Brief Article
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Co., Limited. All rights reserved.
World J Gastroenterol. Feb 21, 2014; 20(7): 1846-1851
Published online Feb 21, 2014. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v20.i7.1846
Is the AIMS65 score useful in predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding?
Sung Hoon Jung, Jung Hwan Oh, Hye Yeon Lee, Joon Won Jeong, Se Eun Go, Chan Ran You, Eun Jung Jeon, Sang Wook Choi
Sung Hoon Jung, Jung Hwan Oh, Hye Yeon Lee, Joon Won Jeong, Se Eun Go, Chan Ran You, Eun Jung Jeon, Sang Wook Choi, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul 130-709, South Korea
Author contributions: Jung SH and Oh JH designed the study, drafted and revised the manuscript and approved the final version of the manuscript; Jeong JW, Go SE, and Lee HY collected and analyzed data; You CH, Jeon EJ, and Choi SW supervised the study, and extensively revised the manuscript.
Supported by Catholic Research Coordinating Center of the Korea health 21 R and D Project, No. A070001, Ministry of Health and Welfare South Korea
Correspondence to: Jung Hwan Oh, MD, Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, St. Paul’s Hospital, 180 Wangsan-ro, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 130-709, South Korea. ojh@catholic.ac.kr
Telephone: +82-2-9582114 Fax: +82-2-9687250
Received: September 2, 2013
Revised: November 3, 2013
Accepted: November 18, 2013
Published online: February 21, 2014
Processing time: 191 Days and 3.2 Hours
Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the applicability of AIMS65 scores in predicting outcomes of peptic ulcer bleeding.

METHODS: This was a retrospective study in a single center between January 2006 and December 2011. We enrolled 522 patients with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage who visited the emergency room. High-risk patients were regarded as those who had re-bleeding within 30 d from the first endoscopy as well as those who died within 30 d of visiting the Emergency room. A total of 149 patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were analysed, and the AIMS65 score was used to retrospectively predict the high-risk patients.

RESULTS: A total of 149 patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were analysed. The poor outcome group comprised 28 patients [male: 23 (82.1%) vs female: 5 (10.7%)] while the good outcome group included 121 patients [male: 93 (76.9%) vs female: 28 (23.1%)]. The mean age in each group was not significantly different. The mean serum albumin levels in the poor outcome group were slightly lower than those in the good outcome group (P = 0.072). For the prediction of poor outcome, the AIMS65 score had a sensitivity of 35.5% (95%CI: 27.0-44.8) and a specificity of 82.1% (95%CI: 63.1-93.9) at a score of 0. The AIMS65 score was insufficient for predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding (area under curve = 0.571; 95%CI: 0.49-0.65).

CONCLUSION: The AIMS65 score may therefore not be suitable for predicting clinical outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding. Low albumin levels may be a risk factor associated with high mortality in peptic ulcer bleeding.

Keywords: Gastrointestinal haemorrhage; Peptic ulcer; Mortality; Morbidity; Prognosis

Core tip: AIMS65 score is a novel simple score for predicting outcomes for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, this scoring system is based on analyses of data from a mixed patient population with both variceal and non-variceal UGIB. The present study focused on the effectiveness of the AIMS65 score in predicting outcomes of peptic ulcer bleeding. This retrospective single-centre study, which included 149 patients, revealed that the AIMS65 score may not be suitable for predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding. Further, low albumin levels may be a risk factor associated with high mortality in peptic ulcer bleeding.