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

Predictive utility of the Rockall scoring system in patients suffering from acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB) represents a significant clinical challenge due to its unpredictability and potentially severe outcomes. The Rockall risk score has emerged as a critical tool for prognostic assessment in patients with ANVUGIB, aiding in the prediction of rebleeding and mortality. However, its applicability and accuracy in the Chinese population remain understudied.

AIM

To assess the prognostic value of the Rockall risk score in a Chinese cohort of patients with ANVUGIB.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 168 ANVUGIB patients' medical records was conducted. The study employed statistical tests, including the t-test, χ 2 test, spearman correlation, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, to assess the relationship between the Rockall score and clinical outcomes, specifically focusing on rebleeding events within 3 months post-assessment.

RESULTS

Significant associations were found between the Rockall score and various clinical outcomes. High Rockall scores were significantly associated with rebleeding events (r = 0.735, R 2 = 0.541, P < 0.001) and strongly positively correlated with adverse outcomes. Low hemoglobin levels (t = 2.843, P = 0.005), high international normalized ratio (t = 3.710, P < 0.001), active bleeding during endoscopy (χ 2 = 7.950, P = 0.005), large ulcer size (t = 6.348, P < 0.001), and requiring blood transfusion (χ 2 = 6.381, P = 0.012) were all significantly associated with rebleeding events. Furthermore, differences in treatment and management strategies were identified between patients with and without rebleeding events. ROC analysis indicated the excellent discriminative power (sensitivity: 0.914; specificity: 0.816; area under the curve: 0.933; Youden index: 0.730) of the Rockall score in predicting rebleeding events within 3 months.

CONCLUSION

This study provides valuable insights into the prognostic value of the Rockall risk score for ANVUGIB in the Chinese population. The results underscore the potential of the Rockall score as an effective tool for risk stratification and prognostication, with implications for guiding risk-appropriate management strategies and optimizing care for patients with ANVUGIB.

Importance of risk assessment, endoscopic hemostasis, and recent advancements in the management of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB) is a common medical emergency in clinical practice. While the incidence has significantly reduced, the mortality rates have not undergone a similar reduction in the last few decades, thus presenting a significant challenge. This editorial outlines the key causes and risk factors of ANVUGIB and explores the current standards and recent updates in risk assessment scoring systems for predicting mortality and endoscopic treatments for achieving hemostasis. Since ANUVGIB predominantly affects the elderly population, the impact of comorbidities may be responsible for the poor outcomes. A thorough drug history is important due to the increasing use of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants in the elderly. Early risk stratification plays a crucial role in deciding the line of management and predicting mortality. Emerging scoring systems such as the ABC (age, blood tests, co-morbidities) score show promise in predicting mortality and guiding clinical decisions. While conventional endoscopic therapies remain cornerstone approaches, novel techniques like hemostatic powders and over-the-scope clips offer promising alternatives, particularly in cases refractory to traditional modalities. By integrating validated scoring systems and leveraging novel therapeutic modalities, clinicians can enhance patient care and mitigate the substantial morbidity and mortality associated with ANVUGIB.

Clinical Pathway for Enhanced Recovery in the Management of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

To explore the effects of the clinical pathway on the outcomes of patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Materials and Methods

Randomized controlled trial. The study was conducted in two medical centers in China from 1 June 2022 to 31 December 2022. Patients with a diagnosis of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding who provided written informed consent were consecutively assigned to the intervention group. The patients in the intervention group were treated using the clinical pathway, while the control group received routine care and follow-up. Time, cost, complications, and prognostic indicators were analyzed. Intentional-to-treat analysis and per-protocol analysis were used for data analysis.

Results

A total of 114 eligible patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding were randomly divided into two groups and included in the intention-to-treat analysis. In addition, 106 patients were included in the per-protocol analysis. The median age of the 106 patients was 57 years (range, 18-92 years) and 83.0% were male. There were no significant differences between groups regarding the baseline characteristics. The intervention group demonstrated a statistically significantly shorter length of stay, lower hospital cost (ie, cost during hospitalization, cost in the emergency room, and cost in the ward), significantly fewer cases of complications, and a higher level of patient satisfaction when compared with the control group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the rates of transfusion, repeat endoscopy, rebleeding readmission, and mortality.

Conclusion

The implementation of the clinical pathway for patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding may help improve patient outcomes and satisfaction.

Trial Registration Number

ChiCTR2200060316.

Registration Link

https://www.chictr.org.cn/.

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.

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.

