Original articleClinical endoscopyThe AIMS65 score compared with the Glasgow-Blatchford score in predicting outcomes in upper GI bleeding
Section snippets
Database and patient selection
The Research Patient Data Registry at Brigham and Women's Hospital was used to identify patients who presented to the emergency department with UGIB between 2004 and 2009. The Research Patient Data Registry is a centralized clinical data registry that gathers clinical and laboratory data on each patient admitted to the Partners Healthcare System, which includes Brigham and Women's Hospital. The initial query was performed by using any ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth
Patient characteristics
There were 5252 patients with any ICD-9-CM code indicating a diagnosis of UGIB in the Partners network, of whom 325 patients were treated at our institution and had UGIB as the main diagnosis (retrospectively determined at the end of the admission). Complete records were available for 278 of the 325 patients. These patients comprised the study cohort. Table 2 shows the patient characteristics. Fifty-four percent of the patients were male; 10 patients had UGIB as inpatients. The median age was
Discussion
This study confirms that the AIMS65 score accurately predicts inpatient mortality in patients with UGIB. In addition, the AIMS65 score was superior to the GBRS for predicting inpatient and in and out of ICU mortality, whereas the GBRS is superior to the AIMS65 score for predicting PRBC transfusion. The 2 scores had similar predictive ability when a composite clinical endpoint of inpatient mortality, rebleeding, and endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention was considered as well as
Conclusions
In this study, we validate the AIMS65 score as a predictor of inpatient mortality in a different patient population from that used in the original derivation study, with comparable results. We have also demonstrated that the AIMS65 score is superior to the GBRS in predicting inpatient mortality, whereas the GBRS is superior to the AIMS65 score in predicting PRBC transfusion. In addition, we show that both scores are equivalent in predicting several clinically useful outcomes including hospital
References (20)
- et al.
Acute upper GI bleeding: did anything change? Time trend analysis of incidence and outcome of acute upper GI bleeding between 1993/1994 and 2000
Am J Gastroenterol
(2003) - et al.
Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage clinical guideline: determining the optimal hospital length of stay
Am J Med
(1996) - et al.
A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage
Lancet
(2000) - et al.
Comparing the Blatchford and pre-endoscopic Rockall score in predicting the need for endoscopic therapy in patients with upper GI hemorrhage
Gastrointest Endosc
(2010) - et al.
Outpatient management of patients with low-risk upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage: multicentre validation and prospective evaluation
Lancet
(2009) - et al.
Risk scoring systems to predict need for clinical intervention for patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding
Am J Emerg Med
(2007) - et al.
A simple risk score accurately predicts in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and cost in acute upper GI bleeding
Gastrointest Endosc
(2011) - et al.
Geographic variation of spirometry use in newly diagnosed COPD
Chest
(2008) Update on upper gastrointestinal bleedingBasing treatment decisions on patients' risk level
Postgrad Med
(1998)- et al.
International consensus recommendations on the management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Ann Intern Med
(2010)
Cited by (105)
Upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage patients' survival: A causal inference and prediction study
2024, European Journal of Clinical InvestigationInferior vena cava collapsibility index and stroke volume as predictors of blood transfusion in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department
2024, Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology (Australia)Retrospective Study: Comparison of AIMS65, Rockall and Glasgow Blatch-ford Scores for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
2023, Acta Gastroenterologica LatinoamericanaStrengths and limitations of risk stratification tools for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a narrative review
2023, Expert Review of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
DISCLOSURE: The authors disclosed no financial relationships relevant to this publication.
If you would like to chat with an author of this article, you may contact Dr Saltzman at [email protected].
- ⁎
Drs Hyett and Abougergi contributed equally to this article.