Endoscopy-based triage significantly reduces hospitalization rates and costs of treating upper GI bleeding: a randomized controlled trial

Massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to splenoportal axis thrombosis in a patient with a tested JAK2 mutation: A case report and review literature

Portal hypertension is a clinical syndrome defined as a portal venous pressure that exceeds 10mmHg. Cirrhosis is the most common cause of portal hypertension and thrombosis of the splenoportal axis not associated with liver cirrhosis is the second cause of portal hypertension in the Western world. The primary myeloproliferative disorders are the main cause of portal venous thrombosis and somatic mutation of Janus Kinase 2 gene (JAK2 V617F) can be found in approximately 90% of polycythemia vera, 50% of essential thrombocyrosis and 50% primary myelofibrosis. A a 55-year-old man with JAK2 mutation-associated splenoportal axis hypertension and bleeding complications due to oesophageal varices is reported. A massive upper bleeding episode made an emergent surgery to be done immediatelly at seventh day. The patient was discharged home at fifteenth day after surgery.

Risk stratification in acute upper GI bleeding: comparison of the AIMS65 score with the Glasgow-Blatchford and Rockall scoring systems

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The American College of Gastroenterology recommends early risk stratification in patients presenting with upper GI bleeding (UGIB). The AIMS65 score is a risk stratification score previously validated to predict inpatient mortality. The aim of this study was to validate the AIMS65 score as a predictor of inpatient mortality in patients with acute UGIB and to compare it with established pre- and postendoscopy risk scores.

METHODS

ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision) codes identified patients presenting with UGIB requiring endoscopy. All patients were risk stratified by using the AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), pre-endoscopy Rockall, and full Rockall scores. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality. Secondary outcomes were a composite endpoint of inpatient mortality, rebleeding, and endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention; blood transfusion requirement; intensive care unit (ICU) admission; rebleeding; and hospital length of stay. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was calculated for each score.

RESULTS

Of the 424 study patients, 18 (4.2%) died and 69 (16%) achieved the composite endpoint. The AIMS65 score was superior to both the GBS (AUROC, 0.80 vs 0.76, P < .027) and the pre-endoscopy Rockall score (0.74, P = .001) and equivalent to the full Rockall score (0.78, P = .18) in predicting inpatient mortality. The AIMS65 score was superior to all other scores in predicting the need for ICU admission and length of hospital stay. AIMS65, GBS, and full Rockall scores were equivalent (AUROCs, 0.63 vs 0.62 vs 0.63, respectively) and superior to pre-endoscopy Rockall (AUROC, 0.55) in predicting the composite endpoint. GBS was superior to all other scores for predicting blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

The AIMS65 score is a simple risk stratification score for UGIB with accuracy superior to that of GBS and pre-endoscopy Rockall scores in predicting in-hospital mortality and the need for ICU admission.

Clinical outcome of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding after hours: the role of urgent endoscopy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study was performed to investigate the clinical role of urgent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB) performed by experienced endoscopists after hours.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed for consecutively collected data of patients with ANVUGIB between January 2009 and December 2010.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients visited the emergency unit for ANVUGIB after hours. Among them, 60 underwent urgent EGD (within 8 hours) and 98 underwent early EGD (8 to 24 hours) by experienced endoscopists. The frequencies of hemodynamic instability, fresh blood aspirate on the nasogastric tube, and high-risk endoscopic findings were significantly higher in the urgent EGD group. Primary hemostasis was achieved in all except two patients. There were nine cases of recurrent bleeding, and 30-day mortality occurred in three patients. There were no significant differences between the two groups in primary hemostasis, recurrent bleeding, and 30-day mortality. In a multiple linear regression analysis, urgent EGD significantly reduced the hospital stay compared with early EGD. In patients with a high clinical Rockall score (more than 3), urgent EGD tended to decrease the hospital stay, although this was not statistically significant (7.7 days vs. 12.0 days, p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent EGD after hours by experienced endoscopists had an excellent endoscopic success rate. However, clinical outcomes were not significantly different between the urgent and early EGD groups.

