External validation of scoring systems in risk stratification of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

The aim of this study was to externally validate the four commonly used scoring systems in the risk stratification of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB).

Patients of UGIB who underwent endoscopy within 24 h of presentation were stratified prospectively using the pre-endoscopy Rockall score (PRS) >0, complete Rockall score (CRS) >2, Glasgow Blatchford bleeding scores (GBS) >3, and modified GBS (m-GBS) >3 scores. Patients were followed up to 30 days. Prognostic accuracy of the scores was done by comparing areas under curve (AUC) in terms of overall risk stratification, re-bleeding, mortality, need for intervention, and length of hospitalization.

One hundred and seventy-five patients were studied. All four scores performed better in the overall risk stratification on AUC [PRS = 0.566 (CI: 0.481–0.651; p-0.043)/CRS = 0.712 (CI: 0.634–0.790); p<0.001)/GBS = 0.810 (CI: 0.744–0.877; p->0.001); m-GBS = 0.802 (CI: 0.734–0.871; p<0.001)], whereas only CRS achieved significance in identifying re-bleed [AUC—0.679 (CI: 0.579–0.780; p = 0.003)]. All the scoring systems except PRS were found to be significantly better in detecting 30-day mortality with a high AUC (CRS = 0.798; p-0.042)/GBS = 0.833; p-0.023); m-GBS = 0.816; p-0.031). All four scores demonstrated significant accuracy in the risk stratification of non-variceal patients; however, only GBS and m-GBS were significant in variceal etiology. Higher cutoff scores achieved better sensitivity/specificity [RS > 0 (50/60.8), CRS > 1 (87.5/50.6), GBS > 7 (88.5/63.3), m-GBS > 7(82.3/72.6)] in the risk stratification.

GBS and m-GBS appear to be more valid in risk stratification of UGIB patients in this region. Higher cutoff values achieved better predictive accuracy.