AIMS65 Score Research Articles

Utilizing point-of-care lactate testing for rapid prediction of clinical outcomes in patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department

ObjectivesWe aimed to rapidly predict the prognosis of patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with acute gastrointestinal bleeding (AGIB) using point-of-care (POC) lactate testing. MethodsThis single-center retrospective observational study included 327 patients (survival group, 287; non-survival group, 40) who presented to the ED with AGIB between March 2021 and February 2022. We compared POC-measured lactate levels with laboratory-measured lactate levels using Pearson's correlation. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify early predictors of in-hospital mortality and correlated clinical outcomes. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine the optimal cutoff for POC-measured lactate levels for predicting in-hospital mortality, and the ROC curves for POC-measured lactate levels and AIMS65 scores were compared using the DeLong test. ResultsPOC-measured lactate levels strongly correlated with laboratory-measured lactate levels (R2 = 0.82). Patients in the non-survival group had higher POC-measured lactate levels than did those in the survival group (2.6 mmol/L vs. 1.4 mmol/L, p < 0.001). POC-measured lactate level, age, systolic blood pressure, heart rate, and malignancy were identified as early predictors of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] for POC-measured lactate levels: 1.15; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.02–1.30). The optimal POC-measured lactate level cutoff was 3.2 mmol/L. Areas under the ROC curves for POC-measured lactate level and the AIMS65 score were 0.70 and 0.73, respectively, showing statistical compatibility. Higher POC-measured lactate levels correlated with ICU admission, blood transfusion, and mechanical ventilation (aOR: 1.16, 95 % CI 1.05–1.27; 1.16, 1.04–1.30; and 1.31, 1.13–1.53, respectively]. Further, the hyperlactatemia subgroup (POC-measured lactate level ≥3.2 mmol/L) exhibited a lower survival probability in the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis (p < 0.01). ConclusionsOur study shows that rapidly obtainable POC-measured lactate levels are valuable for predicting critical outcomes in AGIB patients and should be considered an early prognostic indicator for in-hospital mortality in the ED.

Comparative analysis of four upper gastrointestinal bleeding scoring systems for predicting multiple outcomes: an observational study in the emergency department

Objective: Numerous scoring systems have been developed to assess the risk associated with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), and several studies have investigated their comparative accuracy in predicting patient outcomes. This study was undertaken to compare four well-known scoring systems, namely the pre-endoscopy Rockall score, full Rockall score, Glasgow-Blatchford Bleeding score (GBS), and AIMS65, with the aim of predicting five distinct outcomes in cases of non-variceal UGIB. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted focusing on adult patients with UGIB presenting to the emergency department (ED). The primary endpoints of this study included in-hospital mortality, the need for re-endoscopy, the requirements for packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion, massive transfusion, and one-month rebleeding. Results: A total number of 320 patients were enrolled, with 44 (13·75%) in-hospital deaths. Based on the area under the curves (AUC), while certain scores outperformed others in specific outcome prediction, the AIMS65 scoring system demonstrated superior predictive capability for both in-hospital mortality (0.91) and massive transfusion (0.71). Regarding PRBC transfusion requirements, both AIMS65 and GBS exhibited similar predictive capacities (AUC=0.67 and 0.68, respectively). In terms of re-endoscopy and one-month rebleeding, the GBS scoring system displayed slightly better performance compared to the other systems (AUC=0.61 and 0.63, respectively). In the composite outcome, all scores had significant associations, and among them, the AIMS-65 score had the highest AUC (0.76). Conclusion: The AIMS65 scoring system was the most reliable tool for predicting in-hospital mortality and, to a lesser extent, massive transfusion requirements, while GBS and AIMS65 could be moderately and cautiously relied on for preparations regarding the need for PRBC transfusion.

Lactate to albumin ratio as a prognosis predictor in gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department.

