Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage
Conditions
Brief summary
Use of risk scoring systems in the assessment of patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage is increasing. Comparative studies have intended to identify the system of choice, but the majority of these are characterized by retrospective designs, small sample sizes, low rate of severe bleeding, or low mortality. The main aim of this study was to identify the optimal scoring system.
Interventions
None listed
Sponsors
Odense University Hospital
Study design
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
One of the following: * Haematemesis * Melaena * Coffee-ground vomit
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Need for hospital-based intervention | 1 month | Need of hospital-based intervention was defined as treatment with blood transfusion, endoscopic therapy, transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE), surgery, or identification of cancer at upper endoscopy. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Identification of low-risk patients | 1 month | Low-risk patients were defined as patients who did not need hospital-based intervention, and survived more than 30 days from day of admission. Low-risk patients were considered as suitable for early discharge and potential outpatient management. |
| Rebleeding | 1 month | Rebleeding was defined as presence of hematemesis, blood per nasogastric tube, or melaena associated with a decline in B-hemoglobin of at least 1mmol/l (not explained by hemodilution) or decline in systolic arterial pressure of at least 20mmHg after the initial bleeding had stopped. |
| 30 day mortality | 30 days | — |
Countries
Denmark
Outcome results
None listed