Clinical usefulness of Rockall scoring system in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer--comparison with Forrest classification]

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The Rockall risk assessment score was developed to predict the risk of rebleeding and death in patients with upper GI hemorrhage. The validity of this score, however, was not established in Korea. We tried to assess the reliability of the Rockall score to predict outcomes in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer. METHODS: Medical records of 175 patients with benign peptic ulcer bleeding treated in Samsung Medical Center from January 2000 to May 2003 were retrospectively analyzed. They were classified into three groups: no rebleeding rebleeding, and death and mean Rockall score was compared. Forrest classification was also compared with the Rockall score regarding the clinical usefulness of predicting poor outcomes in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer. RESULTS: One hundred forty five patients did not show rebleeding, with mean Rockall score of 3.5 (SD=1.5). On the other hand, rebleeding occurred in 25 patients and the mean score was 6.4 (SD=1.44). There were 13 deaths with mean score of 7.0 (SD=1.08). The differences between the three groups were significant (p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, Rockall score was a independent risk factor of rebleeding and mortality (odds ratio, OR=2.73 and OR=8.74). CONCLUSIONS: The Rockall scoring system is useful to predict poor outcome such as rebleeding and death in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer.     

Prospective validation of the Rockall risk scoring system for upper GI hemorrhage in subgroups of patients with varices and peptic ulcers

OBJECTIVES: The Rockall risk assessment score was devised to allow prediction of the risk of rebleeding and death in patients with upper GI hemorrhage. The score was derived by multivariate analysis in a cohort of patients with upper GI hemorrhage and subsequently validated in a second cohort. Only 4.4% of patients included in the initial study had esophageal varices, and analysis was not performed according to the etiology of the bleeding. Our aim was to assess the validity of the Rockall risk scoring system in predicting rebleeding and mortality in patients with esophageal varices or peptic ulcers. METHODS: Admissions (n = 358) over 32 months to a single specialist GI bleeding unit were scored prospectively. The distribution of episodes of rebleeding and mortality by Rockall score were statistically analyzed using Fisher's exact test with 99% CIs calculated using a Monte Carlo method. The Child-Pugh score was determined in patients with esophageal varices. RESULTS: The Rockall score was predictive of both rebleeding and mortality in patients with variceal hemorrhage (both ps < 0.0005), as was the Child-Pugh score (p = 0.001 and p < 0.0005, respectively). The initial Rockall score was predictive of mortality in patients with peptic ulcers (p = 0.01), although the complete score was not (p > 0.05). The complete score did, however, predict rebleeding in these patients (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to validate the Rockall score in specific subgroups of patients with esophageal varices or peptic ulcers and suggests that it is particularly applicable to variceal hemorrhage.     

Relevance of the Rockall score in patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer haemorrhage.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of the Rockall score to predict outcome in patients who undergo endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer haemorrhage. DESIGN: Retrospective data analysis. SETTING: Patients admitted to the three major acute hospitals in Lothian, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Details of 211 patients involved in two randomized trials of endoscopic therapy between 1995 and 1999 were accessed, and Rockall scores calculated. All patients had ulcers with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessels requiring endoscopic therapy. The patients were followed up for 6 months and end points included rebleeding and death. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A comparison of mean Rockall scores for those patients who did not rebleed, those who re-bled and those who died. Identification of those patients at greatest risk of rebleeding or death after endoscopic therapy. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-six patients did not rebleed, with mean score 6.17 (SD = 1.61). Rebleeding occurred in 35 patients whose mean score was 6.97 (SD = 1.52). There were 29 deaths with mean score 7.34 (SD = 1.40). The differences between the three groups were significant by one-way ANOVA (P < 0.001). Fifty-six patients had a Rockall score of 8 or over and, of these, 16 (29%) re-bled and 14 (25%) died. Of the 155 patients with scores of 7 or less, 19 (12%) re-bled and 15 (10%) died. The difference between these groups was significant with chi2 = 7.912 (P = 0.005) for rebleeding and chi2 = 8.147 (P = 0.004) for death. CONCLUSIONS: The Rockall score can be used to predict poor outcome in patients who undergo therapeutic endoscopy for major peptic ulcer bleeding.     

