Publications

Detailed Information

AIMS65 scoring system is comparable to Glasgow-Blatchford score or Rockall score for prediction of clinical outcomes for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorKim, Min Seong-
dc.contributor.authorChoi, Jeongmin-
dc.contributor.authorShin, Won Chang-
dc.date.accessioned2019-09-24T01:09:55Z-
dc.date.available2019-09-24T11:01:59Z-
dc.date.issued2019-07-26-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Gastroenterology, 19(1):136ko_KR
dc.identifier.issn1471-230X-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/160877-
dc.description.abstractBackground
Risk stratification for patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal (NVUGI) bleeding is crucial for successful prognosis and treatment. Recently, the AIMS65 score has been used to predict mortality risk and rebleeding. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of the AIMS65 score with the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score, and pre-endoscopic Rockall score in Korea.

Methods
We retrospectively studied 512 patients with NVUGI bleeding who were treated at a university hospital between 2013 and 2016. The AIMS65, GBS, Rockall score, and pre-endoscopic Rockall score were used to stratify patients based on their bleeding risk. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were composite clinical outcomes of mortality, rebleeding, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Each scoring system was compared using the receiver-operating curve (ROC).

Results
A total of 17 patients (3.3%) died and rebleeding developed in 65 patients (12.7%). Eighty-six patients (16.8%) required ICU admission. The AIMS65 (area under the curve (AUC) 0.84, 95% confidence interval, 0.81–0.88)) seemed to be superior to the GBS (AUC 0.72, 0.68–0.76), the Rockall score (AUC 0.75, 0.71–0.79), or the pre-endoscopic Rockall score (AUC 0.74, 0.70–0.78) in predicting in-hospital mortality, but there was not a statistically significant difference between the groups (P = 0.07). The AUC value of the AIMS65 was not significantly different from the other scoring systems in prediction of rebleeding, endoscopic intervention, or ICU admission.

Conclusions
The AIMS65 score in NVUGI bleeding patients was comparable to the GBS or Rockall scoring systems when predicting the mortality, rebleeding, or ICU admission. Because AIMS65 is a much easier, readily calculated scoring system compared to the others, we would recommend using the AIMS65 in daily practice.
ko_KR
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported by the 2018 Inje University research grant. Funding bodies were not involved in the study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data or in writing of the manuscript.ko_KR
dc.language.isoenko_KR
dc.publisherBioMed Centralko_KR
dc.subjectStomachko_KR
dc.subjectGastrointestinal hemorrhageko_KR
dc.subjectAIMS65 scoreko_KR
dc.subjectRockall scoreko_KR
dc.subject, Glasgow-Blatchford score-
dc.titleAIMS65 scoring system is comparable to Glasgow-Blatchford score or Rockall score for prediction of clinical outcomes for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleedingko_KR
dc.typeArticleko_KR
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor김민성-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor최정민-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthor신원창-
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12876-019-1051-8-
dc.language.rfc3066en-
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).-
dc.date.updated2019-07-28T03:40:42Z-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share