. Performance assessment and internal validation of the model were performed using Harrell's concordance index (C-index), calibration plot, and bootstrap sample procedures. UGIB-CLIF-SOFA was also compared with other prognostic models, such as CLIF-SOFA and model for end-stage liver disease, using C-indices.

RESULTS

Eight independent factors derived from Cox analysis (including bilirubin, creatinine, international normalized ratio, sodium, albumin, mean artery pressure, vasopressin used, and hematocrit decrease>10%) were assembled into the nomogram and the UGIB-CLIF-SOFA score. The calibration plots showed optimal agreement between nomogram prediction and actual observation. The C-index of the nomogram using bootstrap (0.729; 95% confidence interval: 0.689-0.766) was higher than that of the other models for predicting survival of CICGIB.

CONCLUSION

We have developed and internally validated a novel nomogram and an easy-to-use scoring system that accurately predicts the mortality probability of CICGIB on the basis of eight easy-to-obtain parameters. External validation is now warranted in future clinical studies.

Application of chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment score for the predication of mortality after esophageal variceal hemorrhage post endoscopic ligation

Background

Esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH) is one of the high mortality complications in cirrhotic patients. Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is currently the standard therapy for EVH. However, some patients have expired during hospitalization or survived shortly after management.

Aim

To evaluate hospital and 6-week mortality by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of chronic liver failure-sequential organ failure assessment (CLIF-SOFA) score compared to a model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and Child–Turcotte–Pugh (CTP) class.

Methods

We retrospectively collected 714 cirrhotic patients with EVH post EVL between July 2010 and June 2016 at Taitung MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taiwan. CLIF-SOFA score, MELD score, and CTP class were calculated for all patients admitted.

Results

Among the 714 patients, the overall hospital and 6-week mortality rates were 6.9% (49/715) and 13.1% (94/715) respectively. For predicting hospital death, area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) values of CLIF-SOFA score, MELD score, and CTP class were 0.964, 0.876, and 0.846. For predicting 6-week death, AUROC values of CLIF-SOFA score, MELD score, and CTP class were 0.943, 0.817, and 0.834. CLIF-SOFA score had higher AUROC value with statistical significance under pairwise comparison than did MELD score and CTP class in prediction of not only hospital but also 6-week mortality. The history of hepatocellular carcinoma was the risk factor for 6-week mortality. For patients with hepatocellular carcinoma the cut-point of CLIF-SOFA score was 5.5 for 6-week mortality and 6.5 for hospital mortality on admission. For patients without hepatocellular carcinoma, the cut-point of CLIF-SOFA score was 6.5 for both 6-week and hospital mortality.

Conclusion

CLIF-SOFA score predicted post-EVL prognosis well. For patients without hepatocellular carcinoma, CLIF-SOFA score ≥6 suggests higher 6-week mortality and CLIF-SOFA score ≥7 suggests higher hospital mortality. For patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, CLIF-SOFA score ≥7 suggests higher 6-week and hospital mortality.