[1]袁海燕,路 亮.ABC评分在静脉和非静脉曲张上消化道出血患者预后评估中的作用[J].医学信息,2022,35(02):86-89.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.02.021]
　YUAN Hai-yan,LU Liang.The ABC Score in the Prognostic Assessment of Patients with Venousand Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding[J].Medical Information,2022,35(02):86-89.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.02.021]
点击复制

ABC评分在静脉和非静脉曲张上消化道出血患者预后评估中的作用()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
35卷
期数:
2022年02期
页码:
86-89
栏目:
论著
出版日期:
2022-01-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
The ABC Score in the Prognostic Assessment of Patients with Venousand Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
文章编号:
1006-1959（2022）02-0086-04
作者:
袁海燕; 路 亮
安徽医科大学附属巢湖医院消化科，安徽 合肥 238000
Author(s):
YUAN Hai-yan; LU Liang
Department of Gastroenterology,Chaohu Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University,Hefei 238000,Anhui,China
关键词:
ABC评分; 上消化道出血评分; 评分系统; 危险分层; 预后
Keywords:
ABC score; Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Score; Scoring system; Hazard stratification; Prognosis
分类号:
R5
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2022.02.021
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 评估ABC评分在预测静脉曲张（VUGIB）和非静脉曲张上消化道出血（NVUGIB）人群预后评估中的临床应用价值。方法 纳入2019年10月-2021年3月我院收治的上消化道出血患者172例，根据是否为静脉曲张出血分为VUGIB组38例，NVUGIB组134例。收集患者一般临床资料，计算两组患者ABC、AIMS65、GBS、CRS评分，以输血、内镜下干预治疗、院内死亡及复合结果为终点绘制ROC曲线，分别使用4种评分系统对两组患者进行ROC曲线下面积（AUROC）比较。结果 两组年龄、白蛋白、收缩压、INR水平比较，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；两组脉率、血红蛋白、尿素、肌酐水平比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；VUGIB组患者中需要内镜干预治疗、院内死亡及复合结果占比高于NVUGIB组患者，合并有心脏疾病、恶性肿瘤人群占比低于NVUGIB组患者，住院时间较NVUGIB组长，差异有统计学意义（P＜0.05）；VUGIB组输血人群占比高于NVUGIB组，但差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；ABC评分在评估NVUGIB组患者输血、院内死亡及复合结果方面，AUROC值最高，分别为0.835、0.832、0.779，在评估VUGIB组患者院内死亡方面与AIMS65评分相当，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 ABC 评分系统在预测NVUGIB患者输血、院内死亡、复合结果优于现有的AIMS65、GBS、CRS评分，并且有助于VUGIB患者院内死亡评估。
Abstract:
Objective To evaluate the clinical value of ABC score in predicting the prognosis of varicose veins gastrointestinal bleeding (VUGIB) and non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB).Methods A total of 172 patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding admitted to our hospital from October 2019 to March 2021 were divided into VUGIB group (38 cases) and NVUGIB group (134 cases). The general clinical data of the patients were collected. The ABC, AIMS65, GBS and CRS scores of the two groups were calculated. The ROC curve was drawn with blood transfusion, endoscopic intervention, in-hospital death and compound results as the endpoints. The area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was compared between the two groups using four scoring systems.Results There was significant difference in age, albumin, systolic blood pressure and INR between the two groups (P<0.05), there was no significant difference in pulse rate, hemoglobin, urea and creatinine levels between the two groups (P>0.05). The proportion of patients requiring endoscopic intervention, in-hospital death and combined results in the VUGIB group was higher than that in the NVUGIB group, and the proportion of patients with cardiac diseases and malignant tumors was lower than that in the NVUGIB group, the hospitalization time was longer than that in the NVUGIB group, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The proportion of blood transfusion population in VUGIB group was higher than that in NVUGIB group, but the difference was not statistically significant (P>0.05). ABC score had the highest AUROC value in evaluating blood transfusion, in-hospital death and compound results in NVUGIB group, which were 0.835,0.832 and 0.779, respectively. There was no significant difference in evaluating in-hospital death between VUGIB group and AIMS65 score (P>0.05).Conclusion ABC scoring system is superior to the existing AIMS65, GBS and CRS scores in predicting blood transfusion, in-hospital mortality and compound results in NVUGIB patients, and it is helpful to evaluate the in-hospital mortality of VUGIB patients.