Management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage before and after the adoption of the Rockall score, in the Italian Gastroenterology Units

OBJECTIVES: Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage is a frequent reason for ordinary hospital admission. In Italy the use of prognostic scores to stratify the risk has not been adequately validated: the impact on clinical management of a rating system like the Rockall score remains to be established. RING is a 'register' that has been collecting hospital discharge files from hospital gastroenterology units, giving a broad picture of the patients admitted for this pathology. METHODS: We analyzed the hospital discharge files collected between 2001 and 2005 from 12 gastroenterology units, which issued more than 26,000 hospital discharge files for ordinary hospital admission and have been using the Rockall score for defining nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage since 2003. RESULTS: There were 2832 hospital discharge files with a main diagnosis of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: 1335 'before' the Rockall score was introduced, 1497 'after' the introduction. Patients' mean age was 67.7+/-16.7 years, with a male/female ratio of 1.7 and no significant changes over the years. There were no differences in the distribution of diagnoses in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage patients before/after the introduction of the Rockall score, though the mean hospital stay became shorter (7.1+/-5.0 vs. 6.3+/-4.5 days), and mortality declined (2.8 vs. 2.3%), in parallel with the caselist as a whole. For 1102 ordinary hospital admission Rockall score was calculated. Diagnoses were more accurate: significantly fewer undefined causes and an increase in peptic ulcer. The mean Rockall score was 4.6+/-2.2: 17.8% low (0-2), 48.7% intermediate (3-5), and 33.5% high (>or=6). Mean hospital stay, rebleeding, and mortality were correlated with the severity of the score. CONCLUSION: The Rockall score enables the clinician to formulate a more precise diagnosis and substantially shortens the time in hospital, especially for patients at low-risk of rebleeding and death, so more resources can be dedicated to critically ill patients.     

Weekend and nighttime effect on the prognosis of peptic ulcer bleeding

AIM: To evaluate whether weekend or nighttime admission affects prognosis of peptic ulcer bleeding despite early endoscopy.METHODS: Retrospective data collection from four referral centers, all of which had a formal out-of-hours emergency endoscopy service, even at weekends. A total of 388 patients with bleeding peptic ulcers who were admitted via the emergency room between January 2007 and December 2009 were enrolled. Analyzed parameters included time from patients’ arrival until endoscopy, mortality, rebleeding, need for surgery and length of hospital stay.RESULTS: The weekday and weekend admission groups comprised 326 and 62 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups, except for younger age in the weekend group. Most patients (97%) had undergone early endoscopy, which resulted in a low mortality rate regardless of point of presentation (1.8% overall vs 1.6% on the weekend). The only outcome that was worse in the weekend group was a higher rate of rebleeding (12% vs 21%, P = 0.030). However, multivariate analysis revealed nighttime admission and a high Rockall score (≥ 6) as significant independent risk factors for rebleeding, rather than weekend admission.CONCLUSION: Early endoscopy for peptic ulcer bleeding can prevent the weekend effect, and nighttime admission was identified as a novel risk factor for rebleeding, namely the nighttime effect.     

Rockall score in predicting outcomes of elderly patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

AIM: To validate the clinical Rockall score in predicting outcomes (rebleeding, surgery and mortality) in elderly patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken in 341 patients admitted to the emergency room and Intensive Care Unit of Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The Rockall scores were calculated, and the association between clinical Rockall scores and patient outcomes (rebleeding, surgery and mortality) was assessed. Based on the Rockall scores, patients were divided into three risk categories: low risk ≤ 3, moderate risk 3-4, high risk ≥ 4, and the percentages of rebleeding/death/surgery in each risk category were compared. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated to assess the validity of the Rockall system in predicting rebleeding, surgery and mortality of patients with AUGIB. RESULTS: A positive linear correlation between clinical Rockall scores and patient outcomes in terms of rebleeding, surgery and mortality was observed (r =0.962, 0.955 and 0.946, respectively, P = 0.001). High clinical Rockall scores > 3 were associated with adverse outcomes (rebleeding, surgery and death). There was a significant correlation between high Rockall scores and the occurrence of rebleeding, surgery and mortality in the entire patient population (χ 2 = 49.29, 23.10 and 27.64, respectively, P = 0.001). For rebleeding, the area under the ROC curve was 0.788 (95%CI: 0.726-0.849, P = 0.001); For surgery, the area under the ROC curve was 0.752 (95%CI: 0.679-0.825, P = 0.001) and for mortality, the area under the ROC curve was 0.787 (95%CI: 0.716-0.859, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Rockall score is clinically useful, rapid and accurate in predicting rebleeding, surgery and mortality outcomes in elderly patients with AUGIB.     