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a common cause of emergency department (ED) visits, and has various prognoses. This study aimed to verify the prognostic ability of the lactate/albumin (L/A) ratio in patients with GIB compared with the AIMS65 score and blood urea nitrogen/albumin (B/A) ratio. This retrospective study included patients with GIB symptoms who visited the ED in 2019. Baseline characteristics and laboratory data were obtained to calculate the L/A and B/A ratios and AIMS65 score. Each score was evaluated as a predictor of intensive care unit (ICU) admission and in-hospital mortality by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. The multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the L/A ratio significantly predicted ICU admission and in-hospital mortality. The AUROC curve for predicting ICU admission were 0.788, 0.695, and 0.586 for the L/A, B/A, and AIMS65 scores, respectively, while the AUROC curve for predicting in-hospital mortality were 0.807, 0.799, and 0.683 for the L/A, B/A, and AIMS65 scores, respectively. The L/A ratio, which consists of the serum lactate and albumin levels, showed superior performance relative to the B/A ratio and AIMS65 score in predicting the prognosis of patients with GIB.

Prediction of 30-day in-hospital mortality in older UGIB patients using a simplified risk score and comparison with AIMS65 score

BackgroundUpper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in older patients is associated with substantial in-hospital morbidity and mortality. This study aimed to develop and validate a simplified risk score for predicting 30-day in-hospital mortality in this population.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 1899 UGIB patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted to a single medical center between January 2010 and December 2019. An additional cohort of 330 patients admitted from January 2020 to October 2021 was used for external validation. Variable selection was performed using five distinct methods, and models were generated using generalized linear models, random forest, support vector machine, and k-nearest neighbors approaches. The developed score, “ABCAP,” incorporated Albumin < 30 g/L, Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN) > 7.5 mmol/L, Cancer presence, Altered mental status, and Pulse rate > 100/min, each assigned a score of 1. Internal and external validation procedures compared the ABCAP score with the AIMS65 score.ResultsIn internal validation, the ABCAP score demonstrated robust predictive capability with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.878 (95% CI: 0.824–0.932), which was significantly better than the AIMS65 score (AUC: 0.827, 95% CI: 0.751–0.904), as revealed by the DeLong test (p = 0.048). External validation of the ABCAP score resulted in an AUC of 0.799 (95% CI: 0.709–0.889), while the AIMS65 score yielded an AUC of 0.743 (95% CI: 0.647–0.838), with no significant difference between the two scores based on the DeLong test (p = 0.16). However, the ABCAP score at the 3–5 score level demonstrated superior performance in identifying high-risk patients compared to the AIMS65 score. This score exhibited consistent predictive accuracy across variceal and non-variceal UGIB subgroups.ConclusionsThe ABCAP score incorporates easily obtained clinical variables and demonstrates promising predictive ability for 30-day in-hospital mortality in older UGIB patients. It allows effective mortality risk stratification and showed slightly better performance than the AIMS65 score. Further cohort validation is required to confirm generalizability.

MH-STRALP: A scoring system for prognostication in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency and early assessment of its outcomes is vital for treatment decisions. To develop a new scoring system to predict its prognosis. In this retrospective study, 692 patients with UGIB were enrolled from two centers and divided into a training (n = 591) and a validation cohort (n = 101). The clinical data were collected to develop new prognostic prediction models. The endpoint was compound outcome defined as (1) demand for emergency surgery or vascular intervention, (2) being transferred to the intensive care unit, or (3) death during hospitalization. The models' predictive ability was compared with previously established scores by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Totally 22.2% (131/591) patients in the training cohort and 22.8% (23/101) in the validation cohort presented poor outcomes. Based on the stepwise-forward Logistic regression analysis, eight predictors were integrated to determine a new post-endoscopic prognostic scoring system (MH-STRALP); a nomogram was determined to present the model. Compared with the previous scores (GBS, Rockall, ABC, AIMS65, and PNED score), MH-STRALP showed the best prognostic prediction ability with area under the ROC curves (AUROCs) of 0.899 and 0.826 in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. According to the calibration curve, decision curve analysis, and internal cross-validation, the nomogram showed good calibration ability and net clinical benefit in both cohorts. After removing the endoscopic indicators, the pre-endoscopic model (pre-MH-STRALP score) was conducted. Similarly, the pre-MH-STRALP score showed better predictive value (AUROCs of 0.868 and 0.767 in the training and validation cohorts, respectively) than the other pre-endoscopic scores. The MH-STRALP score and pre-MH-STRALP score are simple, convenient, and accurate tools for prognosis prediction of UGIB, and may be applied for early decision on its management strategies.

