Abstract:Background and Aims: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the first line therapy in the investigation of and treatment for UGIH. The ability to predict the need for therapeutic endoscopy (TE) may streamline hospital resource utilization, save costs and select low risk patients for outpatient management. There is little data and no risk scores available to date to predict this outcome. This study aims to derive and validate a risk score for predicting the need for TE in non-cirrhotic patients with UGIH. Methods: We prospectively collected clinical and laboratory variables on 1013 non-cirrhotic patients, who presented with hematemesis, melena, coffee ground vomiting or hematochezia between January 2006 and March 2007. Univariate analyses were performed on the variables and a risk score was derived using logistic regression. This risk score was then prospectively validated in a separate cohort of non-cirrhotic patients with UGIH. We compared the accuracy of this score with the Blatchford score in the validation cohort using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results Of the 1013 patients, 252 (24.9%) required TE for haemostasis according to international consensus guidelines, of which 81% were for peptic ulcers. The presence of shock (SBP<100 mmHg), tachycardia (HR>100 bpm), low hemoglobin (<8 g/dL) and high urea were independently associated with the need for TE (all p<0.001). Hematemesis was a stronger predictor for TE when compared to melaena. The use of H2-receptor blockers and proton pump inhibitors was protective against this need (p=0.02). Age, co-morbidities and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and aspirin played no role. The area under a ROC curve for the new risk score in the validation cohort of 337 non-cirrhotic patients was 0.71 (95% CI 0.66-0.77). A threshold of 3 or above predicted the need for TE with 100% sensitivity and 17% specificity, and identified 12.5% of patients as low risk. The area under a ROC curve for the Blatchford score applied to the same cohort was 0.66 (95% CI 0.60-0.73); this identified 2.7% of patients as low risk. There was a significant difference between the 2 areas (p=0.04). Conclusion Hemodynamics, urea and hemoglobin continue to be important predictors of the need for TE; acid suppressive agents play a protective role. Age, co-morbidities and the use of NSAIDs and aspirin do not appear to influence this risk. Risk scores predicting the need for TE perform better at identifying low risk patients. Compared to the Blatchford score, our new risk score identifies more low risk patients who may be suitable for outpatient management.

Prediction of the Need for Endoscopic Hemostasis in Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage (ugih): A Risk Score Derivation and Validation Study

Comparing the Blatchford and pre-endoscopic Rockall score in predicting the need for endoscopic therapy in patients with upper GI hemorrhage

Prediction of the need for emergency endoscopic treatment for upper gastrointestinal bleeding and new score model: a retrospective study

Analysis of Risk Factors and Development of Scoring System to Predict Severity of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Children

Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study

Risk factors and predictive nomograms for bedside emergency endoscopic treatment following endotracheal intubation in cirrhotic patients with esophagogastric variceal bleeding

Identification of risk factors for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in intensive care unit patients (GIBICU study)

Predicting the need for urgent endoscopic intervention in lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective review

MH-STRALP: A scoring system for prognostication in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Rules for Predicting Safe Early Hospital Discharge for Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Phase I (derivation Phase) Study

Development and validation of machine learning models to predict the need for haemostatic therapy in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

S1005 A Score Based on Clinical Factors Predicts Endoscopically Significant Lesions in Critically Ill Patients With Upper GI Bleeding

Comparison of Risk Scores for Predicting Adverse Outcomes in Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Endoscopist’s Judgment Is as Useful as Risk Scores for Predicting Outcome in Peptic Ulcer Bleeding: A Multicenter Study

ABC score: a new risk score that accurately predicts mortality in acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: an international multicentre study

Scoring Systems Used to Predict Mortality in Patients with Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in the ED

Limits of pre-endoscopic scoring systems in geriatric patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Early Identification of High-Risk Factors for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Predictors of endoscopic intervention in upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients hospitalized for another illness: a multi-center retrospective study

A novel scoring system to predict therapeutic intervention for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Which scoring system should be used for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding? Old or new?