Is the AIMS 65 score useful in prepdicting clinical outcomes in Korean patients with variceal and nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding?

Jung Wan Choe, Seung Young Kim, Jong Jin Hyun, Sung Woo Jung, Young Kul Jung, Ja Seol Koo, Hyung Joon Yim, Sang Woo Lee

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    10 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background/Aims: Various clinical scoring systems, including the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall risk score (RS), and AIMS65 score (AIMS65), have been validated to predict the clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). We compared the performance of these three scoring systems in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with UGIB in Korea. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 286 patients with UGIB who visited emergency department. The primary outcome was the need for clinical intervention (endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical) and blood transfusion. Results: The causes of UGIB were esophageal/gastric varices in 64 patients, peptic ulcer in 168, Mallory-Weiss tear in 32, malignancy of UGI tract in eight, and unknown in 14. One hundred seventy-four (61%) patients required blood transfusion, 166 (58%) required endoscopic intervention, and 10 (3.5%) required surgical intervention. The GBS outperformed the RS and AIMS65 in predicting the need for endoscopic intervention. Conclusions: The GBS and RS were more accurate than AIMS65 in predicting the need for clinical interventions and transfusion patients with UGIB, regardless of variceal or nonvariceal bleeding. The AIMS65 may not be optimal for predicting clinical outcomes of UGIB in Korea.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)813-820
    Number of pages8
    JournalGut and liver
    Volume11
    Issue number6
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2017 Nov

    Keywords

    • Gastrointestinal hemorrhage
    • Mortality
    • Risk assessment

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Hepatology
    • Gastroenterology

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Is the AIMS 65 score useful in prepdicting clinical outcomes in Korean patients with variceal and nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this