Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational Study

Introduction. The majority of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) are admitted for urgent endoscopy as it can be difficult to determine who can be safely managed as an outpatient. Our objective was to compare four clinical prediction scoring systems: Glasgow Blatchford Score (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hassan K. Dakik, F. Douglas Srygley, Shih-Ting Chiu, Shein-Chung Chow, Deborah A. Fisher
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2017-01-01
Series:Gastroenterology Research and Practice
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/3171697
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849404531045040128
author Hassan K. Dakik
F. Douglas Srygley
Shih-Ting Chiu
Shein-Chung Chow
Deborah A. Fisher
author_facet Hassan K. Dakik
F. Douglas Srygley
Shih-Ting Chiu
Shein-Chung Chow
Deborah A. Fisher
author_sort Hassan K. Dakik
collection DOAJ
description Introduction. The majority of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) are admitted for urgent endoscopy as it can be difficult to determine who can be safely managed as an outpatient. Our objective was to compare four clinical prediction scoring systems: Glasgow Blatchford Score (GBS) and Clinical Rockall, Adamopoulos, and Tammaro scores in a sample of patients presenting to the emergency department of a large US academic center. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients during 2008–2010. Our outcome was significant UGIB defined as high-risk stigmata on endoscopy, or receipt of blood transfusion or surgery, or death. Results. A total of 393 patients met inclusion criteria. The GBS was the most sensitive for detecting significant UGIB at 98.30% and had the highest negative predictive value (90.00%). Adding nasogastric lavage data to the GBS increased the sensitivity to 99.57%. Conclusions. Of all four scoring systems compared, the GBS demonstrated the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value for identifying a patient with a significant UGIB. Therefore, patients with a 0 score can be safely managed as an outpatient. Our results also suggest that performing a nasogastric lavage adds little to the diagnosis UGIB.
format Article
id doaj-art-9b2d0ce2b7dd49d4bad463ed862c6a9b
institution Kabale University
issn 1687-6121
1687-630X
language English
publishDate 2017-01-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Gastroenterology Research and Practice
spelling doaj-art-9b2d0ce2b7dd49d4bad463ed862c6a9b2025-08-20T03:36:58ZengWileyGastroenterology Research and Practice1687-61211687-630X2017-01-01201710.1155/2017/31716973171697Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational StudyHassan K. Dakik0F. Douglas Srygley1Shih-Ting Chiu2Shein-Chung Chow3Deborah A. Fisher4Duke Gastroenterology Division, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, USAAustin Gastroenterology, Austin, TX, USADuke Biostatistics Division, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, USADuke Biostatistics Division, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, USADuke Gastroenterology Division, Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC, USAIntroduction. The majority of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) are admitted for urgent endoscopy as it can be difficult to determine who can be safely managed as an outpatient. Our objective was to compare four clinical prediction scoring systems: Glasgow Blatchford Score (GBS) and Clinical Rockall, Adamopoulos, and Tammaro scores in a sample of patients presenting to the emergency department of a large US academic center. Methods. We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients during 2008–2010. Our outcome was significant UGIB defined as high-risk stigmata on endoscopy, or receipt of blood transfusion or surgery, or death. Results. A total of 393 patients met inclusion criteria. The GBS was the most sensitive for detecting significant UGIB at 98.30% and had the highest negative predictive value (90.00%). Adding nasogastric lavage data to the GBS increased the sensitivity to 99.57%. Conclusions. Of all four scoring systems compared, the GBS demonstrated the highest sensitivity and negative predictive value for identifying a patient with a significant UGIB. Therefore, patients with a 0 score can be safely managed as an outpatient. Our results also suggest that performing a nasogastric lavage adds little to the diagnosis UGIB.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/3171697
spellingShingle Hassan K. Dakik
F. Douglas Srygley
Shih-Ting Chiu
Shein-Chung Chow
Deborah A. Fisher
Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational Study
Gastroenterology Research and Practice
title Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational Study
title_full Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational Study
title_fullStr Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational Study
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational Study
title_short Clinical Performance of Prediction Rules and Nasogastric Lavage for the Evaluation of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Observational Study
title_sort clinical performance of prediction rules and nasogastric lavage for the evaluation of upper gastrointestinal bleeding a retrospective observational study
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/3171697
work_keys_str_mv AT hassankdakik clinicalperformanceofpredictionrulesandnasogastriclavagefortheevaluationofuppergastrointestinalbleedingaretrospectiveobservationalstudy
AT fdouglassrygley clinicalperformanceofpredictionrulesandnasogastriclavagefortheevaluationofuppergastrointestinalbleedingaretrospectiveobservationalstudy
AT shihtingchiu clinicalperformanceofpredictionrulesandnasogastriclavagefortheevaluationofuppergastrointestinalbleedingaretrospectiveobservationalstudy
AT sheinchungchow clinicalperformanceofpredictionrulesandnasogastriclavagefortheevaluationofuppergastrointestinalbleedingaretrospectiveobservationalstudy
AT deborahafisher clinicalperformanceofpredictionrulesandnasogastriclavagefortheevaluationofuppergastrointestinalbleedingaretrospectiveobservationalstudy