Cargando…

Correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score, shock index, and Forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate the correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score, shock index, and Forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 955 patients with PUB were assessed using the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index, as well...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: YANG, Hong, PAN*, Chen, LIU, Qi, WANG, Yan, LIU, Zhe, CAO, Xian, LEI, Jingjing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7379461/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32041384
http://dx.doi.org/10.3906/sag-1906-154
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND/AIM: To investigate the correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score, shock index, and Forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 955 patients with PUB were assessed using the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index, as well as the Forrest classification based on their gastroscopy results. The correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index was determined using scatter plot analysis, and the correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score or shock index and Forrest classification was determined using Spearman’s analysis. RESULTS: Both the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index showed the highest values in patients with Forrest class IIa. The Glasgow-Blatchford score was significantly higher than patients with Forrest class Ib/IIc/III (P < 0.05), and the shock index was significantly higher than patients with Forrest class Ib/IIb/III (P < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index, at r = 0.427 (P < 0.001). A negative correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and Forrest classification, at r = –0.111 (P < 0.01), and between the shock index and Forrest classification, at r = –0.138 (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: A moderate correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index in patients with PUB, and the correlation between the Forrest classification and Glasgow-Blatchford score or shock index was relatively low.