PREDICTIVE VALUE OF THE CHAMPS AND ROCKALL SCORES FOR REBLEEDING IN PATIENTS WITH PEPTIC ULCER BLEEDING
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Rebleeding is a serious complication that increases the need for repeat intervention, prolongs hospital stay, and adversely affects clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to peptic ulcer disease. Prognostic scoring systems such as ROCKALL and CHAMPS are commonly used to support risk stratification and guide monitoring and treatment strategies. Objectives: To compare the predictive value of the CHAMPS and ROCKALL scores for rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. Materials and methods: An analytical crosssectional study was conducted on 95 patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to peptic ulcer disease treated at Tay Ninh General Hospital from July 2025 to February 2026. Results: The median age of patients was 58.00 (49.00–67.00) years, and males accounted for 74.7%. During hospitalization, rebleeding occurred in 5 patients (5.3%). Both ROCKALL and CHAMPS scores were higher in patients with rebleeding than in those without rebleeding. ROC analysis showed a higher observed AUC for CHAMPS than for ROCKALL (0.813 vs 0.681). A CHAMPS score ≥4 yielded a sensitivity of 60.0%, specificity of 100%, and NPV of 97.8%, whereas a ROCKALL score ≥7 showed a sensitivity of 60.0% and specificity of 90.0%. Conclusion: In this single-center study, the observed AUC for CHAMPS was higher than that for ROCKALL for predicting rebleeding. However, with only five rebleeding events, these findings should be considered preliminary and hypothesis-generating and are insufficient to establish superiority or to support replacing ROCKALL in clinical practice. Prospective multicenter validation with a substantially larger number of events is required.
Keywords
ROCKALL, CHAMPS, gastrointestinal bleeding, peptic ulcer
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
2. Almadi MA, Lu Y, Alali AA, Barkun AN. Peptic ulcer disease. Lancet. 2024. 404(10447), 6881, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)00155-7.
3. Han DP, Gou CQ, Ren XM. Predictive utility of the Rockall scoring system in patients suffering from acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024. 16(8), 2620-2629, https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v16.i8.2620.
4. Matsuhashi T, Hatta W, Hikichi T, Fukuda S, Mikami T, et al. A simple prediction score for inhospital mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. J Gastroenterol. 2021. 56(8), 758-768, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00535-021-01797-w.
5. Lâm Tú Hương, Nguyễn Đình Thắng, Bùi Hữu Hoàng, Võ Duy Thông. Validating the CHAMPS Score: A Novel and Reliable Prognostic Score of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2024. 17:201-211, https://doi.org/10.2147/CEG.S469218.
6. Dương Trọng Hiền, Trương Văn Cường. Kết quả điều trị xuất huyết tiêu hóa do loét dạ dày - tá tràng tại Bệnh viện Hữu Nghị Việt Đức. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam. 2024. 535(1), 1-5, https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v535i1.8332.
7. Rockall TA, Logan RF, Devlin HB, Northfield TC. Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Gut. 1996. 38(3), 316-321, https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.38.3.316.
8. Laine L, Barkun AN, Saltzman JR, Martel M, Leontiadis GI. ACG Clinical Guideline: Upper Gastrointestinal and Ulcer Bleeding. Am J Gastroenterol. 2021. 116(5), 899-917, https://doi.org/10.14309/ajg.0000000000001245.
9. Aydin H, Berikol GB, Erdogan MO, Gemici E, Doğan H. CHAMPS score in predicting mortality of patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2023. 69(4), e20221052, https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20221052.
10. Vreeburg EM, Terwee CB, Snel P, Rauws EAJ, Bartelsman JFWM, et al. Validation of the Rockall risk scoring system in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Gut. 1999. 44(3), 331-335, https://doi.org/10.1136/gut.44.3.331.
11. Frías-Ordoñez JS, Arjona-Granados DA, Urrego-Díaz JA, Briceño-Torres M, Martínez-Marín JD. Validation of the Rockall score in upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding in a Colombian tertiary hospital. Arq Gastroenterol. 2022. 59(1), 80-88, https://doi.org/10.1590/S00042803.202200001-15
12. Kim BJ, Park MK, Kim SJ, Kim ER, Min BH, et al. Comparison of scoring systems for the prediction of outcomes in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a prospective study. Dig Dis Sci. 2009. 54(11), 2523-2529, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-0080654-7.
13. In KR, Oh YE, Moon HS, Jung S, Kang SH, et al. Comparison and validation of several scoring systems for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective study. Sci Rep. 2024. 14(1), 27940, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-79643-1.
14. Ucdal M, Ekingen E. Comparative Evaluation of A4C, CHAMPS, and CAGIB Scores for Risk Stratification in Hemodialysis Patients with Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding. Diagnostics (Basel). 2026. 16(3), 401, https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics16030401.
15. Riley RD, Debray TPA, Collins GS, Archer L, Ensor J, et al. Minimum sample size for external validation of a clinical prediction model with a binary outcome. Stat Med. 2021. 40(19), 42304251, https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.9025.