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.

Clinical research of risk assessment of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Objective To investigate the accuracy of prognosis risk assessment and clinical applicability of Rockall (RS) and Blatchford scoring system (BRS) for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB). Methods From January 2009 to December 2009, the clinical date 195 ANVUGIB patients who met the standards with complete information and treated in The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University were recorded. Each patient's scores of RS and BRS were calculated for risk stratification. Patients were followed up for 30 days after discharged.Death or the prognosis of disease in 30 days after discharged was considered as clinical study endpoints.Checked prognostic capacity of these two scoring system. Results In the 195 patients, there were 150 years, mean age was 53.97±18.34 years. 90 patients' age was over sixty (elderly group), 105 less than sixty (non-elderly group). 182 patients survived (93.3%), while 13 dead (6.7%). In survival patients, 11were re-bleeding (5.6 %). Mortality ( 12.2 %, 11/90), the percentage of patients with comorbidities (43.3%, 39/90) and taking aspirin (24. 4%, 22/90) were higher in elderly patients than non-elderly patients (1.9%, 2/105; 16.2%, 17/105; 11.4%, 12/105 respectively)(P＜0.05).The AUC of RS in predicting risk of death was 0.742 (P=0.004) and re-bleeding was 0.469 (P=0.101). For BRS score system, the AUC of predicting risk of death was 0. 493 (P= 0. 067)and rebleeding was 0.341(P=0.092). The RS score was positively correlated with length of hospital stay,however there was no statistically significant between BRS score and length of hospital stay.Conclusion RS score system was good at predicting the risk of death, and the score was positively correlated with length of hospital stay. While it was poor in predicting the risk of re-bleeding. BRS performed poorly in predicting the risk of both death and re-bleeding, so it was not suitable for predicting the risk of hospitalized patients.