Background: Some scoring systems have been introduced to predict the need for performing urgent endoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, in an emergency situation, this intervention is insufficient and cannot easily provide the required treatment. Aim: To identify new risk factors that can predict the need for endoscopic intervention (EI) in UGIB patients. Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional study. Patients with UGIB admitted from April 2011 to August 2014 were included. The proportion of cases requiring EI and clinical factors (age, gender, antiplatelet/anticoagulant therapy, history of gastro-duodenal ulcer (GDU), systolic blood pressure, heart rate, hemoglobin, mean corpuscular volume, blood urea nitrogen-creatinine ratio (BUN/Cr ratio), prothrombin time-international normalized ratio, and Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) were analyzed using logistic regression models. Result: Of 378 patients who were included in this study, 180 were found to be with GDU. The proportion of cases requiring EI was significantly higher in those with GDU than in other causes except variceal bleeding (53.5 vs. 37.0%, p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed that a history of GDU was an independent risk factor (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.06–3.00) in addition to BUN/Cr ratio (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.00–1.03) and GBS (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.08–1.33). Conclusion: A history of GDU was an independent risk factor for predicting the need for EI in UGIB in addition to BUN/Cr ratio and GBS.

1.
Rockall TA, Logan RF, Devlin HB, Northfield TC: Incidence of and mortality from acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage in the United Kingdom. Steering Committee and members of the National Audit of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Haemorrhage. BMJ 1995; 311: 222–226.
2.
Barkun AN, Martel M, Toubouti Y, Rahme E, Bardou M: Endoscopic hemostasis in peptic ulcer bleeding for patients with high-risk lesions: a series of meta-analyses. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 786–799.
3.
Cheng DW, Lu YW, Teller T, Sekhon HK, Wu BU: A modified Glasgow Blatchford Score improves risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal bleed: a prospective comparison of scoring systems. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2012; 36: 782–789.
4.
Gralnek IM, Dumonceau JM, Kuipers EJ, Lanas A, Sanders DS, Kurien M, Rotondano G, Hucl T, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Marmo R, Racz I, Arezzo A, Hoffmann RT, Lesur G, de Franchis R, Aabakken L, Veitch A, Radaelli F, Salgueiro P, Cardoso R, Maia L, Zullo A, Cipolletta L, Hassan C: Diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2015; 47:a1–a46.
5.
Hwang JH, Fisher DA, Ben-Menachem T, Chandrasekhara V, Chathadi K, Decker GA, Early DS, Evans JA, Fanelli RD, Foley K, Fukami N, Jain R, Jue TL, Khan KM, Lightdale J, Malpas PM, Maple JT, Pasha S, Saltzman J, Sharaf R, Shergill AK, Dominitz JA, Cash BD; Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: The role of endoscopy in the management of acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 1132–1138.
6.
Schiefer M, Aquarius M, Leffers P, Stassen P, van Deursen C, Oostenbrug L, Jansen L, Masclee A, Keulemans YC: Predictive validity of the Glasgow Blatchford Bleeding Score in an unselected emergency department population in continental Europe. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 24: 382–387.
7.
Masaoka T, Suzuki H, Hori S, Aikawa N, Hibi T: Blatchford scoring system is a useful scoring system for detecting patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding who do not need endoscopic intervention. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 22: 1404–1408.
8.
Srygley FD, Gerardo CJ, Tran T, Fisher DA: Does this patient have a severe upper gastrointestinal bleed? JAMA 2012; 307: 1072–1079.
9.
Attar A, Sebbagh V, Vicaut E, Le Toumelin P, Bouhnik Y: Urgent endoscopy in severe non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: does the Glasgow-Blatchford score help endoscopists? Scand J Gastroenterol 2012; 47: 1086–1093.
10.
Farooq FT, Lee MH, Das A, Dixit R, Wong RC: Clinical triage decision vs risk scores in predicting the need for endotherapy in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Am J Emerg Med 2012; 30: 129–134.
11.
Pang SH, Ching JY, Lau JY, Sung JJ, Graham DY, Chan FK: Comparing the Blatchford and pre-endoscopic Rockall score in predicting the need for endoscopic therapy in patients with upper GI hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 1134–1140.
12.
Blatchford O, Murray WR, Blatchford M: A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Lancet 2000; 356: 1318–1321.
13.
Bryant RV, Kuo P, Williamson K, Yam C, Schoeman MN, Holloway RH, Nguyen NQ: Performance of the Glasgow-Blatchford score in predicting clinical outcomes and intervention in hospitalized patients with upper GI bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 576–583.
14.
Asaka M, Kato M, Sugiyama T, Satoh K, Kuwayama H, Fukuda Y, Fujioka T, Takemoto T, Kimura K, Shimoyama T, Shimizu K, Kobayashi S: Follow-up survey of a large-scale multicenter, double-blind study of triple therapy with lansoprazole, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin for eradication of Helicobacter pylori in Japanese peptic ulcer patients. J Gastroenterol 2003; 38: 339–347.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.