Diagnostic value of liver stiffness measurement combined with risk scores for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in patients with hepatitis B cirrhosis

PurposeTo assess the predictive value of liver stiffness measurement (LSM) and three bleeding risk scoring systems for esophagogastric varices bleeding (EGVB) in patients with hepatitis B cirrhosis during hospitalization. MethodsIn this study, 210 patients who had hepatitis B cirrhosis were selected as the subjects. They were categorized into two groups based on whether EGVB occurred during hospitalization: a bleeding group (70 cases) and a non-bleeding group (140 cases). Logistic regression was used to analyze the factors related to the occurrence of EGVB, and the diagnostic performance was evaluated using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. ResultsSignificant differences were observed between the two groups in systolic blood pressure, platelet count, albumin, urea nitrogen, LSM, pre-endoscopic Rockall score (PRS), Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), and AIMS65 score (P < 0.05). The correlation analysis showed that LSM had significant positive relationship with PRS, GBS and AIMS65 score. Logistic regression analysis revealed that LSM and GBS score were independent risk factors for EGVB occurrence during hospitalization. ROC curve analysis showed that the combined prediction model of LSM and GBS score had the best prediction performance for EGVB occurrence, with an ROC curve area of 0.811, which was significantly better than the three risk scoring systems (P < 0.05), but similar to the predicted value of LSM (P = 0.335). ConclusionsThe combination of LSM and GBS score can significantly improve the predictive efficacy of EGVB occurrence in patients with hepatitis B cirrhosis during hospitalization, which has important clinical significance for patients' prognosis.

AIMS65 Scoring System for Predicting Clinical Outcomes Among Emergency Department Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Introduction: Several scoring systems were developed for early risk stratification in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB) patients. AIMS65 score is a scoring system that only consists of five parameters, it might be used in daily clinical practice because of rapid and easy to calculate within 12 hours of admission. Objective: To evaluate the AIMS65 scoring system as a predictor of mortality, rebleeding events, need for endoscopic therapy, blood transfusion, and ICU admission for all causes of UGIB. Methods: We conducted a systematic review on PubMed, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, and Cochrane Library databases from the 2012 to 2022 publication period. We included either prospective or retrospective cohort studies that reported UGIB with all kinds of aetiologies who presented in the emergency department (ED), reported discriminative performance for each outcome, and reported the optimal cut-off of AIMS65. The primary measurement of discriminative performance for clinical outcomes includes mortality, rebleeding incidents, need for endoscopic therapy, blood transfusion, and ICU admission. Results: We identified 351 published studies, of which 20 were included in this study. Most of the studies reported discriminative performance for predicting mortality, which amounts to about 18 out of 20 studies. Rebleeding prediction was reported in 11 studies, need for endoscopic therapy in 5 studies, blood transfusion in 7 studies, and ICU admission in 2 studies. Most of the studies reported fair to excellent discriminative performance for predicting mortality, but in contrast for predicting rebleeding, the need for endoscopic therapy, blood transfusion, and ICU admission. Cut-off values≥ 2 are frequently reported to distinguish between high-risk and low-risk patients in mortality. Conclusion: AIMS65 can be applied to patients with UGIB in ED for predicting mortality, but not applicable for predicting rebleeding events, the need for endoscopic therapy, blood transfusion, and ICU admission. It enhances early decision-making and triage for UGIB patients.

The Role of Endoscopy-Independent Gastrointestinal Bleeding Scores in Predicting 30-day Mortality in Aged Over 65

Introduction: The aim of this study was to assess the power of clinical findings and scoring systems to predict mortality in patients over 65 years of age with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Materials and Method: Data on demographic profiles and risk estimation scores were retrospectively extracted from electronic hospital medical records and other electronic databases using a standard data extraction form. The AIMS65, pre-Rockall, modified Glasgow-Blatchford, T, and Baylor bleeding scores were calculated to estimate the 30-day mortality risk. The inclusion criteria were patients aged 65 and over who presented with active bleeding symptoms and had been diagnosed with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding by the gastroenterology department. Results: The mean age was 75.23 years, and 23.6% of the patients died within 30 days. The 30-day mortality was associated with albumin levels, malignancy, and intensive care unit hospitalization. An inverse relationship was found between the albumin level and mortality, whereas the presence of cancer and the need for intensive care were associated with 2.8-fold and 2.2-fold increases in the risk of death, respectively. The AIMS65 score (AUC: 0.794) had the highest discriminative ability to predict 30-day mortality among all risk scores. Conclusion: Albumin levels, malignancy presence, and ICU admission were indicators of mortality risk in elderly patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Calculating all the scores, excluding the Baylor Bleeding score, is beneficial for assessing the risk of mortality associated with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The AIMS65 score demonstrates the highest discriminative ability. However, using these risk-scoring systems necessitates additional data. Keywords: Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Mortality; Aged.

