EC Gastroenterology and Digestive System

Background: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency, it’s a life-threatening condition that requires rapid decision-making. Many scoring systems have been developed to predict certain adverse clinical events. In this way, we aimed to compare the performance of the pre-endoscopic GBS, pRS and qSOFA scores in predicting the severity of upper gastrointestinal bleeding according to the following clinical endpoints: admission to an Intensive Care Unit, need for therapeutic intervention, and re-bleeding.

Methods: This was a descriptive and analytical retrospective stud of 102 cases of upper gastrointestinal bleeding admitted to Cheikh Khalifa International University Hospital between October 2021 to October 2022. The accuracy of each risk score to predict clinical endpoints were evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC).

Results: In comparison with the pRS and the qSOFA, The GBS score was the most accurate predictor of ICU admission, blood transfusion, and rebleeding, with AUROCs of 0.914, 0.914, and 0.727, respectively. While it had a similar ability to predict the need for therapeutic endoscopy to the Rockall score (AUROC GBS 0.747; AUROC pRS 0.721). No score was useful for predicting the need for surgical intervention. the SOFA score was the lowest score for the prediction of all outcomes.

Conclusion: We can support the use of GBS and pRS on a practical basis at the end of this study, but it is still too early to propose qSOFA.

Keywords: Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding; Scoring System; p-Rockal Scale; Glasgow-Blatchford Scale; Q-Sofa Score; Outcomes

1. Laursen Stig Borbjerg., et al. “ABC score: a new risk score that accurately predicts mortality in acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: an international multicentre study”. Gut 4 (2021): 707-716.
2. Abougergi Marwan S., et al. “The in-hospital mortality rate for upper GI hemorrhage has decreased over 2 decades in the United States: a nationwide analysis”. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 4 (2015): 882-888.
3. Cúrdia Gonçalves Tiago., et al. “Optimizing the Risk Assessment in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: CompariCúrdia Gonçalves, Tiago et al. “Optimizing the Risk Assessment in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Comparison of 5 Scores Predicting 7 Outcomes”. GE Portuguese Journal of Gastroenterology 6 (2018): 299-307.
4. Tham Jennifer and Adrian Stanley. “Clinical utility of pre-endoscopy risk scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding”. Expert Review of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 12 (2019): 1161-1167.
5. Barkun Alan N., et al. “Management of Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Guideline Recommendations from the International Consensus Group”. Annals of Internal Medicine 11 (2019): 805-822.
6. Gralnek Ian M., et al. “Diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline”. Endoscopy 10 (2015): a1-46.
7. Rockall TA., et al. “Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage”. Gut3 (1996): 316-321.
8. Blatchford O., et al. “A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage”. Lancet 9238 (2000): 1318-1321.
9. Seymour Christopher W., et al. “Assessment of Clinical Criteria for Sepsis: For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)”. The Journal of the American Medical Association 8 (2016): 762-774.
10. Singer Mervyn., et al. “The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3)”. The Journal of the American Medical Association 8 (2016): 801-810.
11. Alzoubaidi Durayd., et al. “Management of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: where are we in 2018?”. Frontline Gastroenterology 1 (2019): 35-42.
12. Monteiro Sara., et al. “Upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk scores: Who, when and why?”. World Journal of Gastrointestinal Pathophysiology 1 (2016): 86-96.
13. Singer Adam J., et al. “Quick SOFA Scores Predict Mortality in Adult Emergency Department Patients with and Without Suspected Infection”. Annals of Emergency Medicine 4 (2017): 475-479.
14. Jawa Randeep S., et al. “Risk assessment of the blunt trauma victim: The role of the quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment Score (qSOFA)”. American Journal of Surgery 3 (2017): 397-401.
15. Bagin Vladimir., et al. “Quick SOFA vs Rockall preendoscopy scores for risk assessment in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective cohort study”. International Journal of Emergency Medicine 1 (2022): 10-25.
16. Aquarius Michel., et al. “Prospective multicenter validation of the Glasgow Blatchford bleeding score in the management of patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage presenting at an emergency department”. European Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 9 (2015): 1011-1016.
17. Li Yajie., et al. “Comparisons of six endoscopy independent scoring systems for the prediction of clinical outcomes for elderly and younger patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding”. BMC Gastroenterology 1 (2022): 187.
18. Renukaprasad Abhijnya K., et al. “A Comparative Analysis of Risk Scoring Systems in Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleed”. Cureus 7 (2022): e26669.
19. Taslidere Bahadır., et al. “Comparison of the quick SOFA score with Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scores in predicting severity in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding”. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine 45 (2021): 29-36.