Back to Journals » Clinical and Experimental Gastroenterology » Volume 9

Comparison of Glasgow-Blatchford score and full Rockall score systems to predict clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Authors Mokhtare M, Bozorgi V, Agah S, Nikkhah M, Faghihi AH, Boghratian AH, Shalbaf N, Khanlari A, Seifmanesh H

Received 12 June 2016

Accepted for publication 2 September 2016

Published 31 October 2016 Volume 2016:9 Pages 337—343

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S114860

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Amy Norman

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Professor Andreas M Kaiser


Marjan Mokhtare, Vida Bozorgi, Shahram Agah, Mehdi Nikkhah, Amirhossein Faghihi, Amirhossein Boghratian, Neda Shalbaf, Abbas Khanlari, Hamidreza Seifmanesh

Colorectal Research Center, Rasoul Akram Hospital, Tehran, Iran

Background: Various risk scoring systems have been recently developed to predict clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The two commonly used scoring systems include full Rockall score (RS) and the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS). Bleeding scores were assessed in terms of prediction of clinical outcomes in patients with UGIB.
Patients and methods: Two hundred patients (age >18 years) with obvious symptoms of UGIB in the emergency department of Rasoul Akram Hospital were enrolled. Full RS and GBS were calculated. We followed the patients for records of rebleeding and 1-month mortality. A receiver operating characteristic curve by using areas under the curve (AUCs) was used to statistically identify the best cutoff point.
Results: Eighteen patients were excluded from the study due to failure to follow-up. Rebleeding and mortality rate were 9.34% (n=17) and 11.53% (n=21), respectively. Regarding 1-month mortality, full RS was better than GBS (AUC, 0.648 versus 0.582; P=0.021). GBS was more accurate in terms of detecting transfusion need (AUC, 0.757 versus 0.528; P=0.001), rebleeding rate (AUC, 0.722 versus 0.520; P=0.002), intensive care unit admission rate (AUC, 0.648 versus 0.582; P=0.021), and endoscopic intervention rate (AUC, 0.771 versus 0.650; P<0.001).
Conclusion: We found the full RS system is better for 1-month mortality prediction while GBS system is better for prediction of other outcomes.

Keywords:
full Rockall score, Glasgow-Blatchford score, gastrointestinal bleeding, mortality, prognosis

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]