Update on risk scoring systems for patients with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage

Upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage (UGIH) remains a common medical emergency worldwide. It is increasingly recognised that early risk assessment is an important part of management, which helps direct appropriate patient care and the timing of endoscopy. Several risk scores have been developed, most of which include endoscopic findings, although a minority do not. These scores were developed to identify various end-points including mortality, rebleeding or clinical intervention in the form of transfusion, endoscopic therapy or surgery. Recent studies have reported accurate identification of a very low risk group on presentation, using scores which require simple clinical or laboratory parameters only. This group may not require admission, but could be managed with early out-patient endoscopy. This article aims to describe the existing pre- and post-endoscopy risk scores for UGIH and assess the published data comparing them in the prediction of outcome. Recent data assessing their use in clinical practice, in particular the early identification of low-risk patients, are also discussed.

Scoring systems in critically ill: Which one to use in cancer patients?

BACKGROUND Scoring systems have not been evaluated in oncology patients.We aimed to assess the performance of Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation(APACHE)II,APACHE III,APACHE IV,Simplified Acute Physiology Score(SAPS)II,SAPS III,Mortality Probability Model(MPM)II0 and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(SOFA)score in critically ill oncology patients.AIM To compare the efficacy of seven commonly employed scoring systems to predict outcomes of critically ill cancer patients.METHODS We conducted a retrospective analysis of 400 consecutive cancer patients admitted in the medical intensive care unit over a two-year period.Primary outcome was hospital mortality and the secondary outcome measure was comparison of various scoring systems in predicting hospital mortality.RESULTS In our study,the overall intensive care unit and hospital mortality was 43.5%and 57.8%,respectively.All of the seven tested scores underestimated mortality.The mortality as predicted by MPM II0 predicted death rate(PDR)was nearest to the actual mortality followed by that predicted by APACHE II,with a standardized mortality rate(SMR)of 1.305 and 1.547,respectively.The best calibration was shown by the APACHE III score(χ^(2)=4.704,P=0.788).On the other hand,SOFA score(χ^(2)=15.966,P=0.025)had the worst calibration,although the difference was not statistically significant.All of the seven scores had acceptable discrimination with good efficacy however,SAPS III PDR and MPM II0 PDR(AUROC=0.762),had a better performance as compared to others.The correlation between the different scoring systems was significant(P<0.001).CONCLUSION All the severity scores were tested under-predicted mortality in the present study.As the difference in efficacy and performance was not statistically significant,the choice of scoring system used may depend on the ease of use and local preferences.

Scoring systems in prediciting mortality rate of patients applying emergency department

Objective: To compare the scoring systems used in intensive care units in terms of predictingthe mortality in emergency patients and to determine the most appropriate scoring system forurgent care. Methods: This study was carried out by retrospectively reviewing the files ofpatients admitted to Ankara Numune Training and Research Hospital emergency medicineclinic between October 1, 2010 and October 31, 2010 for non-traumatic reasons and admittedto any service of the hospital. This study calculated automatically with the data obtained fromthe patients files and records, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHEⅡ), Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS Ⅱ), Modified Early Warning Score (MEW)and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores via internet. Patient files werereviewed and their outcomes (hospitalization, discharge, referral and mortality) were recorded.The obtained data were entered in SPSS 18 and compared with the scores of APACHE Ⅱ,SAPS Ⅱ, MEW and SOFA. Results: Based on area under the curve analysis, APACE Ⅱ (0.799;95% CI: 0.746 to 0.845) showed the biggest area under the curve in terms of predicting thepatients mortality. However, there was no difference between four scoring system in terms ofpredicting the mortality. Age (P<0.001, odd's ratio 1.055) pulse (P<0.007, odd's ratio 1.025)and SO2 (P<0.003, odd's ratio 0.952) variables were found to be independent risk factors formortality. Conclusions: Scores such as APACHE Ⅱ, SAPS Ⅱ, and SOFA, can not be used tomake an urgent decision on the first encounter with the patient even though they are successfulin predicting mortality. In this case, MEW could be recommended as the most useful system.As a result, the use of scoring systems in emergency departments is useful and necessary. But,multi-centered and large patient group studies are needed.

Recommendations for the use of chemoembolization in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: Usefulness of scoring system?

Several hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) staging systems have been established, and a variety of countryspecific treatment strategies are also proposed. The barcelona- clinic liver cancer(BCLC) system is the most widely used in Europe. The Hong Kong liverCancer is a new prognostic staging system; it might become the reference system in Asia. Transarterial chemoembolization(TACE) is the most widely used treatment for HCC worldwide; but it showed a benefit only for intermediate stage HCC(BCLC B), and there is still no consensus concerning treatment methods and treatment strategies. In view of the highly diverse nature of HCC and practices, a scoring system designed to assist with decision making before the first TACE is performed or prior to repeating the procedure would be highly useful.

Ideal scoring system for acute pancreatitis:Quest for the Holy Grail

Clinical scoring systems are required to predict complications,severity,need for intensive care unit admission,and mortality in patients with acute pancreatitis.Over the years,many scores have been developed,tested,and compared for their efficacy and accuracy.An ideal score should be rapid,reliable,and validated in different patient populations and geographical areas and should not lose relevance over time.A combination of scores or serial monitoring of a single score may increase their efficacy.

