A comparative study of Glasgow-Blatchford score early combined with multi-disciplinary team and traditional consultation mode in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

DONG Lili; XU Wenguang; BIAN Gang; WANG Wenlei

doi:10.13201/j.issn.1009-5918.2023.05.006

Article navigation > J Clin Emerg > 2023 > 24(5): 253-257

Next Article Previous Article

DONG Lili, XU Wenguang, BIAN Gang, et al. A comparative study of Glasgow-Blatchford score early combined with multi-disciplinary team and traditional consultation mode in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J]. J Clin Emerg, 2023, 24(5): 253-257. doi: 10.13201/j.issn.1009-5918.2023.05.006

Citation:

A comparative study of Glasgow-Blatchford score early combined with multi-disciplinary team and traditional consultation mode in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Department of Gastroenterology, Qingdao Third People's Hospital, Qingdao, Shandong, 266041, China

More Information

Corresponding author: WANG Wenlei, E-mail: 81088217@qq.com

Received Date: 12 February 2023

Publish Date: 10 May 2023

Abstract

Abstract

Objective
To explore the efficacy of Blatchford score combined with multi-disciplinary team(MDT) in the early stage of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding compared with the traditional consultation mode.
Methods
From February 2021 to December 2021, 160 cases of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding with Glasgow-Blatchford(GBS) bleeding score ≥ 6 were selected from the emergency department of Qingdao Third People's Hospital, Shandong Province. They were divided into MDT group(80 cases) and control group(80 cases) by random number table. The MDT group patients immediately started the MDT treatment program, while the control group treated upper gastrointestinal bleeding with traditional consultation mode. The completion rate of emergency endoscopy, the success rate of hemostasis and the length of hospitalization of the two groups were compared and analyzed. oneyear, compare the rate of rebleeding and all-cause mortality within one year, and include age, sex, red blood cell infusion volume, MDT management, GBS score at admission, ALT, AST, PT, APTT, albumin, BUN, HGB, PLT, WBC, blood glucose, arterial blood lactic acid level into the regression analysis to evaluate the correlation between each variable and all-cause mortality within one year.
Results
The completion rate of emergency endoscopy and the success rate of endoscopic hemostasis in the MDT group were higher than those in the control group, the completion time of endoscopy and the hospitalization time were shorter than those in the control group, and the rebleeding rate and all-cause mortality rate within one year of follow-up were lower than those in the control group, the difference was statistically significant(P < 0.05). Univariate analysis showed that red blood cell infusion volume, MDT management, HGB level, PLT level, and lactic acid level were selected as variables, and then included in multivariate logistic regression analysis. The results showed that MDT management was a protective factor for all-cause mortality within one year, and red blood cell infusion volume was a high-risk factor for all-cause mortality.
Conclusion
The MDT mode based on GBS is better than the traditional consultation mode in the treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, which can guarantee the life safety of patients to the greatest extent.
- multi-disciplinary team /
- Glasgow-Blatchford score /
- acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

FullText(HTML)

References

[1]	中国医师协会急诊医师分会, 中华医学会急诊医学分会, 全军急救医学专业委员会, 等. 急性上消化道出血急诊诊治流程专家共识(2020版)[J]. 中华急诊医学杂志, 2021, 30(1): 15-24. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0282.2021.01.006 CrossRef Google Scholar
[2]	刘海华, 蒋熙攘, 陈华, 等. 多学科诊疗模式医疗整合对急性上消化道出血紧急救治的疗效研究[J]. 临床急诊杂志, 2021, 22(8): 525-528. Google Scholar
[3]	蒋彬, 曹婷, 阳学风, 等. 多学科协作诊疗模式在抢救危险性上消化道出血致失血性休克中的疗效研究[J]. 实用休克杂志(中英文), 2021, 5(4): 222-226. Google Scholar
[4]	张瑞军, 戴晶, 杨桥, 等. 急性上消化道出血救治快速通道效果评价分析[J]. 临床急诊杂志, 2022, 23(12): 827-831. Google Scholar
[5]	Lu Y, Loffroy R, Lau JY, et al. Multidisciplinary management strategies for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J]. Br J Surg, 2014, 101(1): e34-e50. Google Scholar
[6]	王连峰, 吴廷创. 顽固性上消化道出血多学科联合诊疗模式的探讨[J]. 中国医学创新, 2014, 11(20): 118-120. Google Scholar
[7]	田丹, 魏捷, 晏晨, 等. 以多学科协作为导向的重症上消化道大出血的急诊综合治疗[J]. 临床急诊杂志, 2019, 20(2): 136-138. Google Scholar
[8]	Blatchford O, Murray WR, Blatchford M. A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage[J]. Lancet, 2000, 356(9238): 1318-1321. Google Scholar
[9]	《中华消化外科杂志》编辑委员会, 《中华消化杂志》编辑委员会. 急性非静脉曲张性上消化道出血多学科防治专家共识(2019版)[J]. 中华消化外科杂志, 2019, 18(12): 1094-1100. Google Scholar
[10]	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. Google Scholar
[11]	Abougergi MS, Charpentier JP, Bethea E, et al. A prospective, multicenter study of the AIMS65 score compared with the Glasgow-blatchford score in predicting upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage outcomes[J]. J Clin Gastroenterol, 2016, 50(6): 464-469. Google Scholar
[12]	Sung JJ, Chiu PW, Chan FKL, et al. Asia-Pacific working group consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an update 2018[J]. Gut, 2018, 67(10): 1757-1768. Google Scholar
[13]	Kalkan Ç, Soykan I, Karakaya F, et al. Comparison of three scoring systems for risk stratification in elderly patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J]. Geriatr Gerontol Int, 2017, 17(4): 575-583. Google Scholar
[14]	Siau K, Hodson J, Ingram R, et al. Time to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: results from a prospective multicentre trainee-led audit[J]. United European Gastroenterol J, 2019, 7(2): 199-209. Google Scholar
[15]	Lau JYW, Yu YY, Tang RSY, et al. Timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J]. N Engl J Med, 2020, 382(14): 1299-1308. Google Scholar
[16]	Jeong N, Kim KS, Jung YS, et al. Delayed endoscopy is associated with increased mortality in upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage[J]. Am J Emerg Med, 2019, 37(2): 277-280. Google Scholar
[17]	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. Google Scholar
[18]	Stanley AJ, Laine L. Management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding[J]. BMJ, 2019, 364: l536. Google Scholar
[19]	de Franchis R, Baveno VI Faculty. Expanding consensus in portal hypertension: report of the Baveno VI Consensus Workshop: Stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension[J]. J Hepatol, 2015, 63(3): 743-752. Google Scholar