scholarly journals Modification of Glasgow-Blatchford scoring with lactate in predicting the mortality of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in emergency department

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-38
Author(s):  
Zeynep Konyar ◽  
Ozlem Guneysel ◽  
Fatma Sari Dogan ◽  
Eren Gokdag
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Erythrocyte Suspension ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Lactate Levels ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal

Background: Gastrointestinal bleeding is a commonly seen multidisciplinary clinical condition in emergency departments which has high treatment cost and mortality in company with hospital admission. Risk evaluation before endoscopy is based on clinical and laboratory findings at patient’s emergency visit. Objective: The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of “Glasgow-Blatchford scale + lactate levels” to predict the mortality of patients detected with gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department. Methods: A total of 107 patients with preliminary diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal bleeding included in the study after approval of the ethics committee were prospectively evaluated. Glasgow-Blatchford scale scores were calculated and venous blood lactate levels were assessed. Need for blood transfusion in the follow-up, the amount of transfusion, and mortality in the next 6 months were evaluated. Results: A statistically significant difference was found in mortality rates between the lactate and Glasgow-Blatchford scale cohorts in our study (p = 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively). The mortality rate was significantly higher in the lactate(+) GBS(+) cases compared to the lactate(–) GBS(+), lactate(+) GBS(–), and lactate(–) GBS(–) cases compared to the bilateral comparisons (p = 0.004, p = 0.001, p = 0.001, and p < 0.01, respectively). There was a statistically significant relationship between the rate of erythrocyte suspension replacement in the cases according to Glasgow-Blatchford scale levels (p = 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively). The incidence of erythrocyte suspension replacement was 7.393 times greater in patients with Glasgow-Blatchford scale score of 12 and above. Conclusion: Glasgow-Blatchford scale is highly sensitive to the determination of mortality risk and the need for blood transfusion in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Glasgow-Blatchford scale with lactate evaluation is more sensitive and more significant than Glasgow-Blatchford scale alone. This significance provides us to establish “modified Glasgow-Blatchford scale.” In the future, studies which will use Glasgow-Blatchford scale supported by lactate could be increased and the results should be supported more.

scholarly journals P132: Real life management of patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a tertiary care emergency department - Are we delivering the standard of care?

CJEM ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (S1) ◽  
pp. S103-S104
Author(s):  
S. Sandha ◽  
M. Bullard ◽  
B. Halloran ◽  
C. Joseph ◽  
D. Grigat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Information System ◽  
Blood Transfusion ◽  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Proton Pump ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Endoscopic Intervention ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal

Introduction: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common Emergency Department (ED) presentation. Early endoscopic intervention, supported by Glasgow Blatchford Score (GBS) severity, has been shown to reduce re-bleeding rates and lower morbidity and mortality. However, emergent endoscopy is not necessary for all patients. Low-risk patients can be managed with outpatient follow-up. Other important management decisions such as blood transfusion (Hb <70) and use of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) also warrant evaluation. The aim of this study was to compare the timing and appropriateness of endoscopy and blood transfusion and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use in a tertiary care setting to the standard of care. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to examine the management of patients presenting with UGIB to the ED in 2016 using a standard chart review methodology. TANDEM and EDIS (Emergency Department Information System) databases were queried to identify patients using specified ICD 10 codes and the CEDIS (Canadian Emergency Department Information System) presenting complaints of vomiting blood or blood in stool/melena. Outcome measures included: patient characteristics, the GBS to determine appropriateness of endoscopic intervention, diagnoses, blood transfusion indications and utilization of oral or intravenous PPIs. Data were entered into a REDCap database and analyzed using standard non-parametric statistical tests. Results: A total of 200 patients, 59% male (118/200), mean age 59 years (range 18 - 92 years) were included. The median GBS was 9. 79% of patients (157/200) underwent endoscopy during the hospital visit: 30% of patients with GBS 0-3 (13/43) and 80% patients with GBS 4 (125/157) underwent endoscopy 24 hours. The two most common endoscopic diagnoses were peptic ulcers (39%, 61/157) and varices (18%, 28/157), while 14% (22/157) had a normal diagnosis or mild gastritis. 174/200 patients (87%) were given IV or oral PPI in the ED whereas the remaining 26 (13%) did not receive PPI in hospital. 46% of patients (89/194) received blood transfusion, but only 51% (45/89) were administered based on the 70 g/L threshold while in 40% (36/89) of patients the less restrictive threshold of 90 g/L was used. Conclusion: A majority of UGIB patients presenting to a tertiary hospital ED appropriately received endoscopy 24 hours based on a GBS score 4. PPI use was appropriate but a proportion of patients received inappropriate blood transfusions.

scholarly journals Clinical profile of patients presenting to emergency with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a tertiary hospital of Nepal

