Epidemiology and risk factors of adverse outcome in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Tarasov, E E; Bagin, V. A.; Nishnevich, E V; Astafyeva, M.; Руднов, В. А.; Prudkov, M. I.

doi:10.17116/hirurgia201905131

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At present, IIc (n = 36) 0 (0.00) -III (n = 659) 0 (0.00) -Monotherapy: epinephrine injection, argon plasma coagulation, or hemoclips; combination therapy: combining epinephrine injection with argon plasma coagulation and/or hemoclips. the analysis of risk factors on adverse outcomes of ANVUGIB patients [24] and the comparison of the GBS with other risk scores (e.g., Rockall score, AIMS65, etc.) in predicting the prognosis of ANVUGIB patients are still hot topics, and some other researchers have reported the application value of the GBS and Forrest classification in Mallory-Weiss syndrome [25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score, shock index, and Forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding

Hong¹,

Pan²,

Liu³

et al. 2020

Turk J Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/aim: To investigate the correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score, shock index, and Forrest classification in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). Materials and methods:A total of 955 patients with PUB were assessed using the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index, as well as the Forrest classification based on their gastroscopy results. The correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index was determined using scatter plot analysis, and the correlation between the Glasgow-Blatchford score or shock index and Forrest classification was determined using Spearman's analysis.Results: Both the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index showed the highest values in patients with Forrest class IIa. The Glasgow-Blatchford score was significantly higher than patients with Forrest class Ib/IIc/III (P < 0.05), and the shock index was significantly higher than patients with Forrest class Ib/IIb/III (P < 0.05). A positive correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index, at r = 0.427 (P < 0.001). A negative correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and Forrest classification, at r = -0.111 (P < 0.01), and between the shock index and Forrest classification, at r = -0.138 (P < 0.01). Conclusion:A moderate correlation was observed between the Glasgow-Blatchford score and shock index in patients with PUB, and the correlation between the Forrest classification and Glasgow-Blatchford score or shock index was relatively low.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%