Patient and endoscopic characteristics and clinical outcomes in subjects with non-variceal GI bleeding referred for transarterial embolization: a single-center experience

PURPOSE

Management of massive non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NV-UGIB) can be challenging. Transarterial Embolization (TAE) is often the first therapeutic approach when endoscopic therapy fails before surgery. The purpose of this study is to analyze the technical success, and outcome for our patients with an NV-UGIB referred for TAE.

METHOD

This retrospective analysis included 74 consecutive patients with an NV-UGIB in whom TAE was performed after endoscopic treatment between February 2016 to May 2019 at Prisma Health-Upstate Greenville Memorial Hospital.

RESULTS

TAE was 98.7% technically successful, with a failure due to severe celiac stenosis, and 85.1% clinically successful. Most TAEs were performed empirically due to lack of extravasation yet were clinically as effective as targeted TAE. We noted a 30-day rebleeding rate and mortality rate of 14.8% and 13.5%, respectively. No complications were reported during the angiographic procedure. Subjects with coagulopathy had more rebleeding (45.5% vs. 17.5%, p = 0.040), and mortality (30% vs 7.4%, p = 0.012). Mortality was also associated with the number of transfused packed blood cells (13.6 ± 8.4 vs. 6.1 ± 5.4, p = 0.020) units and hypotension on admission (27.8% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.043). Interestingly, subjects that underwent left gastric artery (LGA) compared to non-LGA embolization had a higher rebleeding rate of (37.5% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.004) and a greater mortality rate of (37.5% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

TAE is clinically effective in the presence or absence of contrast extravasation to treat uncontrolled or high-risk NV-UGIB. Less effective clinical outcomes regarding TAE targeting the LGA warrant further investigation.

Comparison of intermittent and continuous proton pump inhibitor infusions in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of intermittent and continuous proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) infusion on the outcomes of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB).

METHODS

The study was a single-centred retrospective study in adult patients with active upper gastrointestinal bleeding who received intermittent or continuous PPI infusion at King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, from January 2013 to October 2019. The outcomes assessed were rebleeding, length of hospital stays and mortality within 30 days of admission, and were compared between the treatment groups. A statistically significant p-value was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

The study involved 97 patients with NVUGIB treated with intermittent (n=56) and continuous (n=41) PPI infusions, with mean (±SD) ages of 66.0±16.1 and 58.0±19.5 years, respectively. The baseline and clinical characteristics between the 2 treatment groups; age (p=0.116), gender (p=0.345) and comorbidities (p=0.401), were comparable. There were no significant differences in rebleeding rates within 30 days (5 [8.9%] versus 1 [2.4%], p=0.396), length of hospital stays (4 vs 5, p=0.067), and mortality rate (1 [1.7%] vs 3 [7.3%], p=0.308) between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

The management of NVUGIB with intermittent and continuous PPI infusions demonstrated comparable outcomes in reducing rebleeding rate, length of hospital stays, and mortality rate among patients attending the university hospital in Saudi Arabia.

Comparisons of six endoscopy independent scoring systems for the prediction of clinical outcomes for elderly and younger patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

OBJECTIVES

To compare the predictive ability of six pre-endoscopic scoring systems (ABC, AIMS65, GBS, MAP(ASH), pRS, and T-score) for outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in elderly and younger patients.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 1260 patients, including 530 elderly patients (age [Formula: see text] 65) and 730 younger patients (age < 65) presenting with UGIB, was performed at Zhongda Hospital Southeast University, from January 2015 to December 2020. Six scoring systems were used.

RESULTS

ABC had the largest areas under the curve (AUCs) of 0.827 (0.792-0.858), and 0.958 (0.929-0.987) for elderly and younger groups for predicting mortality respectively. The differences of the AUCs for predicting the outcome of mortality and rebleeding between the two groups were significant for ABC and pRS (p < 0.01). For intervention prediction, significant differences were observed only for pRS [AUC 0.623 (0.578-0.669) vs. 0.699 (0.646-0.752)] (p < 0.05) between the two groups. For intensive care unit (ICU) admission, the AUC for MAP (ASH) [0.791 (0.718-0.865) vs. 0.891 (0.831-0.950)] and pRS [0.610 (0.514-0.706) vs. 0.891 (0.699-0.865)] were more effective for the younger group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). For comparison of scoring systems in the same cohort, ABC was significantly higher than pRS: AUC 0.710 (0.699-0.853, p < 0.05) and T-score 0.670 (0.628-0.710, p < 0.01) for predicting mortality in the elderly group. In the younger group, ABC was significantly higher than GBS and T-score (p < 0.01). MAP(ASH) performs the best in predicting intervention in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ABC and pRS are more accurate for predicting mortality and rebleeding in the younger cohort, and pRS may not be suitable for elderly patients. There was no difference between the two study populations for GBS, AIMS65, and T-score. Except for ICU admission, MAP(ASH) showed fair accuracy for both cohorts.

