Is the AIMS65 score useful in predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding?

Table 1 Characteristics of good vs poor outcome n (%)

		Total (n = 149)	Good outcome (n = 121)	Poor outcome (n = 28)	P value
Diagnosis	Gastric ulcer	117 (78.5)	92 (76.0)	25 (89.3)	0.124
	Duodenal ulcer	32 (21.5)	29 (24.0)	3 (10.7)
Sex	Male	116 (77.9)	93 (76.9)	23 (82.1)	0.544
	Female	33 (22.1)	28 (23.1)	5 (17.9)
Age	mean ± SD	62.9 ± 15.9	62.1 ± 16.4	66.3 ± 13.0	0.216
	< 65 yr	72 (48.3)	62 (51.2)	10 (35.7)	0.139
	≥ 65 yr	77 (51.7)	59 (48.8)	18 (64.3)
Systolic BP	mean ± SD	110.9 ± 22.6	109.8 ± 22.7	115.4 ± 22.4	0.243
	≤ 90	36 (24.2)	31 (25.6)	5 (17.9)	0.387
	> 90	113 (75.8)	90 (74.4)	23 (82.1)
Albumin	mean ± SD	3.3 ± 0.6	3.4 ± 0.6	3.1 ± 0.6	0.072
	< 3.0	47 (31.5)	35 (28.9)	12 (42.9)	0.153
	≥ 3.0	102 (68.5)	86 (71.1)	16 (57.1)
INR (PT)	mean ± SD	1.2 ± 0.8	1.2 ± 0.8	1.2 ± 0.2	0.537
	≤ 1.5	138 (92.6)	113 (93.4)	25 (89.3)	0.4341
	> 1.5	11 (7.4)	8 (6.6)	3 (10.7)
Mental status	alert	144 (96.6)	117 (96.7)	27 (96.4)	0.999
	drowsy, coma	5 (3.4)	4 (3.3)	1 (3.6)
AIMS65 score	0	48 (32.2)	43 (35.5)	5 (17.9)	0.2721
	1	49 (32.9)	37 (30.6)	12 (42.9)
	2	34 (22.8)	26 (21.5)	8 (28.6)
	3	15 (10.1)	13 (10.7)	2 (7.1)
	4	3 (2.0)	2 (1.7)	1 (3.6)
	< 2 (0–1)	97 (65.1)	80 (66.1)	17 (60.7)	0.589
	≥ 2 (2–5)	52 (34.9)	41 (33.9)	11 (39.3)
	< 1	48 (32.2)	43 (35.5)	5 (17.9)	0.071
	≥ 1	101 (67.8)	78 (64.5)	23 (82.1)

¹Mean ± SD tested by t-test, n (%) tested using the χ² test and Fisher’s exact test. BP: Blood pressure; INR (PT): International normalized ratio (prothrombin time).

Table 2 Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operating curve using the AIMS65 score cut-off point

AIMS65 score cut-off point	Sensitivity	Specificity	Positive predictive value	Negative predictive value	Area under the ROC curve
≤ 0	35.5%	82.1%	89.6	22.8	0.571
≤ 1	66.1%	39.3%	82.5	21.2	(SE: 0.054
≤ 2	87.6%	10.7%	80.9	16.7	95%CI: 0.49-0.65)
≤ 3	98.4%	3.6%	81.5	33.3

ROC: Receiver operating curve; SE: Standard error; CI: Confidence interval.