177 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24587662)
1. Is the AIMS65 score useful in predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding?
Jung SH; Oh JH; Lee HY; Jeong JW; Go SE; You CR; Jeon EJ; Choi SW
World J Gastroenterol; 2014 Feb; 20(7):1846-51. PubMed ID: 24587662
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. AIMS65: a promising upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk score but further validation required.
Boyapati R; Majumdar A; Robertson M
World J Gastroenterol; 2014 Oct; 20(39):14515-6. PubMed ID: 25339841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Scoring systems for predicting clinical outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding.
Noh JH; Cha B; Ahn JY; Na HK; Lee JH; Jung KW; Kim DH; Choi KD; Song HJ; Lee GH; Jung HY
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Sep; 101(36):e30410. PubMed ID: 36086775
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Scoring systems for peptic ulcer bleeding: Which one to use?
Budimir I; Stojsavljević S; Baršić N; Bišćanin A; Mirošević G; Bohnec S; Kirigin LS; Pavić T; Ljubičić N
World J Gastroenterol; 2017 Nov; 23(41):7450-7458. PubMed ID: 29151699
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Validity of the Pre-endoscopic Scoring Systems for the Prediction of the Failure of Endoscopic Hemostasis in Bleeding Gastroduodenal Peptic Ulcers.
Iino C; Shimoyama T; Igarashi T; Aihara T; Ishii K; Sakamoto J; Tono H; Fukuda S
Intern Med; 2018 May; 57(10):1355-1360. PubMed ID: 29321420
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Treatment and prognosis in peptic ulcer bleeding.
Laursen SB
Dan Med J; 2014 Jan; 61(1):B4797. PubMed ID: 24547604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparison of the Glasgow-Blatchford and AIMS65 scoring systems for risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department.
Yaka E; Yılmaz S; Doğan NÖ; Pekdemir M
Acad Emerg Med; 2015 Jan; 22(1):22-30. PubMed ID: 25556538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Red Blood Cell Transfusion Volumes According to AIMS65 Scores in Patients with Peptic Ulcer Bleeding.
Lee MW; Lee HJ; Shin KH; Kim GH; Kim HH
Lab Med; 2022 Mar; 53(2):190-193. PubMed ID: 34522953
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A multicenter prospective study of the treatment and outcome of patients with gastroduodenal peptic ulcer bleeding in Japan.
Kawaguchi K; Yoshida A; Yuki T; Shibagaki K; Tanaka H; Fujishiro H; Miyaoka Y; Yanagitani A; Koda M; Ikuta Y; Hamamoto T; Mukoyama T; Sasaki Y; Kushiyama Y; Yuki M; Noguchi N; Miura M; Ikebuchi Y; Yashima K; Kinoshita Y; Ishihara S; Isomoto H
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Dec; 101(49):e32281. PubMed ID: 36626498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Emergency endoscopy for acute gastrointestinal bleeding: prognostic value of endoscopic hemostasis and the AIMS65 score in Japanese patients.
Nakamura S; Matsumoto T; Sugimori H; Esaki M; Kitazono T; Hashizume M
Dig Endosc; 2014 May; 26(3):369-76. PubMed ID: 24168099
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of three risk scores to predict outcomes in upper gastrointestinal bleeding; modifying Glasgow-Blatchford with albumin.
Shafaghi A; Gharibpoor F; Mahdipour Z; Samadani AA
Rom J Intern Med; 2019 Dec; 57(4):322-333. PubMed ID: 31268861
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. [Comparison between Glascow-Blatchford, Rockall and AIMS65 scores in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a hospital in Lima, Peru].
Espinoza-Ríos J; Aguilar Sánchez V; Bravo Paredes EA; Pinto Valdivia J; Huerta-Mercado Tenorio J
Rev Gastroenterol Peru; 2016; 36(2):143-52. PubMed ID: 27409091
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Risk stratification in acute upper GI bleeding: comparison of the AIMS65 score with the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring systems.
Robertson M; Majumdar A; Boyapati R; Chung W; Worland T; Terbah R; Wei J; Lontos S; Angus P; Vaughan R
Gastrointest Endosc; 2016 Jun; 83(6):1151-60. PubMed ID: 26515955
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. AIMS65 scoring system is comparable to Glasgow-Blatchford score or Rockall score for prediction of clinical outcomes for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Kim MS; Choi J; Shin WC
BMC Gastroenterol; 2019 Jul; 19(1):136. PubMed ID: 31349816
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. ABC score is an effective predictor of outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding.
Sakong H; Moon HS; Choi SW; Kang SH; Sung JK; Jeong HY
Medicine (Baltimore); 2022 Dec; 101(49):e31541. PubMed ID: 36626500
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. AIMS65 predicts prognosis of patients with duodenal ulcer bleeding; a comparison with other risk-scoring systems.
Hirai R; Shimodate Y; Minami M; Ishikawa S; Kanadani T; Takezawa R; Doi A; Nishimura N; Mouri H; Matsueda K; Yamamoto H; Mizuno M
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol; 2021 Dec; 33(12):1480-1484. PubMed ID: 33252414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study.
Stanley AJ; Laine L; Dalton HR; Ngu JH; Schultz M; Abazi R; Zakko L; Thornton S; Wilkinson K; Khor CJ; Murray IA; Laursen SB;
BMJ; 2017 Jan; 356():i6432. PubMed ID: 28053181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of AIMS65 Score and Other Scoring Systems for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Koreans with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.
Park SM; Yeum SC; Kim BW; Kim JS; Kim JH; Sim EH; Ji JS; Choi H
Gut Liver; 2016 Jul; 10(4):526-31. PubMed ID: 27377742
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Bleeding Peptic Ulcer - Tertiary Center Experience: Epidemiology, Treatment and Prognosis.
Budimir I; Stojsavljević S; Hrabar D; Kralj D; Bišćanin A; Kirigin LS; Zovak M; Babić Ž; Bohnec S; Budimir I
Acta Clin Croat; 2017 Dec; 56(4):707-714. PubMed ID: 29590726
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Use of the AIMS65 and pre-endoscopy Rockall scores in the prediction of mortality in patients with the upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
Kılıç M; Ak R; Dalkılınç Hökenek U; Alışkan H
Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg; 2022 Dec; 29(1):100-104. PubMed ID: 36588521
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