Outcome of non-variceal acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in relation to the time of endoscopy and the experience of the endoscopist： A two-year survey

AIM: To prospectively assess the impact of time of endoscopy and endoscopist's experience on the outcome of non-variceal acute upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding patients in a large teaching hospital. METHODS: All patients admitted for non-variceal acute upper GI bleeding for over a 2-year period were potentially eligible for this study. They were managed by a team of seven endoscopists on 24-h call whose experience was categorized into two levels (high and low) according to the number of endoscopic hemostatic procedures undertaken before the study. Endoscopic treatment was standardized according to Forrest classification of lesions as well as the subsequent medical therapy. Time of endoscopy was subdivided into two time periods: routine (8 a.m.-5 p.m.) and on-call (5p.m.-8a.m.). For each category of experience and time periods rebleeding rate, transfusion requirement, need for surgery, length of hospital stay and mortality we compared. Multivariate analysis was used to discriminate the impact of different variables on the outcomes that were considered. RESULTS: Study population consisted of 272 patients (mean age 67.3 years) with endoscopic stigmata of hemorrhage. The patients were equally distributed among the endoscopists, whereas only 19% of procedures were done out of working hours. Rockall score and Forrest classification at admission did not differ between time periods and degree of experience. Univariate analysis showed that higher endoscopist's experience was associated with significant reduction in rebleeding rate (14% vs 37%), transfusion requirements (1.8±0.6 vs 3.0±1.7 units) as well as surgery (4% vs 10%), but not associated with the length of hospital stay nor mortality. By contrast, outcomes did not significantly differ between the two time periods of endoscopy. On multivariate analysis, endoscopist's experience was independently associated with rebleeding rate and transfusion requirements. Odds ratios for low experienced endoscopist were 4.47 for rebleeding and 6.90 for need of transfusion after the endoscopy. CONCLUSION: Endoscopist's experience is an important independent prognostic factor for non-variceal acute upper GI bleeding. Urgent endoscopy should be undertaken preferentially by a skilled endoscopist as less expert staff tends to underestimate some risk lesions with a negative influence on hemostasis.     

Scoring systems and risk assessment for upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Mortality associated with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains high despite advances in diagnosis and therapy. This was emphasized by the findings of the seminal English National Audit of acute gastrointestinal haemorrhage undertaken by Rockall and associates in the mid-1990s. The apparent lack of progress is largely due to less selective reporting in an ageing population with greater co-morbidity. Thus some deaths will be unavoidable even with exemplary treatment. Managing high risk patients in a dedicated area with close cooperation between medical and surgical gastroenterologists has been shown to improve outcome. The challenge is to select those patients who have most to gain from such a scarce and expensive resource so that their treatment can be optimized. Various risk factors have been identified to help achieve this end. Rockall's national audit data suggest that avoidable deaths remain a problem in most district general hospitals. A simple numerical score was derived from these audit data (Rockall score) to predict rebleeding and mortality. The score is based on five variables: age, shock, co-morbidity, endoscopic diagnosis and stigmata of recent haemorrhage. It has the advantage that pre-endoscopic assessment can be made by inexperienced medical or nursing staff. The system was validated internally in a second audit by Rockall and co-workers, and subsequent external validation has come from New Zealand and the Netherlands. The score is less reliable at predicting rebleeding than death and so is, as yet, an imperfect instrument. The scoring system has also proven valuable in selecting low risk patients for early discharge (resulting in health care economies) and for comparing outcome data from different hospitals or populations. Endoscopic treatment has recently been shown to reduce rebleeding rates and perhaps mortality. These advances in therapy are becoming more widely adopted and may influence the predictive ability of the Rockall score. The study from Edinburgh, in this issue, although small and with wide confidence intervals, supports the ability of the Rockall score to identify high risk cases amongst those given endoscopic treatment. It also suggests that an adjustment of the score may be required in these circumstances to prevent overcalling the risk of rebleeding and death.     

Scoring systems for peptic ulcer bleeding: which one to use?

