Motola-Kuba M, Escobedo-Arzate A, Tellez-Avila F, Altamirano J, Aguilar-Olivos N, González-Angulo A, Zamarripa-Dorsey UM, Chávez-Tapia NC

Language: English
References: 13
Page: 895-901
PDF size: 150.73 Kb.

ABSTRACT

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.

REFERENCES

1. Amitrano L, Guardascione MA, Manguso F, Bennato R, Bove A, DeNucci C, Lombardi G, Martino R, et al. The effectiveness of current acute variceal bleed treatments in unselected cirrhotic patients: refining short-term prognosis and risk factors. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 1872-8.

2. Augustin S, Muntaner L, Altamirano JT, González A, Saperas E, Dot J, Abu-Suboh M, Armengol JR, et al. Predicting early mortality after acute variceal hemorrhage based on classification and regression tree analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 1347-54.

3. Reverter E, Tandon P, Augustin S, Turon F, Casu S, Bastiampillai R, Keough A, Llop E, et al. A MELD-based model to determine risk of mortality among patients with acute variceal bleeding. Gastroenterology 2014; 146: 412-19 e413.

4. de Groot NL, Bosman JH, Siersema PD, van Oijen MG. Prediction scores in gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and quantitative appraisal. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 731-9.

5. de Franchis R. Revising consensus in portal hypertension: report of the Baveno V consensus workshop on methodology of diagnosis and therapy in portal hypertension. J Hepatol 2010; 53: 762-8.

6. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL. Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988; 44: 837-45.

7. Reed EA, Dalton H, Blatchford O, Ashley D, Mowat C, Gaya DR, Cahill A, Warshow U, et al. Is the Glasgow Blatchford score useful in the risk assessment of patients presenting with variceal haemorrhage? Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 26: 432-7.

8. Lahiff C, Shields W, Cretu I, Mahmud N, McKiernan S, Norris S, Silke B, Reynolds JV, et al. Upper gastrointestinal bleeding: predictors of risk in a mixed patient group including variceal and nonvariceal haemorrhage. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 24: 149-54.

9. Flores-Rendon AR, Gonzalez-Gonzalez JA, Garcia-Compean D, Maldonado-Garza HJ, Garza-Galindo AA. Model for end stage of liver disease (MELD) is better than the Child-Pugh score for predicting in-hospital mortality related to esophageal variceal bleeding. Ann Hepatol 2008; 7: 230-4.

10. Al-Freah MA, Gera A, Martini S, McPhail MJ, Devlin J, Harrison PM, Shawcross D, Abeles RD, et al. Comparison of scoring systems and outcome of patients admitted to a liver intensive care unit of a tertiary referral centre with severe variceal bleeding. Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics 2014; 39: 1286-300.

11. Abraldes JG, Tandon P. Soft and hard endpoints in acute variceal bleeding. Hepatology 2015; 61: 762-5.

12. Ahn SY, Park SY, Tak WY, Lee YR, Kang EJ, Park JG, Lee WK, Lee K, et al. Prospective validation of Baveno V definitions and criteria for failure to control bleeding in portal hypertension. Hepatology 2015; 61: 1033-40.

13. Thabut D, Rudler M, Dib N, Carbonell N, Mathurin P, Saliba F, Mallet A, et al. Multicenter prospective validation of the Baveno IV and Baveno II/III criteria in cirrhosis patients with variceal bleeding. Hepatology 2015; 61: 1024-32.