The Performance of a Modified Glasgow Blatchford Score in Predicting Clinical Interventions in Patients with Acute Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Vietnamese Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study
Duc Trong Quach,
Ngoi Huu Dao,
Minh Cao Dinh,
Chung Huu Nguyen,
Linh Xuan Ho,
Nha-Doan Thi Nguyen,
Quang Dinh Le,
Cong Minh Hong Vo,
Sang Kim Le,
Toru Hiyama
Affiliations
Duc Trong Quach
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hochiminh City Vietnam
Ngoi Huu Dao
Department of Gastroenterology, An-Binh Hospital, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
Minh Cao Dinh
Department of Gastroenterology, Dong-Nai General Hospital, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
Chung Huu Nguyen
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hochiminh City Vietnam
Linh Xuan Ho
Department of Gastroenterology, Gia-Dinh People’s Hospital, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
Nha-Doan Thi Nguyen
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hochiminh City Vietnam
Quang Dinh Le
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hochiminh City Vietnam
Cong Minh Hong Vo
Department of Gastroenterology, Gia-Dinh People’s Hospital, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
Sang Kim Le
Department of Gastroenterology, Trung-Vuong Emergency Center, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam
Toru Hiyama
Health Service Center, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima, Japan
Background/AimsTo compare the performance of a modified Glasgow Blatchford score (mGBS) to the Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS) and the pre-endoscopic Rockall score (RS) in predicting clinical interventions in Vietnamese patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AN-VUGIB).Methods : A prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted in five tertiary hospitals from May 2013 to February 2014. The mGBS, GBS, and pre-endoscopic RS scores were prospectively calculated for all patients. The accuracy of mGBS was compared with that of GBS and pre-endoscopic RS using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Clinical interventions were defined as blood transfusions, endoscopic or radiological intervention, or surgery.Results : There were 395 patients including 128 (32.4%) needing endoscopic treatment, 117 (29.6%) requiring blood transfusion and two (0.5%) needing surgery. In predicting the need for clinical intervention, the mGBS (AUC, 0.707) performed as well as the GBS (AUC, 0.708; p=0.87) and outperformed the pre-endoscopic RS (AUC, 0.594; p<0.001). However, none of these scores effectively excluded the need for endoscopic intervention at a threshold of 0.Conclusion : smGBS performed as well as GBS and better than pre-endoscopic RS for predicting clinical interventions in Vietnamese patients with ANVUGIB.