...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology >Comparison of Glasgow-Blatchford score and full Rockall score systems to predict clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding
【24h】

Comparison of Glasgow-Blatchford score and full Rockall score systems to predict clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

机译:比较Glasgow-Blatchford评分和完整Rockall评分系统以预测上消化道出血患者的临床结局

获取原文

摘要

Background: Various risk scoring systems have been recently developed to predict clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The two commonly used scoring systems include full Rockall score (RS) and the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS). Bleeding scores were assessed in terms of prediction of clinical outcomes in patients with UGIB. Patients and methods: Two hundred patients (age >18 years) with obvious symptoms of UGIB in the emergency department of Rasoul Akram Hospital were enrolled. Full RS and GBS were calculated. We followed the patients for records of rebleeding and 1-month mortality. A?receiver operating characteristic curve by using areas under the curve (AUCs) was used to statistically identify the best cutoff point. Results: Eighteen patients were excluded from the study due to failure to follow-up. Rebleeding and mortality rate were 9.34% (n=17) and 11.53% (n=21), respectively. Regarding 1-month mortality, full RS was better than GBS (AUC, 0.648 versus 0.582; P =0.021). GBS was more accurate in terms of detecting transfusion need (AUC, 0.757 versus 0.528; P =0.001), rebleeding rate (AUC, 0.722 versus 0.520; P =0.002), intensive care unit admission rate (AUC, 0.648 versus 0.582; P =0.021), and endoscopic intervention rate (AUC, 0.771 versus 0.650; P <0.001). Conclusion: We found the full RS system is better for 1-month mortality prediction while GBS system is better for prediction of other outcomes.
机译:背景:最近开发了各种风险评分系统,以预测上消化道出血(UGIB)患者的临床结局。两种常用的评分系统包括完整的Rockall评分(RS)和格拉斯哥-Blatchford评分(GBS)。根据UGIB患者的临床预后评估评估出血分数。患者和方法:纳入Rasoul Akram医院急诊科的UGIB症状明显的200例患者(年龄> 18岁)。计算全RS和GBS。我们追踪了患者的再出血记录和1个月死亡率。通过使用曲线下的面积(AUC)来确定接收器工作特性曲线,以统计学方式确定最佳截止点。结果:18名患者由于随访失败而被排除在研究之外。再出血和死亡率分别为9.34%(n = 17)和11.53%(n = 21)。关于1个月的死亡率,完全RS优于GBS(AUC,0.648对0.582; P = 0.021)。 GBS在检测输血需求(AUC,0.757对0.528; P = 0.001),再出血率(AUC,0.722对0.520; P = 0.002),重症监护病房住院率(AUC,0.648对0.582; P = 0.021)和内窥镜干预率(AUC,0.771对0.650; P <0.001)。结论:我们发现完整的RS系统更适合1个月的死亡率预测,而GBS系统更适合预测其他结局。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号