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
  • [21] Scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Which one scores better?
    Dhir, Vinay
    Shah, Rahul
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2019, 38 (02) : 95 - 97
  • [22] Scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Which one scores better?
    Vinay Dhir
    Rahul Shah
    Indian Journal of Gastroenterology, 2019, 38 : 95 - 97
  • [23] Comparison of risk scoring systems in predicting clinical outcome at upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients in an emergency unit
    Dicu, Daniela
    Pop, Felicia
    Ionescu, Daniela
    Dicu, Tiberius
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2013, 31 (01): : 94 - 99
  • [24] Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study
    Stanley, Adrian J.
    Laine, Loren
    Dalton, Harry R.
    Ngu, Jing H.
    Schultz, Michael
    Abazi, Roseta
    Zakko, Liam
    Thornton, Susan
    Wilkinson, Kelly
    Khor, Cristopher J. L.
    Murray, Iain A.
    Laursen, Stig B.
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2017, 356
  • [25] International, Multicentre Prospective Study Comparing Risk Scoring Systems for Patients Presenting With Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
    Laursen, Stig B.
    Laine, Loren
    Dalton, Harry
    Abazi, Rozeta
    Ngu, Jing Hieng
    Schultz, Michael
    Zakko, Liam
    Thornton, Susan
    Wilkinson, Kelly
    Holloway, Amelia
    Khor, Christopher Jen Lock
    Steiner, Tracey
    Murray, Iain A.
    Stanley, Adrian
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2016, 150 (04) : S164 - S164
  • [26] Comparison of risk-scoring systems in predicting needs of intervention and clinical outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Ooi, Marie
    Low, Yvonne
    Bryant, Robert
    Nam Quoc Nguyen
    JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2017, 32 : 264 - 264
  • [27] RE: Validation of a Machine Learning Model That Outperforms Clinical Risk Scoring Systems for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
    Atsawarungruangkit, Amporn
    Habr, Fadlallah G.
    GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2020, 158 (08) : 2307 - 2308
  • [28] Risk scoring systems to predict need for clinical intervention for patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding
    Chen, G-Chuan
    Hung, Ming-Szu
    Chiu, Te-Fa
    Chen, Ah-Chang
    Hsiao, Cheng-Ting
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE, 2007, 25 (07): : 774 - 779
  • [29] Comparison of risk-scoring systems in predicting need for intervention and clinical outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Ooi, M.
    Low, Y.
    Wong, C.
    Bryant, R.
    Nguyen, N. Q.
    JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2017, 32 : 48 - 48
  • [30] Prospective comparison of three risk scoring systems in non-variceal and variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding
    Thanapirom, Kessarin
    Ridtitid, Wiriyaporn
    Rerknimitr, Rungsun
    Thungsuk, Rattikorn
    Noophun, Phadet
    Wongjitrat, Chatchawan
    Luangjaru, Somchai
    Vedkijkul, Padet
    Lertkupinit, Comson
    Poonsab, Swangphong
    Ratanachu-ek, Thawee
    Hansomburana, Piyathida
    Pornthisarn, Bubpha
    Thongbai, Thirada
    Mahachai, Varocha
    Treeprasertsuk, Sombat
    JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2016, 31 (04) : 761 - 767