Comparison of scoring systems for predicting clinical outcomes of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective cohort study.

This study aimed to determine the performance of the Oakland, Glasgow-Blatchford, and AIMS65 scores in predicting the clinical outcomes of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). This prospective cohort study was conducted from July 2020 to July 2021. Patients admitted with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding were enrolled. The Oakland, Glasgow-Blatchford, and AIMS65 scores were calculated. The primary outcome was validating the performance of the scores in predicting severe LGIB; secondary outcomes were comparing the performance of the scores in predicting the need for blood transfusion, hemostatic interventions, in-hospital rebleeding, and mortality. Receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated for all outcomes. The associations between all three scores and the primary outcomes were calculated using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Patients with acute LGIB (n=150) were enrolled (88 [58.7%] men and mean age: 63.6±17.3years). The rates of severe LGIB, need for blood transfusion, hemostatic intervention, in-hospital rebleeding, and in-hospital mortality were 54.7%, 79.3%, 10.7%, and 3.3%, respectively. The Oakland and Glasgow-Blatchford scores had comparable performance in predicting severe LGIB, need for blood transfusion, and mortality, outperforming the AIMS65 score. All scores were suboptimal for predicting hemostatic interventions and rebleeding. Our results demonstrate the predictive performances of the Oakland score and the GBS are excellent and comparable for severe LGIB, the need for blood transfusion, and in-hospital mortality in patients with acute LGIB. Thus, GBS could be considered as an alternative predictive score for stratification of the patients with acute LGIB.

Mortality Risk Scoring System in Patients after Bleeding from Cancers in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract.

: Risk scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding have not been well validated for tumor bleeding. This study aimed to identify risk factors for mortality in patients with UGI cancer bleeding and to develop a predictive model. : Consecutive patients with UGI cancers who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy for suspected bleeding were retrospectively included. Patient characteristics, endoscopic findings and 30-day mortality were assessed. A predictive model was made based on risk factors for mortality using logistic regression, and the area under the curve (AUC) of this model was calculated. It was then compared with other risk scoring systems. : In a total of 264 patients, 193 had tumor bleeding. Among them, 108 (56.0%), 76 (39.4%), and nine (4.7%) patients received conservative treatment, endoscopic therapy, and non-endoscopic hemostasis, respectively. Rebleeding occurred in 23 (21.3%), 26 (34.2%), and one (11.1%) patient(s), respectively. Our new model is composed of altered mental status, renal failure, rebleeding, age older than 65 years, and low serum albumin (all p<0.05). This model predicted 30-day mortality with an AUC of 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.86), which was significantly higher than AUCs of the Glasgow-Blatchford score, Rockall, and AIMS65 score (AUC=0.61, 0.64, and 0.69, respectively, all p<0.05). : Our new scoring system provides a better prediction of 30-day mortality than existing scoring systems in patients with UGI cancer bleeding. This new scoring system can be used to predict and prepare these patients who are known to have high mortality.

Construction of a prediction model for rebleeding in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BackgroundThe incidence of rebleeding in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains despite advances in intervention approaches. Therefore, early prediction of the risk of rebleeding could help to greatly reduce the mortality rate in these patients. We aim to develop and validate a new prediction model to predict the probability of rebleeding in patients with AUGIB.MethodsA total of 1170 AUGIB patients who completed the procedure of emergency gastroscopy within 48 h of admission were included. Logistic regression analyses were performed to construct a new prediction model. A receiver operating characteristic curve, a line graph, and a calibration and decision curve were used to assess the predictive performance of our new prediction model and compare its performance with that of the AIMS65 scoring system to determine the predictive value of our prediction model.ResultsA new prediction model was constructed based on Lactic acid (LAC), neutrophil percentage (NEUTP), platelet (PLT), albumin (ALB), and D-DIMER. The AUC values and their 95% confidence interval (CI) for the new prediction model and the AIMS65 score were 0.746 and 0.619, respectively, and 0.697–0.795 and 0.567–0.670, respectively. In the training group, the C index values based on the prediction model and the AIMS65 scoring system were 0.720 and 0.610, respectively. In the validation group, the C index values based on the prediction model and the AIMS65 scoring system were 0.828 and 0.667, respectively. The decision and calibration curve analysis also showed that the prediction model was superior to the AIMS65 scoring system in terms of accuracy of prediction, consistency, and net clinical benefit.ConclusionThe prediction model can predict the probability of rebleeding in AUGIB patients after endoscopic hemostasis therapy.