Acute Upper Non-variceal and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common surgical emergency requiring hospital admission and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Appropriate decision-making is essential to make a prompt diagnosis, accurate risk assessment, and proper resuscitation of patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. Despite multiple randomized trials and meta-analyses, there is still controversy on various management issues like appropriate risk stratification, the timing of endoscopy, choosing an appropriate endoscopic, and radiological intervention in these groups of patients. As the usage of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiplatelet, and antithrombotic agents is common in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding, the physician is challenged with proper management of these drugs. The present review summarizes the current strategies for risk stratification, localization of bleeding source, endoscopic and radiological intervention in patients with acute nonvariceal upper GI, middle GI, and lower GI bleeding.

Endovascular Treatment of Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage

Background and Objectives: Severe non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding is a life-threatening condition with complicated treatment if endoscopic therapy fails. In such cases, transcatheter arterial embolization is recommended. The technical and clinical effects of this technique were analyzed in this group of patients, as well as its complication rate and 30-day mortality. Materials and Methods: Patient data over a one-decade period (from 2010 to 2019) were analyzed retrospectively; 27 patients (18 men and 9 women; median age 61 years) treated by endovascular embolization in our institution, with clinically significant gastrointestinal hemorrhage after unsuccessful or impossible endoscopic treatment, were identified, and their data were collected. Results: The source of bleeding was found in 88% of patients, but embolization was performed in 96% of them. The overall technical success rate was 96.8%, and the clinical success was 88.5%. Re-bleeding occurred in eight cases, five of whom had re-embolization that was technically successful in four cases. The incidence of re-bleeding was significantly higher in patients with two or more comorbidities (p = 0.043). There was one serious complication (4%) in the group, and minor difficulties occurred in 18% of patients; 30-day mortality reached 22%. Mortality was significantly higher in the group of patients with re-bleeding (p = 0.044). Conclusions: Transcatheter arterial embolization is a mini-invasive method with high technical success in patients with endoscopically untreatable gastrointestinal bleeding; it is also suitable for high-risk cases. Mortality (to a significant extent) depends on the occurrence of re-bleeding and the patient’s comorbidities.

Evaluation of Six Preendoscopy Scoring Systems to Predict Outcomes for Older Adults with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Objectives

To compare the ability of six preendoscopic scoring systems (ABC, AIMS65, Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS), MAP(ASH), pRS, and T-score) to predict outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in older adults.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of 602 older adults (age ≥ 65) presenting with UGIB at Zhongda Hospital Southeast University from January 2015 to June 2021. Six scoring systems were used to analyze all patients.

Results

ABC had the largest area under the curve (AUC) (0.833; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.801–0.862) and was significantly higher than pRS 0.696 (95% CI: 0.658–0.733, p < 0.01) and T-score 0.667 (95% CI: 0.628–0.704, p < 0.01) in predicting mortality. MAP(ASH) (0.783; 95% CI: 0.748–0.815) performs the best in predicting intervention and was similar to GBS, T-score, ABC, and AIMS65. The AUCs for MAP(ASH) (0.732; 95% CI: 0.698–0.770), AIMS65 (0.711; 95% CI: 0.672–0.746), and ABC (0.718; 95% CI: 0.680–0.754) were fair for rebleeding, while those of GBS (0.662; 95% CI: 0.617–0.694), T-score (0.641; 95% CI: 0.606–0.684), and pRS (0.609; 95% CI: 0.569–0.648) were performed poorly. MAP(ASH) performs the best in predicting ICU admission (0.784; 95% CI: 0.749–0.816). All the five scores were significantly higher than pRS (p < 0.05 for ABC, AIMS65 and T-score, p < 0.01 for GBS and MAP).

Conclusions

Mortality, intervention, rebleeding, and ICU admission in UGIB for older adults can be predicted well using MAP(ASH). ABC is the most accurate for predicting mortality. Except for rebleeding, GBS has an acceptable performance in predicting ICU admission, mortality, and intervention. AIMS65 and T-score performed moderately, and pRS may not be suitable for the target cohort.