AIM To compare the Glasgow-Blatchford score(GBS), Rockall score(RS) and Baylor bleeding score(BBS) in predicting clinical outcomes and need for interventions in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers. METHODS Between January 2008 and December 2013, 1012consecutive patients admitted with peptic ulcer bleeding(PUB) were prospectively followed. The pre-endoscopic RS, BBS and GBS, as well as the post-endoscopic diagnostic scores(RS and BBS) were calculated for all patients according to their urgent upper endoscopy findings. Area under the receiver-operating characteristics(AUROC) curves were calculated for the prediction of lethal outcome, rebleeding, needs for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention, and the optimal cutoff values were evaluated.RESULTS PUB accounted for 41.9% of all upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding, 5.2% patients died and 5.4% patients underwent surgery. By comparing the AUROC curves of the aforementioned pre-endoscopic scores, the RS best predicted lethal outcome(AUROC 0.82 vs 0.67 vs0.63, respectively), but the GBS best predicted need for hospital-based intervention or 30-d mortality(AUROC0.84 vs 0.57 vs 0.64), rebleeding(AUROC 0.75 vs 0.61 vs 0.53), need for blood transfusion(AUROC 0.83 vs0.63 vs 0.58) and surgical intervention(0.82 vs 0.63 vs 0.52) The post-endoscopic RS was also better than the post-endoscopic BBS in predicting lethal outcome(AUROC 0.82 vs 0.69, respectively).CONCLUSION The RS is the best predictor of mortality and the GBS is the best predictor of rebleeding, need for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention in patients with PUB. There is no one 'perfect score' and we suggest that these two tests be used concomitantly.     

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: differences in outcome for patients admitted to internal medicine and gastroenterological services

OBJECTIVE: It has been suggested that admission to a gastroenterology service (GAS) is associated with a better prognosis and lower cost for treatment of gastrointestinal (GI) diseases, such as upper GI bleeding (UGB). However, a large potential bias by higher comorbidity on internal medicine services (MED) could not be excluded from these studies. We therefore compared patients with upper GI bleeding admitted to a gastroenterology or internal medicine department, with special emphasis on prognostic factors, such as comorbidity, and outcome. METHODS: Between 1991 and 1995, 322 patients were admitted to our hospital for UGB. Forty-five patients had variceal and 277 patients had nonvariceal upper GI bleeding (NUGB). Of 232 patients with primary NUGB, 125 were admitted to GAS and 93 to MED. The charts of these patients were revised, comorbidity was carefully recorded, and the Rockall risk score was calculated. All deaths were individually classified as unavoidable, mostly due to severe underlying illness, or potentially avoidable. RESULTS: No differences in delay for endoscopy or treatment were observed between GAS and MED. The rebleeding, surgery, and mortality rates in GAS and MED patients were 11.6% versus 11.5% (NS), 7.8% versus 7.3% (NS), and 2.4% versus 10.8% (p = 0.02), respectively. Rockall scores differed between GAS and MED patients (3.1 +/- 1.8 vs 3.7 +/- 1.7, p = 0.02). The mortality rate stratified by Rockall score was lower for the GAS patients. However, individual analysis revealed that only three of 13 deaths were potentially avoidable: two of 10 at the MED and one of three at the GAS. CONCLUSION: The lower mortality among nonvariceal upper GI bleeding patients admitted to a gastroenterological service compared to an internal medicine service was mainly due to lesser comorbidity. This effect was not detected by stratification according to Rockall, but shown with analysis of individual patient charts only. The latter underscores the potential pitfalls when comparing outcome or cost of treatment between different medical services.     

Applicability of the Rockall score in patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND: The Rockall score is used to assess the prognosis of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. AIM: To assess the applicability of the Rockall score in patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding. METHODS: Retrospective evaluation of the Rockall score in the period 1995-2001. To evaluate the applicability of the Rockall system, two groups were created: group I (Rockallor=6 points). RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-two patients were included. The median age of patients was 65 +/ -17 years. Hypotension and associated diseases were present in 20 and 50% of patients, respectively. Re-bleeding occurred in 50 patients (23%) whose median score was 7, whereas the median score of patients without re-bleeding was 6 (p=0.14). There were 20 deaths (9%) with a median score of 8, whilst the median score of surviving patients was 6 (p<0.001). Sixteen patients in group I (18.4%) and 34 in group II (25.2%) re-bled (p=0.25). All the patients who died belong to group II with a Rockall score>or=6 (15% versus 0% in groups II and I, respectively, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The Rockall score can be used in patients who undergo therapeutic endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding to identify those with high risk for mortality.     