AIMS65 Outperforms Other Scoring Systems for Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Octogenarians: A Prospective Study

Background: The incidence and adverse clinical outcomes of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) increase significantly with advanced age. Among those over 80 years of age (octogenarians), this risk becomes markedly pronounced. Our study aimed to assess the predictive ability of four recognized scoring systems for clinical outcomes in octogenarians presenting with NVUGIB. Methods: We compared the Clinical Rock all Score (CRS), Full Rockall Score (FRS), Glasgow Blatchford Score (GBS), and AIMS65 scores for their ability to forecast clinical outcomes. These outcomes encompassed: (1) the requirement for endoscopic intervention, (2) recurrence of bleeding, and (3) 30-day mortality. Results: The study sample comprised 107 octogenarians, including 58 males (54.2%), with a median age of 86 (range 82-89). Ten patients (9.3%) experienced recurrent bleeding, while 19 (17.8%) succumbed within 30 days. The AIMS65 score predicted 30-day mortality with an optimal cutoff value of 2.5, demonstrating 63% sensitivity and 86% specificity. In patients categorized as high-risk by the AIMS65 criteria, a cutoff value of 2 predicted 30-day mortality with 75% sensitivity and 68% specificity. Conclusions: The easily calculable pre-endoscopic AIMS65 score proves beneficial for predicting mortality among octogenarians with NVUGIB, thereby assisting clinical decision-making processes.

Three Simple Parameters on Admission to the Emergency Department are Predictors for Endoscopic Intervention in Patients with Suspected Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BackgroundA considerable number of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) need endoscopic intervention. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine factors that predict the need for endoscopic intervention at the time of admission to the emergency department. MethodsConsecutive patients with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision diagnosis code K92.2 (gastrointestinal hemorrhage) who underwent upper endoscopy between February 2019 and February 2022, including patients diagnosed with nonvariceal UGIB in the emergency department in the study were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups: those treated endoscopically and those not treated endoscopically. These two groups were compared according to clinical and laboratory findings at admission and independent predictors for endoscopic intervention were determined using multivariate regression analysis. ResultsAlthough 123 patients (30.3%) were treated endoscopically, endoscopic treatment was not required in 283 (69.7%) patients. Syncope, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) at admission were independent predictors for endoscopic intervention in the multivariate analysis, after adjusting for endoscopy time. The area under the curve of the syncope+MAP+BUN combination for endoscopic intervention was 0.648 (95% CI 0.588–0.708). Although the syncope+MAP+BUN combination predicted the need for intervention significantly better than pre-endoscopy Rockall and AIMS65 scores (p = 0.010 and p < 0.001, respectively), there was no significant difference in its comparison with the Glasgow-Blatchford score (p = 0.103). ConclusionsSyncope, MAP, and BUN at admission were independent predictors for endoscopic therapy in patients with nonvariceal UGIB. Rather than using complicated scores, it would be more practical and easier to predict the need for endoscopic intervention with these three simple parameters, which are included in the Glasgow-Blatchford score.

Factors influencing re-bleeding after trans-arterial embolization for endoscopically unmanageable peptic ulcer bleeding

Background/Aims Acute peptic ulcer bleeding is the most common cause of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). Endoscopic hemostasis is the standard treatment. However, various conditions complicate endoscopic hemostasis. Transarterial visceral embolization (TAE) may be helpful as a rescue therapy. This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with rebleeding after TAE. Methods We retrospectively investigated the records of 156 patients treated with TAE between January 2007 and December 2021. Rebleeding was defined as the presence of melena, hematemesis, or hematochezia, with a fall (>2.0 g/dl) in hemoglobin level or shock after TAE. The primary outcomes were rebleeding rate and 30-day mortality. Results Seventy patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were selected, and rebleeding within a month after TAE occurred in 15 patients (21.4%). Among the patients included in rebleeding group, significant increases were observed in the prevalence of thrombocytopenia (73.3% vs. 16.4%, p<.001) and ulcers >1 cm (93.3% vs 54.5%, p = .014). The mean AIMS65 (albumin, international normalized ratio, mental status, systolic blood pressure, age >65 years) score (2.3 vs 1.4, p = .009) was significantly higher in the rebleeding group. Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that thrombocytopenia (odds ratio 31.92, 95% confidence interval 6.24–270.6, p<.001) and larger ulcer size (odds ratio 27.19, 95% confidence interval 3.27–677.7, p=.010) significantly increased the risk of rebleeding after TAE. Conclusion TAE was effective in the treatment of patients with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding. AIMS65 score was a significant predictor of rebleeding after TAE, and thrombocytopenia and larger ulcer size increased the risk of rebleeding after TAE.

