Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage.
Journal: 1996/August - Gut
ISSN: 0017-5749
PUBMED: 8675081
Abstract:
The aim of this study was to establish the relative importance of risk factors for mortality after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and to formulate a simple numerical scoring system that categorizes patients by risk. A prospective, unselected, multicentre, population based study was undertaken using standardised questionnaires in two phases one year apart. A total of 4185 cases of acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage over the age of 16 identified over a four month period in 1993 and 1625 cases identified subsequently over a three month period in 1994 were included in the study. It was found that age, shock, comorbidity, diagnosis, major stigmata of recent haemorrhage, and rebleeding are all independent predictors of mortality when assessed using multiple logistic regression. A numerical score using these parameters has been developed that closely follows the predictions generated by logistical regression equations. Haemoglobin, sex, presentation (other than shock), and drug therapy (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and anticoagulants) are not represented in the final model. When tested for general applicability in a second population, the scoring system was found to reproducibly predict mortality in each risk category. In conclusion, a simple numerical score can be used to categorize patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage by risk of death. This score can be used to determine case mix when comparing outcomes in audit and research and to calculate risk standardised mortality. In addition, this risk score can identify 15% of all cases with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage at the time of presentation and 26% of cases after endoscopy who are at low risk of rebleeding and negligible risk of death and who might therefore be considered for early discharge or outpatient treatment with consequent resource savings.
Relations:
Content
Citations
(228)
References
(16)
Conditions
(3)
Organisms
(1)
Affiliates
(2)
Similar articles
Articles by the same authors
Discussion board
Gut 38(3): 316-321

Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to establish the relative importance of risk factors for mortality after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and to formulate a simple numerical scoring system that categorizes patients by risk. A prospective, unselected, multicentre, population based study was undertaken using standardised questionnaires in two phases one year apart. A total of 4185 cases of acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage over the age of 16 identified over a four month period in 1993 and 1625 cases identified subsequently over a three month period in 1994 were included in the study. It was found that age, shock, comorbidity, diagnosis, major stigmata of recent haemorrhage, and rebleeding are all independent predictors of mortality when assessed using multiple logistic regression. A numerical score using these parameters has been developed that closely follows the predictions generated by logistical regression equations. Haemoglobin, sex, presentation (other than shock), and drug therapy (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and anticoagulants) are not represented in the final model. When tested for general applicability in a second population, the scoring system was found to reproducibly predict mortality in each risk category. In conclusion, a simple numerical score can be used to categorize patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage by risk of death. This score can be used to determine case mix when comparing outcomes in audit and research and to calculate risk standardised mortality. In addition, this risk score can identify 15% of all cases with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage at the time of presentation and 26% of cases after endoscopy who are at low risk of rebleeding and negligible risk of death and who might therefore be considered for early discharge or outpatient treatment with consequent resource savings.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.1M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Rockall TA, Logan RF, Devlin HB, Northfield TC. Incidence of and mortality from acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage in the United Kingdom. Steering Committee and members of the National Audit of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Haemorrhage. BMJ. 1995 Jul 22;311(6999):222–226.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Swain CP, Kirkham JS, Salmon PR, Bown SG, Northfield TC. Controlled trial of Nd-YAG laser photocoagulation in bleeding peptic ulcers. Lancet. 1986 May 17;1(8490):1113–1117. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Storey DW, Bown SG, Swain CP, Salmon PR, Kirkham JS, Northfield TC. Endoscopic prediction of recurrent bleeding in peptic ulcers. N Engl J Med. 1981 Oct 15;305(16):915–916. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Katschinski BD, Logan RF, Davies J, Langman MJ. Audit of mortality in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Postgrad Med J. 1989 Dec;65(770):913–917.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Katschinski B, Logan R, Davies J, Faulkner G, Pearson J, Langman M. Prognostic factors in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Dig Dis Sci. 1994 Apr;39(4):706–712. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Jones PF, Johnston SJ, McEwan AB, Kyle J, Needham CD. Further haemorrhage after admission to hospital for gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Br Med J. 1973 Sep 29;3(5882):660–664.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hunt PS, Hansky J, Korman MG. Mortality in patients with haematemesis and melaena: a prospective study. Br Med J. 1979 May 12;1(6173):1238–1240.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Griffiths WJ, Neumann DA, Welsh JD. The visible vessel as an indicator of uncontrolled or recurrent gastrointestinal hemorrhage. N Engl J Med. 1979 Jun 21;300(25):1411–1413. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wara P, Berg V, Amdrup E. Factors influencing mortality in patients with bleeding ulcer. Review of 7 years' experience preceding therapeutic endoscopy. Acta Chir Scand. 1983;149(8):775–785. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • MacLeod IA, Mills PR. Factors identifying the probability of further haemorrhage after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Br J Surg. 1982 May;69(5):256–258. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bornman PC, Theodorou NA, Shuttleworth RD, Essel HP, Marks IN. Importance of hypovolaemic shock and endoscopic signs in predicting recurrent haemorrhage from peptic ulceration: a prospective evaluation. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985 Jul 27;291(6490):245–247.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Branicki FJ, Coleman SY, Fok PJ, Pritchett CJ, Fan ST, Lai EC, Mok FP, Cheung WL, Lau PW, Tuen HH, et al. Bleeding peptic ulcer: a prospective evaluation of risk factors for rebleeding and mortality. World J Surg. 1990 Mar-Apr;14(2):262–270. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Clason AE, Macleod DA, Elton RA. Clinical factors in the prediction of further haemorrhage or mortality in acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Br J Surg. 1986 Dec;73(12):985–987. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hall GH, Round AP. Logistic regression--explanation and use. J R Coll Physicians Lond. 1994 May-Jun;28(3):242–246.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Steele RJ. Endoscopic haemostasis for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Br J Surg. 1989 Mar;76(3):219–225. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sacks HS, Chalmers TC, Blum AL, Berrier J, Pagano D. Endoscopic hemostasis. An effective therapy for bleeding peptic ulcers. JAMA. 1990 Jul 25;264(4):494–499. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Surgical Epidemiology and Audit Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London.
Surgical Epidemiology and Audit Unit, Royal College of Surgeons of England, London.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to establish the relative importance of risk factors for mortality after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and to formulate a simple numerical scoring system that categorizes patients by risk. A prospective, unselected, multicentre, population based study was undertaken using standardised questionnaires in two phases one year apart. A total of 4185 cases of acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage over the age of 16 identified over a four month period in 1993 and 1625 cases identified subsequently over a three month period in 1994 were included in the study. It was found that age, shock, comorbidity, diagnosis, major stigmata of recent haemorrhage, and rebleeding are all independent predictors of mortality when assessed using multiple logistic regression. A numerical score using these parameters has been developed that closely follows the predictions generated by logistical regression equations. Haemoglobin, sex, presentation (other than shock), and drug therapy (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and anticoagulants) are not represented in the final model. When tested for general applicability in a second population, the scoring system was found to reproducibly predict mortality in each risk category. In conclusion, a simple numerical score can be used to categorize patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage by risk of death. This score can be used to determine case mix when comparing outcomes in audit and research and to calculate risk standardised mortality. In addition, this risk score can identify 15% of all cases with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage at the time of presentation and 26% of cases after endoscopy who are at low risk of rebleeding and negligible risk of death and who might therefore be considered for early discharge or outpatient treatment with consequent resource savings.
Collaboration tool especially designed for Life Science professionals.Drag-and-drop any entity to your messages.