首页> 外文OA文献 >Evaluation of scoring systems without endoscopic findings for predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding
【2h】

Evaluation of scoring systems without endoscopic findings for predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

机译:用于预测上胃肠道出血患者的预测结果评估系统的评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Abstract Background Risk scoring systems are used to evaluate patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). We compared Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), modified GBS (mGBS), and Pre-endoscopy Rockall score (Pre-E RS) for immediate application without endoscopic findings in predicting the need of interventions and the 30-day mortality in patients with UGIB. Methods Patients who visited the emergency room with UGIB from January 2007 to June 2016 were included. GBS, mGBS, and Pre-E RS were obtained for all patients. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUC) was used to assess the accuracy of the scoring systems to determine the need for interventions and 30-day mortality. Also, we investigated the potential cutoff scores for predicting 30-day mortality and the need for interventions. Results In predicting the need for interventions, GBS (AUC = 0.727) and mGBS (AUC = 0.733) outperformed Pre-E RS (AUC = 0.564, P < 0.0001). In predicting 30-day mortality, Pre-E RS (AUC = 0.929) outperformed GBS (AUC = 0.664, P < 0.0001) and mGBS (AUC = 0.652, P < 0.0001). Based on AUC analyses of sensitivities and specificities, the optimal cutoff mGBS and GBS for the need for interventions was 9 (70.71% sensitivity, 89.35% specificity) and 9 (73.57% sensitivity, 82.90% specificity) respectively, and optimal cutoff Pre-E RS for 30-day mortality was 4 (88.0% sensitivity, 97.52% specificity). Conclusions GBS and mGBS are considered to be moderately accurate in making an early decision about the need of interventions in patients with UGIB. Pre-E RS is considered to be highly accurate in early detection of patients at high risk for 30-day mortality without endoscopic findings. In addition, we suggested potential cutoff scores to predict the need of interventions for GBS and mGBS, and 30-day mortality for Pre-E RS. Further studies are needed to confirm the clinical applicability of results.
机译:摘要背景风险评分系统来评估患者上消化道出血(UGIB)。我们比较了无内镜检查结果直接应用格拉斯哥布拉奇福德评分(GBS),改性GBS(mGBS),以及预内镜罗卡尔得分(预-E RS)的预测干预的需要,在30天的患者的死亡率UGIB 。谁与UGIB从2007年1月访问了急诊室,以2016年6月方法患者都包括在内。所有患者均获得GBS,mGBS,和Pre-E RS。接收机操作特性曲线(AUC)下的面积用来评估评分系统的准确度,以确定干预和30天的死亡率的需要。此外,我们调查的潜在截止分数预测30天死亡率和需要干预。结果在预测为干预的需要,GBS(AUC = 0.727)和mGBS(AUC = 0.733)表现优于预-E RS(AUC = 0.564,P <0.0001)。在预测30天死亡率,预-E RS(AUC = 0.929)表现优于GBS(AUC = 0.664,P <0.0001)和mGBS(AUC = 0.652,P <0.0001)。基于AUC的敏感性和特异性,最佳的截止mGBS和GBS的分析为需要干预为9(70.71%的敏感性,89.35%的特异性)和9(73.57%的敏感性,82.90%的特异性)分别和最适截止预-E RS 30天的死亡率为4(88.0%的灵敏度,97.52%特异性)。结论GBS和mGBS被认为是在作出有关患者UGIB需要干预的早期决定适度准确。预-E RS被认为是早期发现的患者高度精确的高风险30天死亡率无内镜所见。此外,我们建议潜在截止分数来预测干预GBS和mGBS,和30天死亡率为预-E RS的需要。还需要进一步的研究来证实结果的临床适用性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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