ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2021
Prealbumin and D-dimer as Prognostic Indicators for Rebleeding in Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors and prediction model for rebleeding in grade IIb peptic ulcer patients after endoscopy.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Analysis of factors associated with 1-year rebleeding in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and a Glasgow- Blatchford Score ≥ 6 based on serological indicators.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Construction of a prediction model for rebleeding in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Construction of a risk prediction model for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and rebleeding based on multi-dimensional indicators and its application research.American journal of translational research · 2023Article
- Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDetermining the risk stratification of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) plays a vital role in treating upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Traditional scores like Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score (RS), and AIMS65 score have been widely utilized in UGIB practice, however exhibiting limited practical use due to relative lack of user-friendly characters. Prealbumin as a nutritional indicator and d-dimer as a fibrinolytic activity monitor, are generally used to evaluate the overall nutritional and fibrinolytic condition in UGIB patients.
aimsHere, we explored the predictive value of these two markers in NVUGIB for evaluating severity and prognosis including rebleeding and surgery intervention.
methodsOne hundred and eighty-five patients suffering NVUGIB were enrolled. Their GBS, RS, and AIMS65 score, routine laboratory test results including prealbumin and d-dimer were determined after admission. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to define the independent predictors of rebleeding. ROC curves were generated to compare the suitability of prealbumin, d-dimer, and scores for rebleeding prediction.
resultsThe NVUGIB patients with rebleeding exhibited higher scores, white blood cell counts, d-dimer, CRP, proportion of surgery intervention, and longer hospital stay, but lower hematocrit, hemoglobin, calcium, prealbumin, and fibrinogen than those without rebleeding. The multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that prealbumin and d-dimer were independent predictors for rebleeding. Values of prealbumin and d-dimer were correlated with hospital stay, ulcer degrees, and surgery demand. The ROC curve analyses showed that prealbumin and d-dimer exhibited superior prediction value over the scoring systems.
conclusionsPrealbumin and d-dimer are promising predictors for severity and prognosis in NVUGIB practice.
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.