S'abonner

Comparison of the quick SOFA score with Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scores in predicting severity in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding - 13/07/21

Doi : 10.1016/j.ajem.2021.02.016 
Bahadır Taslidere a, , Ertan Sonmez a, Ayşe Büşra Özcan a, Liljana Mehmetaj a, Elmas Biberci Keskin b, Bedia Gulen c
a Department of Emergency Medicine, Bezmialem Vakıf University, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. 
b Department of Gastroenterology, Bezmialem Vakıf University, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey 
c Department of Emergency Medicine, Medipol Univercity, Istanbul, Turkey 

Corresponding author.

Abstract

Introduction

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the common causes of mortality and morbidity. The Rockall score (RS) and Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) are frequently used in determining the prognosis and predicting in-hospital adverse events, such as mortality, re-bleeding, hospital stay, and blood transfusion requirements. The quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score is easy and swift to calculate. The commonly used scores and the qSOFA score were compared and why and when these scores are most useful was investigated.

Method

133 patients admitted to the emergency department with upper gastrointestinal bleeding over the period of a year, were evaluated in this retrospective study. The RS, GBS and qSOFA score were calculated for each patient, and their relationship with in-hospital adverse events, such as length of hospitalization, rebleeding, endoscopic treatment, blood transfusion requirements, and mortality, was investigated.

Results

The mean overall GBS was 9.72 ± 3.72 (0–19), while that of patients who did not survive was 14.0 ± 1.1 (13–16), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.901, a cutoff value of 12.5, and specificity (Spe) and sensitivity (Sen) of 1 and 0.82, respectively. The median value of the GBS, in terms of transfusion need, was 7.12 ± 4.01 (0–15).

(AUC = 0.752, cut-off = 9.5, Spe = 0.79, Sen = 0.69). The median value of the qSOFA score, in terms of intensive care need, was 1.73 ± 0.7 (0–3) (AUC = 0.921, cut-off = 0.5, Spe = 0.93, Sen = 0.79). The RS median, in terms of re-bleeding, was 8.22 ± 0.97 (6–9).

Conclusion

Early use of risk stratification scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding is important due to the high risk of morbidity and mortality. All scoring systems were effective in predicting mortality, the need for intensive care, and re-bleeding. The GBS had a greater predictive power in terms of mortality and transfusion need, the qSOFA score for intensive care need, and the RS for re-bleeding. The simpler, more efficient, and more easily calculated qSOFA score can be used to estimate the severity of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Highlights

The Glasgow-Blatchford score was most effective in terms of predicting mortality and the need for transfusion.
The Rockall score could be used in predicting the risk of re-bleeding
The quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score could be used for predicting the need for intensive care
qSOFA is a simpler, more efficient and easier to calculate scoring system.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Risk scores, Upper gastrointestinal system bleeding, qSOFA score, Adverse event, Rockall score, Glasgow-Blatchford score


Plan


© 2021  Elsevier Inc. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 45

P. 29-36 - juillet 2021 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Top 10 presenting diagnoses of homeless veterans seeking care at emergency departments
  • Jack Tsai, Dorota Szymkowiak, Stefan G. Kertesz
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Does pain severity predict stone characteristics or outcomes in emergency department patients with acute renal colic?
  • Katie Gourlay, Graeme Splinter, Jake Hayward, Grant Innes

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.