Risk Stratification of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding by AIMS65, Rockall, Glasgow Blatchford and Baylor Scores

Abstract Background Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is the most common cause of emergency admission in gastrointestinal disease. Despite the development of endoscopic therapies and pharmacological management, UGIB is still associated with considerable rates of mortality and morbidity, and high medical expenses. Different scoring systems have been suggested for diagnosing these patients. Aim of the Work In this study we aimed to compare the predictive value of three scoring systems Rockall, Glasgow Blatchfors scale (GBS) and AIMS65 in patients with UGIB. Patients and Methods This study was conducted on 120 adult Egyptian patients presented by UGIB at Emergency department of Ain Shams University Hospital in Cairo, Egypt at a period from October 2020 to June 2021. Patients underwent upper endoscopy within first day from an attack of UGIB. AIMS65, GBS, and PRS scores were calculated for each patient. The ability of these scores to predict clinical outcomes was determined. Area under the receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for rebleeding and mortality. Results GBS was superior to AIMS65, Rockall and Baylor scores in identifying the patients who are likely to need interventional endoscopy "cutoff ≥8.5, sensitivity 80.8%, specificity 54.4%", need blood transfusion "cutoff ≥11.5, sensitivity 54.2%, specificity 90.3%. While AIMS65 score was superior to GBS and other scores in prediction of unfavorable outcomes, namely risk of need for ICU admission "Cutoff ≥1.5, sensitivity 86.4% specificity 96.1%", need for rebleeding in hospital "cutoff ≥1.5, sensitivity 92.7%, specificity 96.2%" and death in hospital "cutoff ≥2.5, sensitivity 90.9%, specificity 98.2%. The reasons for differences in cutoff values compared to previous studies can including ethnicity, UGIB aetiology, period of follow up and number of patients. Conclusion Early risk stratification is recommended in patients presenting with acute UGIB to identify patients at higher risk of bleeding or death and guide management decisions regarding timing of endoscopy, triage to appropriate level of care, and disposition. The optimal cutoff of each scoring system should be specified for different population to maximize the power of identifying UGIB patients at high risk of death.