Validation of the Rockall risk scoring system in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND: Several scoring systems have been developed to predict the risk of rebleeding or death in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). These risk scoring systems have not been validated in a new patient population outside the clinical context of the original study. AIMS: To assess internal and external validity of a simple risk scoring system recently developed by Rockall and coworkers. METHODS: Calibration and discrimination were assessed as measures of validity of the scoring system. Internal validity was assessed using an independent, but similar patient sample studied by Rockall and coworkers, after developing the scoring system (Rockall's validation sample). External validity was assessed using patients admitted to several hospitals in Amsterdam (Vreeburg's validation sample). Calibration was evaluated by a chi2 goodness of fit test, and discrimination was evaluated by calculating the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. RESULTS: Calibration indicated a poor fit in both validation samples for the prediction of rebleeding (p<0.0001, Vreeburg; p=0.007, Rockall), but a better fit for the prediction of mortality in both validation samples (p=0.2, Vreeburg; p=0.3, Rockall). The areas under the ROC curves were rather low in both validation samples for the prediction of rebleeding (0.61, Vreeburg; 0.70, Rockall), but higher for the prediction of mortality (0.73, Vreeburg; 0.81, Rockall). CONCLUSIONS: The risk scoring system developed by Rockall and coworkers is a clinically useful scoring system for stratifying patients with acute UGIB into high and low risk categories for mortality. For the prediction of rebleeding, however, the performance of this scoring system was unsatisfactory.     

Effectiveness of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use during primary coronary angioplasty: results of propensity analysis using the New York State Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Reporting System

Patients undergoing primary angioplasty in clinical practice experience a higher risk for adverse events than those enrolled in clinical trials. Whether glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitor use during primary angioplasty is both safe and effective in real life is unknown. Therefore, we examined the pattern of GP IIb/IIIa use and its effectiveness in a large population-based cohort of 7,321 patients who underwent primary angioplasty in New York State. Propensity analysis was used to account for the nonrandomized use of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Overall, 78.5% of patients who underwent primary angioplasty received GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower with GP IIb/IIIa use (3% vs 6.2%, p <0.0001) after adjustment for both propensity score (odds ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 0.74, p <0.0001) and the combination of propensity score and clinical characteristics (odds ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 0.88, p = 0.006). Patients with older age and higher Mayo Clinic Risk Score (MCRS) received GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors less often. However, stratified analysis of patients with low to moderate risk (MCRS <12) versus high risk (>or=12) demonstrated that GP IIb/IIIa use lowered risk of mortality both in low- to moderate-risk (1.39% vs 3.23%, p <0.0001) and high-risk patients (16.15% vs 22.41%, p = 0.03). In conclusion, adjunct GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor use during primary angioplasty is effective and associated with improved in-hospital survival rates.     

Characteristics and outcomes of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding after therapeutic endoscopy in the elderly

AIM: To characterize the effects of age on clinical presentations and endoscopic diagnoses and to determine outcomes after endoscopic therapy among patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) compared with those aged < 65 years. METHODS: Medical records and an endoscopy data-base of 526 consecutive patients with overt UGIB admitted during 2007-2009 were reviewed. The initial presentations and clinical course within 30 d after endoscopy were obtained. RESULTS: A total o...     

