ArticleClinical endoscopy2015
The AIMS65 Score Is a Useful Predictor of Mortality in Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Urgent Endoscopy in Patients with High AIMS65 Scores.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pyroptosis-immunity-microbiome axis in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: mechanisms, risk prediction, and individualized strategies.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Lactate to hemoglobin ratio predicts short and long term mortality in critically ill patients with Gastrointestinal bleeding.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Readmission Events Following EGD for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleed: An Analysis Using the National Readmission Database.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Management of gastrointestinal bleed in the intensive care setting, an updated literature review.World journal of critical care medicine · 2025Review
- Prediction of 30-day in-hospital mortality in older UGIB patients using a simplified risk score and comparison with AIMS65 score.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Turn over the new leaf of the treatment in peptic ulcer bleeding: a review of the literature.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Pre-Endoscopic Scores Predicting Low-Risk Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Outcomes in Patients Admitted for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding and COVID-19 Infection: A Study of Two Years of the Pandemic.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Performance of Six Clinical Physiological Scoring Systems in Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Elderly and Very Elderly Patients with Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Emergency Department.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- A nomogram to predict in-hospital mortality of gastrointestinal bleeding patients in the intensive care unit.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- Article
- AIMS65 scoring system is comparable to Glasgow-Blatchford score or Rockall score for prediction of clinical outcomes for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.BMC gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Observational
- Can AIMS65 Save the Endoscopists from Midnight Calls?Clinical endoscopy · 2015Article
- The AIMS65 Score is a Superior Predictor of Inhospital Outcomes in Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding of Benign Etiology.Euroasian journal of hepato-gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsTo validate the AIMS65 score for predicting mortality of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and to evaluate the effectiveness of urgent (<8 hours) endoscopic procedures in patients with high AIMS65 scores.
methodsThis was a 5-year single-center, retrospective study. Nonvariceal, upper gastrointestinal bleeding was assessed by using the AIM65 and Rockall scores. Scores for mortality were assessed by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Patients with high AIMS65 scores (≥2) were allocated to either the urgent or non-urgent endoscopic procedure group. In-hospital mortality, success of endoscopic procedure, recurrence of bleeding, admission period, and dose of transfusion were compared between groups.
resultsA total of 634 patients were analyzed. The AIMS65 score successfully predicted mortality (AUROC=0.943; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.876 to 0.99) and was superior to the Rockall score (AUROC=0.856; 95% CI, 0.743 to 0.969) in predicting mortality. The group with high AIMS65 score included 200 patients. The urgent endoscopic procedure group had reduced hospitalization periods (p<0.05).
conclusionsAIMS65 score may be useful in predicting mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Urgent endoscopic procedures in patients with high scores may be related to reduced hospitalization periods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.