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-111
Author(s):  
Sunil Adhikari ◽  
Suraj Rijal ◽  
Darlene Rose House
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Variceal Bleeding ◽  
Clinical Presentation ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Clinical Profile ◽  
Ulcer Bleeding ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal

Introduction: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is an acute emergency condition. It is an important cause for the hospital admission. This study descriptively analyses the clinical profile of upper gastrointestinal bleeding presenting to a tertiary hospital in Nepal. Method: This is a cross-sectional study of patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding from 01 Oct 2018 to 30 Sep 2019 at Patan Hospital Emergency Department, Patan Academy of Health Sciences, Nepal. Patient’s demographics, clinical presentation, duration of illness before presenting to Emergency, vitals, and laboratory parameters were descriptively analyzed. Ethical approval was obtained. Result: There were 121 patients, male 82(67.8%) and female 38(31.4%) aging 14 to 90 years. Fifty-three patients (43.8 %) presented with hematemesis, 38(31.4%) with melena, and 27(22.3%) with both hematemesis and melena. Variceal bleeding was the main cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding found in 73(60.33%) followed by ulcer bleeding in 48(39.66%). Conclusion: Variceal bleeding was the main cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding and hematemesis was the most common clinical presentation in patients presenting to the Emergency Department.

scholarly journals Prediction model of emergency mortality risk in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective study

PeerJ ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. e11656
Author(s):  
Lan Chen ◽  
Han Zheng ◽  
Saibin Wang
Keyword(s):  
Emergency Department ◽  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Decision Curve Analysis ◽  
Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Bleeding Score ◽  
Selection Operator ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal ◽  
D Dimer

Background Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common presentation in emergency departments and carries significant morbidity worldwide. It is paramount that treating physicians have access to tools that can effectively evaluate the patient risk, allowing quick and effective treatments to ultimately improve their prognosis. This study aims to establish a mortality risk assessment model for patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding at an emergency department. Methods A total of 991 patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding between July 2016 and June 2019 were enrolled in this retrospective single-center cohort study. Patient demographics, parameters assessed at admission, laboratory test, and clinical interventions were extracted. We used the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression to identify predictors for establishing a nomogram for death in the emergency department or within 24 h after leaving the emergency department and a corresponding nomogram. The area under the curve of the model was calculated. A bootstrap resampling method was used to internal validation, and decision curve analysis was applied for evaluate the clinical utility of the model. We also compared our predictive model with other prognostic models, such as AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score, modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score, and Pre-Endoscopic Rockall Score. Results Among 991 patients, 41 (4.14%) died in the emergency department or within 24 h after leaving the emergency department. Five non-zero coefficient variables (transfusion of plasma, D-dimer, albumin, potassium, age) were filtered by the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression analysis and used to establish a predictive model. The area under the curve for the model was 0.847 (95% confidence interval [0.794–0.900]), which is higher than that of previous models for mortality of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The decision curve analysis indicated the clinical usefulness of the model. Conclusions The nomogram based on transfusion of plasma, D-dimer, albumin, potassium, and age effectively assessed the prognosis of patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding presenting at the emergency department.

scholarly journals The Role of Rapid Endoscopy for High-Risk Patients with Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (7) ◽  
pp. 425-429 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E Targownik ◽  
Sanjay Murthy ◽  
Leila Keyvani ◽  
Shauna Leeson
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Transfusion Requirements ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Upper Gastrointestinal

BACKGROUND: Performance of endoscopy within 24 h is recommended for patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB). It is unknown whether performing endoscopy early within this 24 h window is beneficial for clinically high-risk patients.METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to identify patients presenting to two tertiary care centres with ANVUGIB and either systolic blood pressure lower than 100 mmHg or heart rate greater than 100 beats/min on presentation between 1999 and 2004. Patients receiving endoscopy within 6 h (rapid endoscopy [RE]) were compared with patients undergoing endoscopy between 6 h and 24 h (early endoscopy [EE]). The primary outcome measure was the development of any adverse bleeding outcome (rebleeding, surgery for control of bleeding, in-hospital mortality or readmission within 30 days for ANVUGIB).RESULTS: There were 169 patients who met the entry criteria (77 RE patients and 92 EE patients). There was no significant difference in the development of any adverse bleeding outcomes between RE and EE patients (25% RE versus 23% EE, difference between groups 2%, 95% CI −9% to 13%). Transfusion requirements and length of hospital stay also did not differ between the comparator groups. RE was not associated with fewer adverse outcomes, even after adjusting for confounders.CONCLUSION: For clinically high-risk ANVUGIB patients, performing endoscopy within 6 h of presentation is no more effective than performing endoscopy between 6 h and 24 h after presentation. The role of RE in high-risk ANVUGIB patients requires further delineation in a prospective fashion.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document