急性非静脉曲张上消化道出血风险评估的临床研究

目的 探讨Rockall(RS)和Blatchford(BRS)评分系统对急性非静脉曲张上消化道出血(ANVUGIB)预后风险评估的准确性和临床实用性.方法 记录我院2009年1月至2009年12月间收治的195例符合研究标准及资料完整的ANVUGIB患者的临床资料,分别计算各患者RS和BRS分值进行危险分层,出院后随访30 d,并将死亡或出院后30 d的疾病转归作为临床研究终点.检验两评分系统对预后的预测能力.结果 195例患者中男150例,女45例,男女比例2.3:1.年龄15～85岁,平均(53.97±18.34)岁.年龄≥60岁患者(老年组)90例,年龄<60岁患者(非老年组)105例.生存182例(93.3%),死亡13例(6.7%),生存患者中再出血11例(5.6%).老年组患者病死率[12.2%(11/90)]、合并基础疾病率[43.3%(39/90)]及服阿司匹林[24.4%(22/90)]均高于非老年组患者[1.9%(2/105)、16.2%(17/105)和11.4%(12/105),P值均<0.05].RS预测死亡风险的曲线下面积(AUC)=0.742(P=0.004),预测再出血风险的AUC=0.469(P=0.101);BRS评分系统预测死亡风险AUC=0.493(P=0.067),预测再出血风险AUC=0.341(P=0.092).RS分值与住院天数呈正相关性,而BRS与住院天数关系无统计学意义.结论 RS评分系统对死亡预测能力良好,其分值高低与住院天数长短呈正相关,但对再出血预测能力较差.BRS对住院患者死亡和再出血预测能力均不理想,不适用于住院患者不良预后的风险预测.     

Glasgow Blatchford,pre-endoscopic Rockall and AIMS65 scores show no difference in predicting rebleeding rate and mortality in variceal bleeding

Objective: To compare the performance of the Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS), pre-endoscopic Rockall score (PRS) and AIMS65 score in predicting specific clinical endpoints following variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH).

Material and methods: Between January 2008 and December 2013, we retrospectively analyzed 225 consecutive hospitalized patients managed for endoscopically confirmed UGIH.

Results: A total of 225 patients (mean age 61.3 years), mostly diagnosed with alcoholic cirrhosis (195/86.7%), presented with variceal UGIH during the study period. Rebleeding occurred in 22 (9.8%) patients and 30-day mortality was 39 (17.3%). Initial hemostasis was achieved with N-butyl cyanoacrylate (151/79.1%) and endoscopic variceal ligation (40/20.9%), while secondary rebleeding prophylaxis in 110 (48.9%) patients was accomplished using endoscopic variceal ligation (92%). The majority of patients died from the underlying disease, while 12 (30.8%) died from bleeding. Median hospital stay was 6 (1–35) days. There was no statistically significant difference among AIMS65, GBS and PRS in predicting mortality (AUROC 0.70 vs. 0.64 vs. 0.66) or rebleeding rates (AUROC 0.74 vs. 0.60 vs. 0.67). The GBS was superior in predicting the need for blood transfusion compared to AIMS65 score (AUROC 0.75 vs. 0.61, p?=?0.01) and PRS (AUROC 0.75 vs. 0.58, p?=?0.009).

Conclusions: The AIMS65, GBS and PRS scores are comparable but not useful for predicting outcome in patients with variceal UGIH because of poor discriminative ability. The GBS is superior in predicting the need for transfusion compared to AIMS65 score and PRS.     

Validation of prognostic scores for clinical outcomes in cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding

Background. The Rockall, Glasgow-Blatchford, and AIMS65 are useful and validated scoring systems for predicting the outcomes of patients with nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding. However, there are no validated evidence for using them to predict outcomes on variceal bleeding. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the prognostic accuracy of different nonvariceal bleeding scores with other liver-specific scoring systems in cirrhotic patients. Material and methods. A retrospective multicenter study that included 160 cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding. The AUROC’s to predict in-hospital mortality, and rebleeding, were analyzed for each scoring system.Results. Overall in-hospital mortality occurred in 13% and in-hospital rebleeding in 12% of patients. The systems with the best AUROC value for predicting mortality were MELD (0.828; 95% CI 0.748-0.909), and AIMS65 (0.817; 95% CI 0.724-0.909). The best score systems for predicting rebleeding were Glasgow-Blatchford (0.756; 95% CI 0.640-0.827), and Rockall (0.691; 95% CI 0.580-0.802).Conclusions. In addition to liver-specific scores, the AIMS65 score is accurate for predicting in-hospital mortality in cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding. Other scoring systems might be useful for predicting significant clinical outcomes in these patients.     