Endoscopic management of acute gastrointestinal bleeding in children: Time for a radical rethink

Currently we are no nearer than 10 or 20years ago providing a safe, adequate, and effective round-the-clock endoscopic services for acute life-threatening gastrointestinal bleeding in children. Preventable deaths are occurring still, and it is a tragedy. This is owing to a number of factors which require urgent attention. Skill-mix and the ability of available endoscopists in the UK are woeful. Manpower is spread too thinly and not concentrated in centers of excellence, which is necessary given the relative rarity of the presentation. Adult gastroenterologists are increasingly reticent regarding their help in increasingly litigious times. Recent work on identification of those children likely to require urgent endoscopic intervention has mirrored scoring systems that have been present in adult circles for many years and may allow appropriate and timely intervention. Recent technical developments such as that of Hemospray® may lower the threshold of competency in dealing with this problem endoscopically, thus allowing lives to be saved. Educational courses, mannequin and animal model training are important but so will be appropriate credentialing of individuals for this skill-set. Assessment of competency will become the norm and guidelines on a national level in each country mandatory if we are to move this problem from the "too difficult" to the "achieved". It is an urgent problem and is one of the last emergencies in pediatrics that is conducted poorly. This cannot and should not be allowed to continue unchallenged.

Comparison of Three Risk Scores to Predict Outcomes of Severe Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Improved medical decisions by using a score at the initial patient triage level may lead to improvements in patient management, outcomes, and resource utilization. There is no validated score for management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) unlike for upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The aim of our study was to compare the accuracies of 3 different prognostic scores [Center for Ulcer Research and Education Hemostasis prognosis score, Charlson index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score] for the prediction of 30-day rebleeding, surgery, and death in severe LGIB.

METHODS

Data on consecutive patients hospitalized with severe gastrointestinal bleeding from January 2006 to October 2011 in our 2 tertiary academic referral centers were prospectively collected. Sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve were computed for 3 scores for predictions of rebleeding, surgery, and mortality at 30 days.

RESULTS

Two hundred thirty-five consecutive patients with LGIB were included between 2006 and 2011. Twenty-three percent of patients rebled, 6% had surgery, and 7.7% of patients died. The accuracies of each score never reached 70% for predicting rebleeding or surgery in either. The ASA score had a highest accuracy for predicting mortality within 30 days (83.5%), whereas the Center for Ulcer Research and Education Hemostasis prognosis score and the Charlson index both had accuracies <75% for the prediction of death within 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

ASA score could be useful to predict death within 30 days. However, a new score is still warranted to predict all 30 days outcomes (rebleeding, surgery, and death) in LGIB.

The AIMS65 Score Is a Useful Predictor of Mortality in Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Urgent Endoscopy in Patients with High AIMS65 Scores

BACKGROUND/AIMS

To validate the AIMS65 score for predicting mortality of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and to evaluate the effectiveness of urgent (<8 hours) endoscopic procedures in patients with high AIMS65 scores.

METHODS

This was a 5-year single-center, retrospective study. Nonvariceal, upper gastrointestinal bleeding was assessed by using the AIM65 and Rockall scores. Scores for mortality were assessed by calculating the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Patients with high AIMS65 scores (≥2) were allocated to either the urgent or non-urgent endoscopic procedure group. In-hospital mortality, success of endoscopic procedure, recurrence of bleeding, admission period, and dose of transfusion were compared between groups.

RESULTS

A total of 634 patients were analyzed. The AIMS65 score successfully predicted mortality (AUROC=0.943; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.876 to 0.99) and was superior to the Rockall score (AUROC=0.856; 95% CI, 0.743 to 0.969) in predicting mortality. The group with high AIMS65 score included 200 patients. The urgent endoscopic procedure group had reduced hospitalization periods (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

AIMS65 score may be useful in predicting mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Urgent endoscopic procedures in patients with high scores may be related to reduced hospitalization periods.

