Scoring systems and risk assessment for upper gastrointestinal bleeding

被引:12
|
作者
Ch'ng, CL [1 ]
Kingham, JGC [1 ]
机构
[1] Singleton Hosp, Dept Gastroenterol, Swansea SA2 8QA, W Glam, Wales
关键词
endoscopy; gastrointestinal haemorrhage; mortality; rebleeding; severity of illness index;
D O I
10.1097/00042737-200110000-00002
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Mortality associated with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains high despite advances in diagnosis and therapy. This was emphasized by the findings of the seminal English National Audit of acute gastrointestinal haemorrhage undertaken by Rockall and associates in the mid-1990s. The apparent lack of progress is largely due to less selective reporting in an ageing population with greater co-morbidity. Thus some deaths will be unavoidable even with exemplary treatment. Managing high risk patients in a dedicated area with close cooperation between medical and surgical gastroenterologists has been shown to improve outcome. The challenge is to select those patients who have most to gain from such a scarce and expensive resource so that their treatment can be optimized. Various risk factors have been identified to help achieve this end. Rockall's national audit data suggest that avoidable deaths remain a problem in most district general hospitals. A simple numerical score was derived from these audit data (Rockall score) to predict rebleeding and mortality. The score is based on five variables: age, shock, co-morbidity, endoscopic diagnosis and stigmata of recent haemorrhage. It has the advantage that pre-endoscopic assessment can be made by inexperienced medical or nursing staff. The system was validated internally in a second audit by Rockall and coworkers, and subsequent external validation has come from New Zealand and the Netherlands. The score is less reliable at predicting rebleeding than death and so is, as yet, an imperfect instrument. The scoring system has also proven valuable in selecting low risk patients for early discharge (resulting in health care economies) and for comparing outcome data from different hospitals or populations. Endoscopic treatment has recently been shown to reduce rebleeding rates and perhaps mortality. These advances in therapy are becoming more widely adopted and may influence the predictive ability of the Rockall score. The study from Edinburgh, in this issue, although small and with wide confidence intervals, supports the ability of the Rockall score to identify high risk cases amongst those given endoscopic treatment. It also suggests that an adjustment of the score may be required in these circumstances to prevent overcalling the risk of rebleeding and death. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 13:1137-1139 (C) 2001 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
引用
收藏
页码:1137 / 1139
页数:3
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Reply to: Risk scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Dicu, Daniela
    Ionescu, Daniela
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2013, 31 (06): : 986 - 986
  • [2] Scoring systems for risk stratification in upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding
    Radaelli, Franco
    Rocchetto, Simone
    Piagnani, Alessandra
    Savino, Alberto
    Di Paolo, Dhanai
    Scardino, Giulia
    Paggi, Silvia
    Rondonotti, Emanuele
    BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2023, 67
  • [3] External validation of scoring systems in risk stratification of upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Anchu A.C.
    Mohsina S.
    Sureshkumar S.
    Mahalakshmy T.
    Kate V.
    Indian Journal of Gastroenterology, 2017, 36 (2) : 105 - 112
  • [4] Comparison of four scoring systems for risk stratification of upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Tuncer, Hakan
    Yardan, Turker
    Akdemir, Hizir Ufuk
    Ayyildiz, Talat
    PAKISTAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2018, 34 (03) : 649 - 654
  • [5] Letter: scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Tellez-Avila, F. I.
    Garcia-Osogobio, S.
    Chavez-Tapia, N.
    ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS, 2013, 37 (03) : 364 - 364
  • [6] COMPARISON OF RISK SCORING SYSTEMS IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS THAT DEVELOP UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING
    Mules, Thomas
    Stedman, Catherine A.
    Ding, Steven
    Burt, Michael
    Gearry, Richard B.
    Chalmers-Watson, Teresa
    Falvey, James D.
    Chapman, Bruce
    Barclay, Murray L.
    Lim, Gary
    Ngu, Jing Hieng
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2019, 156 (06) : S749 - S749
  • [7] Comparison of three different risk scoring systems in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Merighi, A
    Camellini, L
    Pagnini, C
    Azzolini, F
    Guazzetti, S
    Scarcelli, A
    Manenti, F
    Rigo, G
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2002, 55 (05) : AB178 - AB178
  • [8] Clinical differences of scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Shin, Young Shin
    Kang, Dae Hwan
    Choi, Cheol Woong
    Park, Su Bum
    Hong, Joung Boom
    Kim, Dong Jun
    Choi, Yu Yi
    Kang, Dong Ku
    Kim, Min Dae
    Jeong, Eul Jo
    Kim, Hyung Wook
    JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2014, 29 : 171 - 172
  • [9] Risk assessment in upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Ernst J. Kuipers
    Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 2010, 7 : 480 - 482
  • [10] Assessment of Risk Scoring Systems for Upper GI Bleeding in the Emergency Department
    Schwarzbaum, David
    Golfeyz, Shmuel
    Gluckman, Craig
    Cotliar, Dustin
    Weisberg, Ilan
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2017, 112 : S308 - S308