参考文献/References:

[1]王海燕,顿晓熠,柏愚,等.中国上消化道出血的临床流行病学分析[J].中华消化内镜杂志,2013,30(2):83-86.[2]Nahon S,Hagège H,Latrive JP,et al.Epidemiological and prognostic factors involved in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: results of a French prospective multicenter study[J].Endoscopy,2012,44(11):998-1008[3]《中华内科杂志》编辑委员会,《中华医学杂志》编辑委员会,《中华消化杂志》编辑委员会,等.急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血诊治指南(2018年,杭州)[J].中华内科杂志,2019(3):173-180.[4]Tham J,Stanley A.Clinical utility of pre-endoscopy risk scores in upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J].Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol,2019,13(12):1161-1167.[5]路琴,付万发,季红莉,等.AIMS65评分在老年急性非静脉曲张上消化道出血中的应用[J].中华老年多器官疾病杂志,2017,16(7):516-519.[6]莫林芳.AIMS65和Blatchford评分在非静脉曲张上消化道出血中的应用比较[D].南宁:广西医科大学,2016.[7]陈金,张伟,郑松柏,等.四种评分系统对老年人急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血干预及预后的预测价值[J].中华老年多器官疾病杂志,2020,19(8):561-565.[8]Gu L,Xu F,Yuan J.Comparison of AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring approaches in predicting the risk of in-hospital death among emergency hospitalized patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective observational study in Nanjing, China[J].BMC Gastroenterol,2018,18(1):98.[9]Laursen S,Laine L,Dalton H,et al.The International Bleeding Risk Score: A new risk score that can accurately predict mortality in patients with upper GI-bleeding[J].Gastroenterology,2017,152(5):S149-S150.[10]Laursen SB,Oakland K,Laine L,et al.ABC score: a new risk score that accurately predicts mortality in acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: an international multicentre study[J].Gut,2021,70(4):707-716.[11]Barkun AN,Almadi M,Kuipers EJ,et al.Management of Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Guideline Recommendations From the International Consensus Group[J].Ann Intern Med,2019,171(11):805-822.[12]Kim MS,Moon HS,Kwon IS,et al.Validation of a new risk score system for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J].BMC Gastroenterol,2020,20(1):193.[13]Choe JW,Kim SY,Hyun JJ,et al.Is the AIMS 65 Score Useful in Prepdicting Clinical Outcomes in Korean Patients with Variceal and Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding?[J].Gut Liver,2017,11(6):813-820.[14]Stanley AJ,Laine L,Dalton HR,et al.Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study[J].BMJ,2017(356):i6432.[15]赵宁宁,苏争艳,孙超,等.四种评分系统对急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血预后评估的应用研究[J].中华消化内镜杂志,2018,35(4):248-252.[16]李嘉嫦,吕菁君,姜洁,等.不同内镜前评分方法对危险性急性上消化道出血的预后评估价值[J].中国急救医学,2019,39(2):124-129.[17]Wang F,Cui S,Wang F,et al.Different scoring systems to predict 6-week mortality in cirrhosis patients with acute variceal bleeding: a retrospective analysis of 202 patients[J].Scand J Gastroenterol,2018,53(7):885-890.[18]Thanapirom K,Ridtitid W,Rerknimitr R,et al.Prospective comparison of three risk scoring systems in non-variceal and variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J].J Gastroenterol Hepatol,2016,31(4):761-767.[19]Robertson M,Ng J,Abu Shawish W,et al.Risk stratification in acute variceal bleeding: Comparison of the AIMS65 score to established upper gastrointestinal bleeding and liver disease severity risk stratification scoring systems in predicting mortality and rebleeding[J].Dig Endosc,2020,32(5):761-768.[20]Rout G,Sharma S,Gunjan D,et al.Comparison of various prognostic scores in variceal and non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective cohort study[J].Indian J Gastroenterol,2019,38(2):158-166.

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01