Assessment of Endoscopy-Based Scoring Systems for Prognostication in Ulcerative Colitis: A Comparative Analysis

Background and Objective Endoscopy-based scoring systems, including Mayo Endoscopic Score (MES), Modified Mayo Endoscopic Score (MMES), and Degree of Ulcerative Colitis Burden of Luminal Inflammation (DUBLIN) Score, have been introduced to evaluate UC prognosis. This study aims to compare their pred...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Digestive diseases and sciences 2024-10, Vol.69 (10), p.3901-3910
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Pingxin, Zhang, Chuhan, Chen, Baili, He, Yao, Zeng, Zhirong, Mao, Ren, Qiu, Yun, Chen, Minhu
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background and Objective Endoscopy-based scoring systems, including Mayo Endoscopic Score (MES), Modified Mayo Endoscopic Score (MMES), and Degree of Ulcerative Colitis Burden of Luminal Inflammation (DUBLIN) Score, have been introduced to evaluate UC prognosis. This study aims to compare their predictive capacity for clinical outcomes in UC patients. Methods Consecutive UC patients from a tertiary hospital were included. The primary outcome was acute severe ulcerative colitis (ASUC), and secondary outcomes were UC-related admission, medication treatment escalation, disease extension and surgery. Predictive performance was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Results Among 300 patients, 15.3% developed ASUC. Robust correlations were observed among the three scoring systems and were with elevated serum inflammatory markers. The DUBLIN score exhibited superior predictive ability for UC-related admission (AUC 0.751; 95%CI 0.698–0.799) and medication treatment escalation (AUC 0.735; 95% CI 0.681–0.784). No statistical differences were found among three scoring systems for predicting ASUC, disease extension, and surgery. Employing respective cut-offs of 2, 11.25, and 3, higher MES (HR = 3.859, 95% CI 1.636–9.107, p = 0.002), MMES (HR = 3.352, 95% CI 1.879–5.980, p 
ISSN:0163-2116
1573-2568
1573-2568
DOI:10.1007/s10620-024-08582-8