The modified systemic inflammation score is a predictor of ICU admission of COVID-19 patients

Objective:To evaluate the effect of the modified systemic inflammation score(mSIS)on prognosis in patients diagnosed with COVID-19.Methods:In this retrospective cross-sectional study,181 patients were selected and divided into two groups:patients with and without admission to the intensive care unit(ICU).An albumin level of≥4.0 g/dL and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio(LMR)of≥3.4 was scored 0,an albumin level of<4.0 g/dL or LMR of<3.4 was scored 1,and an albumin level of<4.0 g/dL and LMR of<3.4 was scored 2.Results:A total of 242 COVID-19 positive patients were initially included in this study.Of these patients,61 were excluded and 181 patients remained.Among the 181 participants,94(51.9%)were female,and the median age was 61(51,75)years.The mSIS scale ranged from 0 to 2.After analysis,the median score was 0(0,0)in the non-ICU group and 2(0,2)in the ICU group(P<0.001).The median white blood cell,lymphocyte counts,and albumin levels were lower in the ICU group(P<0.001,P<0.001,and P<0.001,respectively).In logistic regression analysis lymphocytopenia(OR=5.158,95%CI=1.249-21.304,P=0.023),hypoalbuminemia(OR=49.921,95%CI=1.843-1352.114,P=0.020),AST elevation(OR=3.939,95%CI=1.017-15.261,P=0.047),and mSIS=2(OR=5.853,95%CI=1.338-25.604,P=0.019)were identified as independent predictors of ICU admission.Conclusion:The mSIS can be used as an independent parameter for establishing the intensive care needs of patients with COVID-19.

Non-classical phenotypes of autoimmune hepatitis and advances in diagnosis and treatment

Non-classical manifestations of autoimmune hepatitis can delay diagnosis and treatment. Our aims were to describe the clinical phenotypes that can confound the diagnosis, detail scoring systems that can ensure their recognition, and outline advances in treatment that can improve their outcome. Prime source and review articles in English were selected throuqh Medline from 1970-2008 and assimilated into personal libraries spanning 32 years. Acute severe or asymptomatic presentations and atypical histological findings,including centrilobular zone 3 necrosis and concurrent bile duct changes, are compatible with the diagnosis. Cholangiographic abnormalities may be present in children and adults with the disease, and autoimmune hepatitis must be considered in patients without autoantibodies or with antimitochondrial antibodies and no other cholestatic features. Asymptomatic patients frequently become symptomatic; mild disease can progress; and there are no confident indices that justify withholding treatment. Two diagnostic scoring systems with complementary virtues have been developed to evaluate patients with confusing features. Normal liver tests and tissue constitute the optimal end point of treatment, and the first relapse is an indication for long- term azathioprine therapy. Cyclosporine, tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil are promising salvage therapies,and budesonide with azathioprine may be a superior frontline treatment. We conclude that the non-classical phenotypes of autoimmune hepatitis can be recognized promptly, diagnosed accurately, and treated effectively.

Histological outcome of chronic hepatitis B in children treated with interferon alpha

AIM： To evaluate the effect of interferon alpha （IFN-α） treatment on the liver histology in children with chronic hepatitis B and to evaluate the usefulness of various histological scoring systems of liver histology in this group of patients. METHODS： Fibrosis stage and inflammation grade were assessed according to Batts and Ludwig, Ishak et al., and IETAVIR （only fibrosis stage） before and 12 mo after IFN-α treatment termination in 93 children aged 2-16 years with chronic hepatitis B. RESULTS： None of the three numerical scoring systems for liver fibrosis showed statistically significant differences in liver fibrosis, while evolution of inflammatory activity revealed statistically significant improvement in the whole group of children with chronic hepatitis B treated with IFN-α and in responders. Significantly positive correlations were found between fibrosis stage and inflammation grade in the respective scoring systems. CONCLUSION： Treatment with IFN-α did not improve histological fibrosis but decreased inflammatory activity in children with chronic hepatitis B. The three semiquantitative scoring systems seem to be comparable in the estimation of the inflammation grade and fibrosis stage in this group of children.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure in children

Although various complex definitions of acute-on-chronic liver failure(ACLF)have been suggested in relation to adult patients,there is currently no universal definition of the syndrome in pediatric patients.In simplified terms,ACLF is characterized by the acute deterioration of the liver functions due to the effects of a precipitating factor on the basis of a chronic liver disease.Acute events and underlying liver diseases are very different in children from those seen in adults.Moreover,acute events and underlying chronic liver diseases vary among geographical regions,although it seems that the most common such diseases and acute events are autoimmune hepatitis,Wilson’s disease,and their flares.ACLF is associated with a poor prognosis.While no scoring systems have been developed to predict the prognosis for children with ACLF,modified versions of the Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the liver’s acute-on-chronic liver failure scoring system and the Chronic Liver Failure-Sequential Organ Failure Assessment criteria can be used in children until specific and validated scoring systems are available.Aside from liver transplantation,there is no proven treatment for ACLF.Thus,the early recognition of ACLF prior to the development of extrahepatic organ failure is important.

Comments on"Review of the role of diagnostic modalities and imaging findings in the COVID-19 pandemic"

The present letter to the editor corresponds to the article entitled“Comprehensive literature review on the radiographic findings,imaging modalities,and the role of radiology in the coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19)pandemic”by Pal et al,published in World J Radiol.2021;13(9):258-282.With zero to unknown prevalence,COVID-19 has created a heterogeneous and unforeseen situation across the world.Healthcare providers encountered new challenges in image interpretation,characterization,and prognostication of the disease.Pal et al delineated the radiological findings,which would guide the radiologists to identify the early signs of severe infection.