首页> 外文期刊>Advances in Bioscience and Clinical Medicine >Comparison of Glasgow Blatchford Score and AIMS65 in Predicting Mortality in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
【24h】

Comparison of Glasgow Blatchford Score and AIMS65 in Predicting Mortality in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

机译:Glasgow Blatchford评分和AIMS65对上胃肠出血患者死亡率的比较

获取原文
       

摘要

Introduction: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is the most common cause of emergency admission in gastrointestinal disease. UGIB could accompany with adverse events if not treated timely. Different scoring systems have been suggested for diagnosing these patients, In this study we aimed to compare the predictive value of two scoring systems AIMS65 and Glasgow Blatchfors scale (GBS) in patients with UGIB. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 153 patients (71.9% male with mean age of 56.72±21.64 years) with acute UGIB between April 2017 and September 2018 were included. Demographic findings, past medical history, laboratory findings, AMIS65 and GBS score, as well as, need for urgent endoscopy, transfusion and mortality were recorded. Both methods value in predicting the outcomes were measured using ROC curves. Results and Conclusion: Urgent endoscopy was performed in 44.4%. The most common finding was peptic ulcer with mostly clean base type. Rebleeding occurred in 15%, need for transfusion was in 44.4% and mortality rate was 5.2%. AIMS65 compared to GBS was superior in predicting mortality (AUC of 0.947 vs. 0.80) but was inferior compared to GBS in predicting need for transfusion (0.849 vs. 0.947). None of the systems could predict the need for urgent endoscopy. AIMS65 with cut off 2 and 0 and GBS with cut off of 12 and 8 could predict mortality and need for transfusion. GBS seems a better system in predicting the need for blood transfusion, while AIMS65 is better system for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with UGIB.
机译:介绍:上胃肠道出血(UGIB)是胃肠道急诊疾病最常见的原因。如果不及时治疗,UGIB可以伴随不良事件。在本研究中提出了诊断这些患者的不同评分系统,我们旨在比较UGIB患者两种评分系统AIMS65和GLASGOW BLACKFORS(GBS)的预测值。方法:在这项横断面研究中,包括2017年4月至2018年4月期间,153名患者(61.9%的男性,平均年龄为56.72±21.64岁)。记录了人口调查结果,过去病史,实验室发现,AMIS65和GBS评分,以及需要紧急内窥镜检查,输血和死亡率。使用ROC曲线测量预测结果的方法。结果与结论:紧急内窥镜检查以44.4%进行。最常见的发现是具有大多数清洁基础类型的消化性溃疡。再混凝土发生在15%,需要输血44.4%,死亡率为5.2%。 AIMS65与GBS相比,预测死亡率优异(0.947 vs.0.80的AUC),但与GBS相比,与GBS预测输血需要相比(0.849 vs.0.947)。没有一个系统可以预测需要紧急内窥镜检查的需求。 AIMS65与切断2和0和GBS切断12和8的GB可以预测死亡率并需要输血。 GBS似乎是一种更好的系统来预测输血需要,而AIMS65是更好的系统,用于预测UGIB患者的住院死亡率。

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