• J. Clin. Gastroenterol. · Jul 2016

    Multicenter Study Comparative Study

    A Prospective, Multicenter Study of the AIMS65 Score Compared With the Glasgow-Blatchford Score in Predicting Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Outcomes.

    • Marwan S Abougergi, Joseph P Charpentier, Emily Bethea, Abbas Rupawala, Joan Kheder, Dominic Nompleggi, Peter Liang, Anne C Travis, and John R Saltzman.
    • *Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology ‡Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston †Division of Gastroenterology, UMass Memorial Health Care, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA.
    • J. Clin. Gastroenterol. 2016 Jul 1; 50 (6): 464-9.

    BackgroundThe AIMS65 score and the Glasgow-Blatchford risk score (GBRS) are validated preendoscopic risk scores for upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH).GoalsTo compare the 2 scores' performance in predicting important outcomes in UGIH.StudyA prospective cohort study in 2 tertiary referral centers and 1 community teaching hospital. Adults with UGIH were included. The AIMS65 score and GBRS were calculated for each patient. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, in-hospital rebleeding, 30-day rebleeding, length of stay, and a composite endpoint of in-hospital mortality, transfusions, or need for intervention (endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical treatment). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated for each score and outcome.ResultsA total of 298 patients were enrolled. The AIMS65 score was superior to the GBRS in predicting in-hospital mortality (AUROC, 0.85 vs. 0.66; P<0.01) and length of stay (Somer's D, 0.21 vs. 0.13; P=0.04). The scores were similar in predicting 30-day mortality (AUROC, 0.74 vs. 0.65; P=0.16), in-hospital rebleeding (AUROC, 0.69 vs. 0.62; P=0.19), 30-day rebleeding (AUROC, 0.63 vs. 0.63; P=0.90), and the composite outcome (AUROC, 0.57 vs. 0.59; P=0.49). The optimal cutoffs for predicting in-hospital mortality were an AIMS65 score of 3 and a GBRS score of 10. For predicting rebleeding, the optimal cutoffs were 2 and 10, respectively.ConclusionsThe AIMS65 score is superior to the GBRS for predicting in-hospital mortality and hospital length of stay for patients with UGIH. The AIMS65 score and GBRS are similar in predicting 30-day mortality, rebleeding, and a composite endpoint.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…