Risk Stratification in Egyptian Patients with Upper Gastro Intestinal Bleeding

Abstract Introduction Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common and life-threatening condition. It remains a common cause of visits to the emergency department with an estimated incidence of about 100 per 100000 hospitalizations and being associated with significant morbidity, 30 day mortality and health-care costs. Urgent triage in emergency departments and risk stratification can help to identify patients who warrant urgent diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. We aimed to assess the correlation between Glasgow-Blatchford Bleeding Score, the AIMS65 score and Rockall score in sixty Egyptian patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and to evaluate the best scoring system for risk stratification in these patients. Methods This prospective study included 60 Egyptian patients presented to Ain shams university hospital with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. All patients underwent emergency endoscopic evaluation within 12 hours of presentation. Surgical and radiological interventions were considered for patients who failed or were not feasible for endoscopic therapy. Rockall score, Glascow-Blatchford and AIMS65 were calculated for each patient. Results the age of the studied patients ranging between 20 and 81 years old with a mean age of 55.57 ± 13.14, of them 66.7% were males and 33.3% were females. Most of the patients (90%) had co-morbidities in the form of hepato-billiary diseases (70%), HTN (30%), DM (26.7%), cardiac disease (8.3%), and GIT related disorders (6.7%). Portal hypertension gastropathy was the most common finding in UGIT endoscopy (58.3%) followed by esophageal varcies (56.7%), then gastritis (30%), then peptic ulcer (20%) and lastly gastric mass (6.7%). Rockall score had significant association with altered mental status and liver cirrhosis. Rockall score was found to be the most effective predictor for mortality (sensitivity 100%, specificity 67.92% and AUC 91.0%). Conclusion complete Rockall score is the most effective scoring system for prediction of in hospital mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Pre-Endoscopic Scores Predicting Low-Risk Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Several risk scores have attempted to risk stratify patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) who are at a lower risk of requiring hospital-based interventions or negative outcomes including death. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare predictive abilities of pre-endoscopic scores in prognosticating the absence of adverse events in patients with UGIB. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central, and ISI Web of knowledge from inception to February 2023. All fully published studies assessing a pre-endoscopic score in patients with UGIB were included. The primary outcome was a composite score for the need of a hospital-based intervention (endoscopic therapy, surgery, angiography, or blood transfusion). Secondary outcomes included: mortality, rebleeding, or the individual endpoints of the composite outcome. Both proportional and comparative analyses were performed. Thirty-eight studies were included from 2153 citations, (n = 36,215 patients). Few patients with a low Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) cutoff (0, ≤1 and ≤2) required hospital-based interventions (0.02 (0.01, 0.05), 0.04 (0.02, 0.09) and 0.03 (0.02, 0.07), respectively). The proportions of patients with clinical Rockall (CRS = 0) and ABC (≤3) scores requiring hospital-based intervention were 0.19 (0.15, 0.24) and 0.69 (0.62, 0.75), respectively. GBS (cutoffs 0, ≤1 and ≤2), CRS (cutoffs 0, ≤1 and ≤2), AIMS65 (cutoffs 0 and ≤1) and ABC (cutoffs ≤1 and ≤3) scores all were associated with few patients (0.01-0.04) dying. The proportion of patients suffering other secondary outcomes varied between scoring systems but, in general, was lowest for the GBS. GBS (using cutoffs 0, ≤1 and ≤2) showed excellent discriminative ability in predicting the need for hospital-based interventions (OR 0.02, (0.00, 0.16), 0.00 (0.00, 0.02) and 0.01 (0.00, 0.01), respectively). A CRS cutoff of 0 was less discriminative. For the other secondary outcomes, discriminative abilities varied between scores but, in general, the GBS (using cutoffs up to 2) was clinically useful for most outcomes. A GBS cut-off of one or less prognosticated low-risk patients the best. Expanding the GBS cut-off to 2 maintains prognostic accuracy while allowing more patients to be managed safely as outpatients. The evidence is limited by the number, homogeneity, quality, and generalizability of available data and subjectivity of deciding on clinical impact. Additional, comparative and, ideally, interventional studies are needed.

Age, blood tests and comorbidities and AIMS65 risk scores outperform Glasgow-Blatchford and pre-endoscopic Rockall score in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a life-threatening condition with high mortality rates. To compare the performance of pre-endoscopic risk scores in predicting the following primary outcomes: In-hospital mortality, intervention (endoscopic or surgical) and length of admission (≥ 7 d). We performed a retrospective analysis of 363 patients presenting with upper GI bleeding from December 2020 to January 2021. We calculated and compared the area under the receiver operating characteristics curves (AUROCs) of Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), pre-endoscopic Rockall score (PERS), albumin, international normalized ratio, altered mental status, systolic blood pressure, age older than 65 (AIMS65) and age, blood tests and comorbidities (ABC), including their optimal cut-off in variceal and non-variceal upper GI bleeding cohorts. We subsequently analyzed through a logistic binary regression model, if addition of lactate increased the score performance. All scores had discriminative ability in predicting in-hospital mortality irrespective of study group. AIMS65 score had the best performance in the variceal bleeding group (AUROC = 0.772; P < 0.001), and ABC score (AUROC = 0.775; P < 0.001) in the non-variceal bleeding group. However, ABC score, at a cut-off value of 5.5, was the best predictor (AUROC = 0.770, P = 0.001) of in-hospital mortality in both populations. PERS score was a good predictor for endoscopic treatment (AUC = 0.604; P = 0.046) in the variceal population, while GBS score, (AUROC = 0.722; P = 0.024), outperformed the other scores in predicting surgical intervention. Addition of lactate to AIMS65 score, increases by 5-fold the probability of in-hospital mortality (P < 0.05) and by 12-fold if added to GBS score (P < 0.003). No score proved to be a good predictor for length of admission. ABC score is the most accurate in predicting in-hospital mortality in both mixed and non-variceal bleeding population. PERS and GBS should be used to determine need for endoscopic and surgical intervention, respectively. Lactate can be used as an additional tool to risk scores for predicting in-hospital mortality.

