Comparison of risk scores for predicting adverse outcomes in acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Abstract

ObjectiveAcute lower gastrointestinal bleeding is a common emergency in gastroenterology. Currently, there is insufficient information to predict adverse outcomes in patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Our study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the clinical risk scores currently utilized and their ability to predict significant outcomes in lower gastrointestinal bleeding. MethodsWe conducted a prognostic study of patients hospitalized for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding who underwent colonoscopy or angiography at a single-center hospital between January 2015 and October 2023. Adverse outcomes associated with ALGIB included rebleeding, blood transfusion, hemostatic interventions, and in-hospital death. We calculated three risk scores at admission (Oakland, Birmingham, SALGIB). We measured the accuracy of these scores using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared them with DeLong's test. Results222 patients with confirmed lower gastrointestinal bleeding (aged 64 years, 53-75) were finally included. The most common diagnoses were colorectal cancer (28%) and hemorrhoids (14%). The Oakland score, Birmingham score, and SALGIB score displayed comparable performance in predicting any adverse outcome ( AUC=0.54, 0.53, 0.55). However, none of the scores were able to sufficiently discriminate rebleeding, blood transfusion, or hemostatic intervention. Using the Youden index, cutoff points for predicting undesired results were identified for the Oakland score at 13, Birmingham score at 3, and SALGIB score at 2. ConclusionsNone of the three scores demonstrated satisfactory discrimination for adverse outcomes. Therefore, it is necessary to develop novel risk stratification scores with higher performance to improve risk stratification in acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding.