Both Full Glasgow-Blatchford Score and Modified Glasgow-Blatchford Score Predict the Need for Intervention and Mortality in Patients with Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Asad, Ur-Rahman; Guan, Jian; Khalid, Sameen; Munaf, Alvina; Sharbatji, Mohammad; Idrisov, Evgeny; He, Xiaoping; Machavarapu, Archana; Abusaada, Khalid

doi:10.1007/s10620-018-5203-4

Cited by 18 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[23] In addition, the GBS does not have the predictive value for endoscopic intervention. [24] A retrospective study [25] has shown that the mortality rates of high-risk patients with GBS >12 points could be reduced if these patients underwent endoscopic examination within 13 hours. Therefore, endoscopic examination should be performed as soon as possible in patients with a GBS >12 points.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall Scores for prediction of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding outcomes in Chinese patients

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall Scores for prediction of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding outcomes in Chinese patients

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scores that do not require data on endoscopic findings specific to UGIB (pre-endoscopic scores) could be applied to not only UGIB but also LGIB; thus, they can be used to assess the risk of all GIB patients 7 . Indeed, Although the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), clinical Rockall score (cRS), and AIMS65 scores, all of which are pre-endoscopic scores 3 – 5 , were initially designed for UGIB, some reports have indicated that these scores are also useful for the risk stratification of LGIB 10 – 13 . Recently, a new pre-endoscopic score, the ABC score was developed for predicting mortality in patients with overall GIB early after presentation, and showed high accuracy for both UGIB and LGIB 9 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Usefulness of the CHAMPS score for risk stratification in lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Tajika

Matsuhashi

Shimodaira

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have recently developed a simple prediction score, the CHAMPS score, to predict in-hospital mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In this study, the primary outcome of this study was the usefulness of the CHAMPS score for predicting in-hospital mortality with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Consecutive adult patients who were hospitalized with LGIB at two tertiary academic medical centers from 2015 to 2020 were retrospectively enrolled. The performance for predicting outcomes with CHAMPS score was assessed by a receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and compared with four existing scores. In 387 patients enrolled in this study, 39 (10.1%) of whom died during the hospitalization. The CHAMPS score showed good performance in predicting in-hospital mortality in LGIB patients with an AUC (95% confidence interval) of 0.80 (0.73–0.87), which was significantly higher in comparison to the existing scores. The risk of in-hospital mortality as predicted by the CHAMPS score was shown: low risk (score ≤ 1), 1.8%; intermediate risk (score 2 or 3), 15.8%; and high risk (score ≥ 4), 37.1%. The CHAMPS score is useful for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with LGIB.

show abstract

“…The GBS is also an extensively investigated factor in the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding. Although the GBS was actually developed for upper gastrointestinal bleeding, it reduced hospital-based interventions and mortality rates in LGIB as well[ 34 , 35 ]. Besides, we established GBS as a positive predictor in the demonstration of bleeding on angiography.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endoscopic hemostasis makes the difference: Angiographic treatment in patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Werner¹,

Baar

Kießlich

et al. 2021

WJGE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND The large majority of gastrointestinal bleedings subside on their own or after endoscopic treatment. However, a small number of these may pose a challenge in terms of therapy because the patients develop hemodynamic instability, and endoscopy does not achieve adequate hemostasis. Interventional radiology supplemented with catheter angiography (CA) and transarterial embolization have gained importance in recent times. AIM To evaluate clinical predictors for angiography in patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). METHODS We compared two groups of patients in a retrospective analysis. One group had been treated for more than 10 years with CA for LGIB ( n = 41). The control group had undergone non-endoscopic or endoscopic treatment for two years and been registered in a bleeding registry ( n = 92). The differences between the two groups were analyzed using decision trees with the goal of defining clear rules for optimal treatment. RESULTS Patients in the CA group had a higher shock index, a higher Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (GBS), lower serum hemoglobin levels, and more rarely achieved hemostasis in primary endoscopy. These patients needed more transfusions, had longer hospital stays, and had to undergo subsequent surgery more frequently ( P < 0.001). CONCLUSION Endoscopic hemostasis proved to be the crucial difference between the two patient groups. Primary endoscopic hemostasis, along with GBS and the number of transfusions, would permit a stratification of risks. After prospective confirmation of the present findings, the use of decision trees would permit the identification of patients at risk for subsequent diagnosis and treatment based on interventional radiology.

show abstract

Both Full Glasgow-Blatchford Score and Modified Glasgow-Blatchford Score Predict the Need for Intervention and Mortality in Patients with Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Abstract: In patients with lower GI bleeding, both full GBS and modified GBS can predict the need for hospital-based interventions and mortality.

Cited by 18 publications

References 26 publications

Comparison of the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall Scores for prediction of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding outcomes in Chinese patients

Comparison of the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall Scores for prediction of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding outcomes in Chinese patients

Usefulness of the CHAMPS score for risk stratification in lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Endoscopic hemostasis makes the difference: Angiographic treatment in patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About