Assessment of risk stratification scoring systems in upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients in the emergency department

Background Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency presented to the emergency department that requires early assessment and management. Many risk stratification scores have been developed to predict the clinical outcomes in patients with UGIB. The commonly used risk scores the Rockall scoring systems (PRS and FRS), Glasgow–Blatchford score (GBS) and AIMS65 score. Aim The aim of the present study was to assess and compare the ability of the wildly used risk scores the RS, GBS, and AIMS65 to predict the clinical outcomes in UGIB patients Patients and methods One hundred patients (age &gt;18 years) with acute UGIB in the emergency department of Alexandria Main University Hospital were prospectively studied. All the study scores were calculated and compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) method to evaluate the performance of each score to predict the mortality, blood transfusion, endoscopic intervention, ICU admission, rebleeding, and length of hospital stay. Results Among the one hundred patients included in the study, 65% were males with a median of age 58 years. 56% had esophageal varices and 63% with liver disease. All the used scores were statistically significant in predicting all clinical outcomes. GBS had the best AUC among the AIMS65, PRS, and FRS scores in predicting mortality with (AUC= 0.80 vs. 0.76, 0.69), blood transfusion need with (AUC= 0.92 vs. 0.88, 0.87), ICU admission with (AUC= 0.86 vs. 0.83, 0.81), rebleeding with (AUC= 0.81 vs. 0.77, 0.69), and length of hospital stay with (AUC= 0.81 vs. 0.75. 0.79). Conclusion All the study scores (GBS, AIMS65, PRS, and FRS) were able to predict the clinical outcomes in the UGIB patients. GBS was the best performing risk score among the four scores for predicting all the clinical outcomes (mortality, blood transfusion, rebleeding, ICU admission, and length of hospital stay) except the prediction of endoscopic intervention in our study population.

AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score and modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score in predicting outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding: An accuracy and calibration study.

Albumin, international normalized ratio (INR), mental status, systolic blood pressure, age >65 years (AIMS65), Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (GBS) and modified GBS (mGBS) are three pre-endoscopy scoring systems used in the risk stratification of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The utility of such scoring systems in a population is estimated by their accuracy and calibration in the population. We aimed at validating and comparing the accuracy of the three scoring systems in predicting clinical outcomes including in-hospital mortality, need for blood transfusion, endoscopic treatment and rebleeding risk. We conducted a single-center, retrospective cohort study on patients with UGIB at a tertiary care center in India over 12 months. Clinical and laboratory data was collected from all patients admitted with UGIB. All patients were risk stratified using AIMS65, GBS and mGBS. The clinical outcome examined were: in-hospital mortality, requirement of blood transfusion, need for endoscopic treatment and rebleeding during hospital stay. The area under receiver-operating curve (AUROC) was calculated to assess the performance and calibration curves (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit curve) were plotted to examine how accurately the model describes the data of all three scoring systems. Total 260 patients were included in the study, of which 236 (90.8%) were males. As many as 144(55.4%) patients required blood transfusion and 64 (30.8%) required endoscopic treatment. While the incidence of rebleeding was 7.7%, in hospital mortality was 15.4%. Of 208 who underwent endoscopy, the most common causes identified were varices (49%) and gastritis (18.2%), followed by ulcer (11%), Mallory-Weiss tear (8.1%), portal hypertensive gastropathy (6.7%), malignancy (4.8%) and esophageal candidiasis (1.9%). The median AIMS65 score was 1, GBS 7 and mGBS 6. The area under curve (AUROC) for AIMS65, GBS and mGBS was (0.77, 0.73,0.70), (0.75, 0.82,0.83), (0.56, 0.58,0.83), (0.81, 0.94,0.53) for in-hospital mortality, blood transfusion requirement, endoscopic treatmentand rebleeding prediction, respectively. GBS and mGBS are superior to AIMS65 in predicting the requirement of blood transfusion and rebleeding risk, whereas in-hospital mortality was better predicted by AIMS 65. Both scores performed poorly in predicting the need of endoscopic treatment. An AIMS65 of 0,1 and a GBS of ≤ 1 are not associated with significant adverse events. A poor calibration of the scores in our population points to the lack of generalizability of these scoring systems.