Cargando…

A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata

AIMS: To explore the risk factors for rebleeding in acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients with high-risk stigmata after endoscopic hemostasis and to develop a new scoring system for them. METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was conducted from January 2012 to June 2017....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dong, Zhiyu, Wang, Junwen, Zhan, Tingting, Zhang, Haiqin, Yi, Lisha, Xu, Shuchang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5867594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29721011
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/5032657
_version_ 1783308995072622592
author Dong, Zhiyu
Wang, Junwen
Zhan, Tingting
Zhang, Haiqin
Yi, Lisha
Xu, Shuchang
author_facet Dong, Zhiyu
Wang, Junwen
Zhan, Tingting
Zhang, Haiqin
Yi, Lisha
Xu, Shuchang
author_sort Dong, Zhiyu
collection PubMed
description AIMS: To explore the risk factors for rebleeding in acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients with high-risk stigmata after endoscopic hemostasis and to develop a new scoring system for them. METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was conducted from January 2012 to June 2017. The logistic regression model was used to explore risk factors of poor clinical outcomes. Accuracy of new scoring systems was compared with Rockall score (RS) and Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) using receiver operating characteristics curve. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients were included. In multivariate regression analysis, systolic blood pressure, endoscopic hemostasis method, hemoglobin, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine were identified as indicators for rebleeding. New scoring systems with 4 variables and 5 variables based on these 5 risk factors were chosen. The 4-variable scoring system outperformed GBS in predicting rebleeding while 5-variable scoring system outperformed RS and GBS in predicting rebleeding significantly. Score 2 was identified as the best cut-off of these 2 scoring systems. CONCLUSIONS: Systolic blood pressure, endoscopic hemostasis method, hemoglobin, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine were all associated with poor clinical outcomes. The new scoring systems had greater accuracy than RS and GBS in predicting rebleeding. Further external validation should be performed to verify the results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5867594
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58675942018-05-02 A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata Dong, Zhiyu Wang, Junwen Zhan, Tingting Zhang, Haiqin Yi, Lisha Xu, Shuchang Gastroenterol Res Pract Research Article AIMS: To explore the risk factors for rebleeding in acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients with high-risk stigmata after endoscopic hemostasis and to develop a new scoring system for them. METHODS: A retrospective single-center study was conducted from January 2012 to June 2017. The logistic regression model was used to explore risk factors of poor clinical outcomes. Accuracy of new scoring systems was compared with Rockall score (RS) and Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) using receiver operating characteristics curve. RESULTS: Two hundred nine patients were included. In multivariate regression analysis, systolic blood pressure, endoscopic hemostasis method, hemoglobin, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine were identified as indicators for rebleeding. New scoring systems with 4 variables and 5 variables based on these 5 risk factors were chosen. The 4-variable scoring system outperformed GBS in predicting rebleeding while 5-variable scoring system outperformed RS and GBS in predicting rebleeding significantly. Score 2 was identified as the best cut-off of these 2 scoring systems. CONCLUSIONS: Systolic blood pressure, endoscopic hemostasis method, hemoglobin, blood urea nitrogen, and serum creatinine were all associated with poor clinical outcomes. The new scoring systems had greater accuracy than RS and GBS in predicting rebleeding. Further external validation should be performed to verify the results. Hindawi 2018-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5867594/ /pubmed/29721011 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/5032657 Text en Copyright © 2018 Zhiyu Dong et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Dong, Zhiyu
Wang, Junwen
Zhan, Tingting
Zhang, Haiqin
Yi, Lisha
Xu, Shuchang
A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata
title A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata
title_full A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata
title_fullStr A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata
title_full_unstemmed A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata
title_short A New Scoring System to Predict Poor Clinical Outcomes in Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Patients with High-Risk Stigmata
title_sort new scoring system to predict poor clinical outcomes in acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients with high-risk stigmata
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5867594/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29721011
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2018/5032657
work_keys_str_mv AT dongzhiyu anewscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT wangjunwen anewscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT zhantingting anewscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT zhanghaiqin anewscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT yilisha anewscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT xushuchang anewscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT dongzhiyu newscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT wangjunwen newscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT zhantingting newscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT zhanghaiqin newscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT yilisha newscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata
AT xushuchang newscoringsystemtopredictpoorclinicaloutcomesinacutenonvaricealuppergastrointestinalbleedingpatientswithhighriskstigmata