Comparative diagnostic utility of Rockall and Glasgow-Blatchford scores in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

Introduction: The Rockall score and Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) are two scoring systems validated in the evaluation of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). However, no meta-analysis exists to summarize the current data and clarify the use of Rockall score and GBS focusing on non-variceal UGIB. We aimed to evaluate and compare the utility of the Rockall score and GBS in predicting clinical outcomes in non-variceal UGIB.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, searching the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for all peer-reviewed articles using the terms including 'Glasgow-Blatchford', 'Rockall', and 'gastrointestinal bleed' from their inception to 22 March 2023. Outcomes included mortality, rebleeding, need for blood transfusion, and need for surgical intervention.

Results: Seven studies with 755 participants with non-variceal bleeding were included in the analysis. Pooled analysis demonstrated no difference in the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) between GBS and Rockall score to predict mortality [weighted mean difference (WMD) = 0.01, 95% CI: -0.06 to 0.08] or rebleeding (WMD = 0.04, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.11). GBS had a higher AUROC to predict the outcomes compared to Rockall score for the needs for transfusion (WMD = 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01-0.16) and surgical intervention (WMD = 0.21, 95% CI: 0.14-0.29).

Conclusion: The GBS could be superior to the Rockall score in predicting the needs for transfusion and surgical intervention in non-variceal UGIB. However, both scores demonstrate low performance for predicting mortality or rebleeding.