Diagnosis and therapy of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is defined as bleeding proximal to the ligament of Treitz in the absence of oesophageal, gastric or duodenal varices. The clinical presentation varies according to the intensity of bleeding from occult bleeding to melena or haematemesis and haemorrhagic shock. Causes of UGIB are peptic ulcers, Mallory-Weiss lesions, erosive gastritis, reflux oesophagitis, Dieulafoy lesions or angiodysplasia. After admission to the hospital a structured approach to the patient with acute UGIB that includes haemodynamic resuscitation and stabilization as well as pre-endoscopic risk stratification has to be done. Endoscopy offers not only the localisation of the bleeding site but also a variety of therapeutic measures like injection therapy, thermocoagulation or endoclips. Endoscopic therapy is facilitated by acid suppression with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. These drugs are highly effective but the best route of application (oral vs intravenous) and the adequate dosage are still subjects of discussion. Patients with ulcer disease are tested for Helicobacter pylori and eradication therapy should be given if it is present. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have to be discontinued if possible. If discontinuation is not possible, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in combination with PPI have the lowest bleeding risk but the incidence of cardiovascular events is increased.

A Clinical Decision Rule Based on the AST-to-Platelet Ratio Index Improves Adherence to Published Guidelines on the Management of Acute Variceal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

Optimal management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) depends on identifying a variceal versus nonvariceal etiology. An objective measure predicting etiology could guide early management pending endoscopy. The AST-to-platelet ratio index (APRI) score has been studied as a marker of cirrhosis and portal hypertension, but has not been evaluated in the setting of acute UGIB.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we reviewed endoscopy reports and other data for patients with acute UGIB, and classified episodes as variceal bleeds or other. We assessed the diagnostic utility of the APRI score relative to other objective measures by Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUROC) curve analysis. We constructed a clinical decision rule based on the APRI score, and assessed how it would have changed management.

RESULTS

The APRI score performed well in predicting a variceal etiology of acute UGIB, with AUROC 0.89. We developed a clinical decision rule using an APRI score of 0.4 to guide early management of acute UGIB patients. Retroactively applying this to our cohort, adherence to published guidelines for administration of octreotide and antibiotics would have increased from 56% to 91%.

CONCLUSIONS

The APRI score is an objective metric that helps predict a variceal etiology of acute UGIB. Using our proposed decision rule could improve adherence to guidelines on management of acute variceal bleeding. Although we were unable to demonstrate a survival benefit, improved adherence to evidence-based guidelines serves as a metric related to this most important outcome measure. Prospective study to validate these findings is indicated.

Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Timing of Endoscopy and Ways to Improve Endoscopic Visualization

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy is the cornerstone of diagnosis and management of patients presenting with acute UGI bleeding. Once hemodynamically resuscitated, early endoscopy (performed within 24 hours of patient presentation) ensures accurate identification of the bleeding source, facilitates risk stratification based on endoscopic stigmata, and allows endotherapy to be delivered where indicated. Moreover, the preendoscopy use of a prokinetic agent (eg, i.v. erythromycin), especially in patients with a suspected high probability of having blood or clots in the stomach before undergoing endoscopy, may result in improved endoscopic visualization, a higher diagnostic yield, and less need for repeat endoscopy.

Endoscopic management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: state of the art

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is one of the most common reasons for hospitalization and a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Recently developed endoscopic devices and supporting apparatuses can achieve endoscopic hemostasis with greater safety and efficiency. With these advancements in technology and technique, gastroenterologists should have no concerns regarding the management of acute upper GI bleeding, provided that they are well prepared and trained. However, when endoscopic hemostasis fails, endoscopy should not be continued. Rather, endoscopists should refer patients to radiologists and surgeons without any delay for evaluation regarding the appropriateness of emergency interventional radiology or surgery.

Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Severity Triage: Locally Derived Score May Outperform Existing Scoring Systems

Background

Scoring tools to predict need for intervention, re-bleeding and mortality of upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) have been developed. It is inconclusive whether these tools are also appropriate for UGIH severity and/or urgency triage. The objective of the study was to compare the performances of the Blatchford score, the Rockall score, and the UGIH score on UGIH severity triage.

Methods

Retrospective 3-year data of UGIH patients (2009 - 2011) were collected. Patients were assigned to each of the three scoring systems based on their clinical characteristics required for the scoring systems. The score ranges of each scoring system were transformed into the same scale from 0 to 100. The score performances were compared by diagnostic indices, graphically presented with area under receiver operating curve (AuROC), discrimination curves, and statistically tested with Chi-squared tests.

Results

When focusing on the diagnostic indices, the local UGIH had similar sensitivity to, but better specificity than the Blatchford score in detecting mild UGIH. The sensitivity was better than and the specificity was less than the Blatchford score in detecting severe UGIH. The local UGIH score was better than the pre-endoscopic Rockall in almost all diagnostic indices. Focusing overall performances, the local UGIH score classified patients non-significantly better than the Blatchford: 89.3% vs. 87.9% for mild (P = 0.243), 87.2% vs. 85.0% for severe (P = 0.092), but significantly classified better than the pre-endoscopic Rockall score: 89.3% vs. 76.4% for mild (P < 0.001), and 87.2% vs. 81.2% for severe (P < 0.001). When exploring the discrimination curves, the Blatchford score classified more patients into the mild categories, and less into the severe categories than the local UGIH score. In contrast, the pre-endoscopic Rockall score classified less patients into the mild, but more into the severe than the local UGIH score.

Conclusion

Triaging UGIH patients into three severity levels in order to decide or set for endoscopy should apply the scoring system specifically developed for that purpose. Adopting other scores developed for other purposes may result in under- and/or over-estimations. The local UGIH score classified patients into three severity levels to help indicate endoscopy more efficiently than the Blatchford score and the pre-endoscopic Rockall score which was developed for different purposes.

Endoscopic management of peptic ulcer bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency around the world and the major cause is peptic ulcer bleeding. Endoscopic treatment is fundamental for the management of peptic ulcer bleeding. Despite recent advances in endoscopic treatment, mortality from peptic ulcer bleeding has still remained high. This is because the disease often occurs in elderly patients with frequent comorbidities and are taking ulcerogenic medications. Therefore, the management of peptic ulcer bleeding is still a challenge for clinicians. This article reviews the various endoscopic methods available for management of peptic ulcer bleeding and the techniques in using these methods.

Comparison of the Glasgow-Blatchford and AIMS65 scoring systems for risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the performance of the Glasgow-Blatchford and the AIMS65 scoring systems as early risk assessment tools for accurately identifying patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding who are at a low risk of requiring clinical interventions, including emergency endoscopy. The secondary objective was to compare their performance regarding relevant clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Data were collected prospectively over a 2-year period in the emergency department of a university hospital. Adult patients with upper GI bleeding from either variceal or nonvariceal sources were included. Composite clinical outcomes consisted of a need for surgical or endoscopic intervention, rebleeding, intensive care unit admission, or in-hospital mortality. Patients who required blood transfusions or suffered composite clinical outcomes were considered high-risk patients. Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) and AIMS65 score were calculated for each patient. The sensitivity and specificity of the scoring systems were calculated. The areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) of the scores were compared.

