External validation of scoring systems in risk stratification of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

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.

COMPARISON OF NON-ENDOSCOPIC SCORES FOR THE PREDICTION OF OUTCOMES IN PATIENTS OF UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEED IN AN EMERGENCY OF A TERTIARY CARE REFERRAL HOSPITAL: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

BACKGROUND

Traditionally peptic ulcer disease was the most common cause of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleed but with the changing epidemiology; other etiologies of UGI bleed are emerging. Many scores have been described for predicting outcomes and the need for intervention in UGI bleed but prospective comparison among them is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

This study was planned to determine the etiological pattern of UGI bleed and to compare Glasgow Blatchford score, Pre-Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and Modified Early Warning Score (MEWS) as predictors of outcome.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study 268 patients of UGI bleed were enrolled and followed up for 8 weeks. Glasgow Blatchford score, Endoscopy Rockall score, AIMS65, and MEWS were calculated for each patient, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve for each score was compared.

RESULTS

The most common etiology for UGI bleed were gastroesophageal varices 150 (63.55%) followed by peptic ulcer disease 29 (12.28%) and mucosal erosive disease 27 (11.44%). Total 38 (15.26%) patients had re-bleed and 71 (28.5%) patients died. Overall, 126 (47%) patients required blood component transfusion, 25 (9.3%) patients required mechanical ventilation and 2 (0.74%) patients required surgical intervention. Glasgow Blatchford score was the best in predicting the need for transfusion (cut off - 10, AUC-ROC= 0.678). Whereas AIMS65 with a score of ≥2 was best in predicting re-bleed (AUC-ROC=0.626) and mortality (AUC-ROC=0.725).

CONCLUSION

Gastrointestinal bleed was most commonly of variceal origin at our tertiary referral center in Northern India. AIMS65 was the best & simplest score with a score of ≥2 for predicting re-bleed and mortality.

Prealbumin and D-dimer as Prognostic Indicators for Rebleeding in Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

Determining the risk stratification of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) plays a vital role in treating upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Traditional scores like Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score (RS), and AIMS65 score have been widely utilized in UGIB practice, however exhibiting limited practical use due to relative lack of user-friendly characters. Prealbumin as a nutritional indicator and d-dimer as a fibrinolytic activity monitor, are generally used to evaluate the overall nutritional and fibrinolytic condition in UGIB patients.

AIMS

Here, we explored the predictive value of these two markers in NVUGIB for evaluating severity and prognosis including rebleeding and surgery intervention.

METHODS

One hundred and eighty-five patients suffering NVUGIB were enrolled. Their GBS, RS, and AIMS65 score, routine laboratory test results including prealbumin and d-dimer were determined after admission. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to define the independent predictors of rebleeding. ROC curves were generated to compare the suitability of prealbumin, d-dimer, and scores for rebleeding prediction.

RESULTS

The NVUGIB patients with rebleeding exhibited higher scores, white blood cell counts, d-dimer, CRP, proportion of surgery intervention, and longer hospital stay, but lower hematocrit, hemoglobin, calcium, prealbumin, and fibrinogen than those without rebleeding. The multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that prealbumin and d-dimer were independent predictors for rebleeding. Values of prealbumin and d-dimer were correlated with hospital stay, ulcer degrees, and surgery demand. The ROC curve analyses showed that prealbumin and d-dimer exhibited superior prediction value over the scoring systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Prealbumin and d-dimer are promising predictors for severity and prognosis in NVUGIB practice.

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.

CLINICAL UTILITY OF RISK SCORES IN VARICEAL BLEEDING

BACKGROUND

Variceal bleeding remains important cause of upper gastrointestinal bleed. Various risk scores are used in risk stratification for non-variceal bleed. Their utility in variceal bleeding patients is not clear. This study aims to compare probability of these scores in predicting various outcomes in same population.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare probability of these scores in predicting various outcomes in same population. To study characteristics and validate AIMS65, Rockall, Glasgow Blatchford score(GBS), Progetto Nazionale Emorragia Digestiva (PNED) score in variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleed (UGIB) patients for predicting various outcomes in our population.

METHODS

Three hundred subjects with UGIB were screened prospectively. Of these 141 patients with variceal bleeding were assessed with clinical, blood investigations and endoscopy and risk scores were calculated and compared to non-variceal cases. All cases were followed up for 30 days for mortality, rebleeding, requirement of blood transfusion and need of radiological or surgical intervention.

RESULTS

Variceal bleeding (141) was more common than non variceal (134) and 25 had negative endoscopy. In variceal group, cirrhosis (85%) was most common etiology. Distribution of age and sex were similar in both groups. Presence of coffee coloured vomitus (P=0.002), painless bleed (P=0.001), edema (P=0.001), ascites (P=0.001), hemoglobin <7.5 gms (P<0.001), pH<7.35 (P<0.001), serum bicarbonate level <17.6 mmol/L (P<0.001), serum albumin<2.75 gms% (P<0.001), platelet count <1.2 lacs/µL (P<0.001), high INR 1.35 (P<0.001), BUN >25mmol/L (P<0.001), and ASA status (P<0.001), high lactate >2.85 mmol/L (P=0.001) were significant. However, no factor was found significant on multivariate analysis. Rockall was found to be significant in predicting mortality and rebleed. AIMS65 was also significant in predicting mortality. GBS was significant in predicting blood transfusion and need of intervention. PNED score was significant in all events except mortality.

CONCLUSION

All four scores had lower predictive potential in predicting events in variceal bleed. However, AIMS65 & Rockall score were significant in predicting mortality, while GBS in predicting need of transfusion and intervention. PNED score was significant in all events except mortality.