Effect of use of combination evidence-based medical therapy after acute coronary syndromes on long-term outcomes

Several medications have individually been shown to reduce mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), but data on long-term outcomes related to the use of combinations of these medications are limited. For 2,684 consecutive patients admitted with ACS from January 1999 and January 2007, a composite score was calculated correlating with the use upon discharge of indicated evidence-based medications (EBMs): aspirin, β blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, and lipid-lowering agents. Multivariate models were used to examine the impact of EBM score on 2-year events with adjustment for components of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score, thienopyridine use, and year of discharge. Women were older, had more co-morbidities, and were less likely to receive all 4 EBMs (53% vs 64%, p < 0.0001) than men. Patients who received all 4 indicated EBMs had a significant 2-year survival benefit compared to patients who received ≤1 EBM (odds ratio 0.25, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.41), which was observed when men and women were examined separately (for men, odds ratio 0.22, 95% confidence interval 0.11 to 0.44; for women, odds ratio 0.3, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.63). A modest benefit, in terms of cardiovascular disease events (myocardial infarction, rehospitalization, stroke, and death), was observed only for men who received all 4 EBMs. In conclusion, a combination of cardiac medications at the time of ACS discharge is strongly associated with 2-year survival in men and women, suggesting that discharge is an important time to prescribe secondary preventative medications.     

Prevalence of Septic Events, Type 1 Hepatorenal Syndrome, and Mortality in Severe Alcoholic Hepatitis and Utility of Discriminant Function and MELD Score in Predicting These Adverse Events

We sought to assess prevalence, and utility of discriminant function (DF) and MELD score in predicting septic events (SE), type 1 hepatorenal syndrome (HRS), and short-term mortality in severe alcoholic hepatitis (AH). Charts of patients with AH (group 1) and cirrhosis without AH (group 2) were retrospectively reviewed. Severe AH, discriminant function (DF) ≥ 32 was treated with pentoxifylline. One hundred ninety-five patients were enrolled in the study and divided into 2 groups: group 1, n=99, and group 2, n=96. Of those with AH, 82% had a DF ≥ 32 at presentation. Group 1 patients had a higher prevalence of SE (38% versus 25%, P=.04), type 1 HRS (30% versus 9%, P=.0003), and short-term mortality (28% versus 7%, P=.0001). In patients with AH, a MELD score ≥20 (but not a DF ≥ 32) at presentation was an independent predictor of a SE (odds ratio [OR] 2.8 [1.0–7.9], P=.04), HRS (OR 4.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0–16.6, P=0.05), and short-term mortality (OR 6.4, 95% CI 1.1–37.6, P=.03). Kaplan-Meier survival curves confirmed that that a MELD ≥ 20 but not a DF ≥ 32 was associated with a poorer survival (P = .005 and .5, respectively). In conclusion, patients with severe AH have higher prevalence of SE, HRS, and short-term mortality compared to those with cirrhosis without AH. A MELD score ≥20 at presentation is an independent predictor of these adverse events in patients with AH who have been treated with pentoxifylline.     

Is the clinical spectrum and prognosis of native valve infective endocarditis in non-addicts changing?

One hundred and ninety-four episodes of endocarditis on nativevalves in non-addict patients were diagnosed from 1975 to 1992and were divided into groups A (78 patients, 1975–1983)and B (116 patients 1984–1992). Both groups had the samegender distribution, similar valvular involvement and microbiologicalcharacteristics. In group B patients, median age was older (46vs 54 years, P=0.0002), the number of patients without previousheart disease was higher (46% vs 22%, P=0.02) and the mediantime of symptoms before diagnosis was shorter (30 vs 50 days,P=0.038). Both groups had similar incidence of heart failure(32% vs 36%), surgical treatment (30% vs 33%) and embolic episodes(26% vs 34%). Surgical mortality decreased from 43% to 18% (P=0.03).Overall mortality decreased non-significantly from 19% in groupA to 12% in group B. Predictors of death in group A were heartfailure (odds ratio 9.6, 95% confidence interval 3.36) and surgicaltreatment (odds ratio 5, 95% confidence interval 1–3–19).Predictors of death in group B were age (odds ratio 498, 95%confidence interval 1–4–19), female sex (odds ratio5.3, 95% confidence interval 1–3–20), staphylococcalinfection (odds ratio 49, 95% confidence interval 1–1–22)and heart failure (odds ratio 5.2, 95% confidence interval 1–3–20).Although in recent years infective endocarditis occurs in olderpatients and is more common in patients with previously unknownheart disease a substantial change in major clinical and prognosticvariables is not apparent in our population. Overall in-hospitalmortality has decreased from 19%> to 12% mainly due to bettersurgical results.