Comparative Performance Analysis of Aims65, Pre-Endoscopic Rockall, Glasgow-Blatchford, and Modified Age Blood Test Comorbidity Scores in Emergency Department Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 12, 2025

Flexible Colonoscopy in Mice to Evaluate the Severity of Colitis and Colorectal Tumors Using a Validated Endoscopic Scoring System
Published on: October 16, 2013
Nurullah İshak Işık1, Attila Beştemir2, Gülhan Kurtoğlu Çelik3
1Emergency Medicine Department, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.
Background:
Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) can lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Assessing the need for endoscopic interventions and predicting in-hospital mortality are critical, particularly where access to endoscopy is limited.
Objective:
This study evaluates the predictive accuracy of pre-endoscopy risk-scoring systems for identifying the need for endoscopic interventions and assessing in-hospital mortality in UGIB patients.
Methods:
We conducted a retrospective cohort study in a tertiary emergency department with 450,000 annual visits. Patients aged ≥18 years presenting with UGIB and undergoing endoscopy between June 1, 2021, and July 31, 2022, were included. Glasgow-Blatchford, pre-endoscopic Rockall, AIMS65, and modified age blood test comorbidity (ABC) scores were calculated using clinical and laboratory data.
Results:
Of 795 patients, 142 required endoscopic interventions and 653 did not. The Glasgow-Blatchford score predicted intervention needs (p = 0.007) but lacked clinical relevance. All scores predicted mortality (p < 0.001); however, AIMS65 and the modified ABC score had the highest predictive accuracy, especially in those requiring interventions (p < 0.001).
Conclusion:
Pre-endoscopy scores have limited utility in predicting intervention needs. Male gender, hematemesis, melena, elevated urea, and low red cell distribution width (RDW) may indicate intervention requirements. The modified ABC score demonstrated strong predictive value for mortality, making it a clinically relevant tool for UGIB risk stratification.
More Related Videos
05:50Author Spotlight: Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Gastric Content Assessment and Risk Stratification in Perioperative Care
Published on: September 22, 2023
06:42Use of the Scissor-Type Knife During the Peroral Endoscopy Myotomy Procedure for the Treatment of Achalasia
Published on: March 3, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Esophageal Varices-II: Clinical Features and Management
In the initial assessment, a thorough review of the patient's medical history is vital to identify risk factors such as liver disease, alcohol...
Peptic Ulcer Disease III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Few clinical manifestations differentiate gastric ulcers from duodenal ulcers. Distinctions in the location, timing, and pain relief are crucial for healthcare providers in differentiating between gastric and duodenal ulcers during clinical assessments.
Serum Laboratory Studies, Stool Test, Breath Test
Endoscopic Procedures I: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
During an EGD, the endoscope can be used to:
Endoscopic Procedures V: ERCP
Patient...
Appendicitis-II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Diagnosing Appendicitis
It requires a multifaceted approach, starting with a detailed physical examination to pinpoint the location and nature of the pain and identify any associated symptoms. Laboratory tests play a crucial role. A complete Blood Count (CBC) typically reveals leukocytosis (an increased number of...