Comparison of various prognostic scores in variceal and non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Various prognostic scores like Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (GBS), modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (mGBS), full Rockall score (FRS) including endoscopic findings, clinical Rockall score (CRS), and albumin, international normalized ratio (INR), mental status, systolic blood pressure, age >65 (AIMS65) are used for risk stratification in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The utility of these scores in variceal UGIB (VUGIB) is not well defined. In this prospective study, we aimed to assess the performance of these scores in patients with non-variceal (NVUGIB) and VUGIB.

METHODS

We included 1011 patients (during March 2017 and August 2018) including 439 with NVUGIB and 572 VUGIB. Performance of GBS, mGBS, FRS, CRS, and AIMS65 for various outcome measures was analyzed using the area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC).

RESULTS

The accuracy of prognostic scores in predicting the composite outcome including the need of hospital-based intervention and 42-day mortality was higher in NVUGIB as compared with VUGIB, AUROC: CRS: 0.641 vs. 0.537; FRS: 0.669 vs. 0.625; GBS: 0.719 vs. 0.587; mGBS: 0.711 vs. 0.594; AIMS65: 0.567 vs. 0.548. GBS and mGBS at a cut-off score of 1 had the highest negative predictive value, 91.7% and 91.3%, respectively, for predicting composite outcome in NVUGIB. Similarly, these scores had better accuracy for predicting 42-day rebleeding in NVUGIB as compared to VUGIB, AUROC: CRS: 0.680 vs. 0.537; FRS: 0.698 vs. 0.565; GBS: 0.661 vs. 0.543; mGBS: 0.627 vs. 0.540; AIMS65: 0.695 vs. 0.606.

CONCLUSION

The prognostic scores such as CRS, FRS, GBS, mGBS, and AIMS65 predict the need for hospital-based management, rebleeding, and mortality better among patients with NVUGIB than VUGIB.

Performance of Three Scoring Systems in Predicting Massive Transfusion in Patients with Unstable Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage

PURPOSE

After trauma and surgery, upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is the most common condition that can require massive transfusion (MT). The present study aimed to analyze and compare the prognostic performance of the Glasgow-Blatchford (GB), pre-endoscopy Rockall (PER), and modified early warning (MEW) scores for predicting MT in patients with unstable UGIB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective observational study included patients with UGIB from March 2016 to February 2018. Receiver operating characteristics analysis was performed to examine the prognostic performance of the GB, PER, and MEW scoring systems. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for MT, after adjusting for relevant covariates. The primary outcome was MT.

RESULTS

Of the 484 included patients with unstable UGIB, 19 (3.9%) received an MT. The areas under the curves (AUCs) of the GB, PER, and MEW scores for MT were 0.577 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.531-0.621], 0.570 (95% CI, 0.525-0.615), and 0.767 (95% CI, 0.727-0.804), respectively. The AUC of the MEW score was significantly different from those of the GB and PER scores. In multivariate analysis, MEW score was independently associated with MT in patients with unstable UGIB (odds ratio, 1.495; 95% CI, 1.100-2.033; p=0.010).

CONCLUSION

In unstable UGIB patients, MEW score had the best prognostic performance for MT among three scoring systems.

Comparison of risk scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in western India: A prospective analysis

AIM

To study the upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) characteristics and to validate the Rockall and Glasgow-Blatchford scores (GBS), Progetto Nazionale Emorragica Digestiva (PNED) and albumin, international normalized ratio (INR), mental status, systolic blood pressure, and age > 65 (AIMS65) risk scores in predicting outcomes in patients with UGIB.

METHODS

Three hundred subjects with hematemesis and/or melena were prospectively enrolled and followed up for 30 days. All patients were assessed by hematological investigations, imaging, and endoscopy and risk scores were calculated.

RESULTS

The mean age was 43.5 ± 17.2 years, and 207 (69%) were males. Hematemesis was the most common presentation (94%). Variceal bleeding was the most common etiology (47.7%). Thirty patients died (10%) and 50 had rebleeding (16.7%). On univariate analysis, serum albumin ≤ 2.7 gm% (p = 0.008), Glasgow Coma scale ≤ 13.9 (p = 0.001), serum bilirubin > 3 mg/dL (p = 0.004), serum bicarbonate ≤ 15.7 mEq/L (p = 0.001), systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg (p = 0.004), and arterial pH ≤ 7.3 (p = 0.003) were found to be the predictors of mortality. No variable was found significant on multivariate analysis. All four scores were significant in predicting mortality, but Rockall (area under receiver operating characteristic [AUROC] 0.728) was better than others. Rebleeding was better predicted by PNED (modified) (AUROC 0.705). In predicting the need for transfusion and surgical or radiological intervention, GBS score > 0 was significant while score of < 2 classified patients into low risk for mortality with high negative predictive value.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed that the variceal bleeding was the commonest cause of UGIB. Rockall score was more significant in predicting mortality while PNED for rebleeding. Low risk for mortality, need for blood transfusion, or interventions were accurately predicted by GBS.

Advances in management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review new advances in managing nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

RECENT FINDINGS

Implementation of various scoring systems in combination with video capsule endoscopy assists in stratifying and managing nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. New techniques such as thermocoagulation and hemoclips are useful to treat bleeding.

SUMMARY

The advancement of methods and procedures in managing nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding has decreased mortality of patients presenting with this type of hemorrhage. In this chapter, we will be discussing various scores to stratify nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and techniques to stop bleeding.