RESULTS

There were 254 patients in the study, of whom 163 (64.2%) were men. The median age was 61 years (interquartile range = 45 to 72 years). Among the patients, 211 (83.1%) underwent endoscopy, of whom 49 (19.3%) required endoscopic intervention to achieve hemostasis. Five (2%) patients required surgical intervention. Rebleeding was observed in 33 (13%) patients. A total of 143 (56.3%) patients received blood transfusions. A total of 152 (59.8%) were defined as high risk. Eighty-one (31.9%) experienced at least one component of the composite clinical outcomes, 18 (7.1%) of whom suffered in-hospital mortality. A GBS of 0 was observed in 16 patients (6.3%) in the study group. Two of these were high-risk patients. A total of 101 (39.8%) patients had AIMS65 scores of 0. Thirty-four of these were high-risk patients. A GBS of 0 had higher sensitivity than an AIMS65 score of 0 (98.68% vs. 77.6%). The negative predictive values of the GBS and AIMS65 of 0 were 87.5 and 66.3%, respectively. The GBS and AIMS65 were similar with regard to the composite outcome prediction, with AUCs of 0.795 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.74 to 0.843) and 0.746 (95% CI = 0.688 to 0.798), respectively (p = 0.137). The scores were also similar with respect to predicting in-hospital mortality (AUCs of 0.85 vs. 0.81; p = 0.342). The GBS was superior to the AIMS65 in identifying high-risk patients, with AUCs of 0.896 (95% CI = 0.85 to 0.93) and 0.771 (95% CI = 0.714 to 0.821; p < 0.001), respectively. The GBS was also more accurate than the AIM65 in predicting the need for blood transfusions (AUCs of 0.904 vs. 0.796; p < 0.001) and interventions (AUCs of 0.727 vs. 0.647; p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the GBS has superior sensitivity relative to the AIMS65 in identifying patients who were not likely to require interventions, including emergency endoscopy. Additional work to determine the use in real-time decision making may be warranted and helpful in providing guidance to clinicians.

Management of overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a low resource setting: a real world report from Nigeria

Background

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains a common medical problem worldwide that has significant associated morbidity, mortality, and health care resource use. This study outlines the aetiology, clinical presentation, and treatment outcomes of patients with UGIB in a Nigerian low resource health facility.

Methods

This was a descriptive study of consecutive patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy for upper GI bleeding in the endoscopy unit of the Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospital Complex, Ile-Ife, Osun State, Nigeria from January 2007 to December 2013.

Results

During the study period, 287 (12.4%) of 2,320 patients who underwent upper GI endoscopies had UGIB. Of these, 206 (72.0%) patients were males and their ages ranged from 3 to 100 years with a median age of 49 years. The main clinical presentation included passage of melaena stool in 268 (93.4%) of individuals, 173 (60.3%) had haematemesis, 110 (38.3%) had haematochezia, and 161 (56.1%) were dizzy at presentation. Observed in 88 (30.6%) of UGIB patients, duodenal ulcer was the most common cause, followed by varices [52 (18.1%)] and gastritis [51 (17.1%)]. For variceal bleeding, 15 (28.8%) and 21 (40.4%) of patients had injection sclerotherapy and variceal band ligation, respectively. The overall rebleeding rate for endoscopic therapy for varices was 16.7%. For patients with ulcers, only 42 of 55 who had Forrest grade Ia to IIb ulcers were offered endoscopic therapy. Endoscopic therapy was áin 90.5% of the cases. No rebleeding followed endoscopic therapy for the ulcers. The obtained Rockall scores ranged from 2 to 10 and the median was 5.0. Of all patients, 92.7% had medium or high risk scores. An increase in Rockall score was significantly associated with length of hospital stay and mortality (p < 0.001). The overall mortality rate was 5.9% (17 patients).

Conclusion

Endoscopic therapy for UGIB in a resource-poor setting such as Nigeria is feasible, significantly reduces morbidity and mortality, and is cost effective. Efforts should be made to improve the accessibility of these therapeutic procedure for patients with UGIB in Nigeria.

Epidemiology and diagnosis of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common gastroenterological emergency. A vast majority of these bleeds have nonvariceal causes, in particular gastroduodenal peptic ulcers. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, low-dose aspirin use, and Helicobacter pylori infection are the main risk factors for UGIB. Current epidemiologic data suggest that patients most affected are older with medical comorbidit. Widespread use of potentially gastroerosive medications underscores the importance of adopting gastroprotective pharamacologic strategies. Endoscopy is the mainstay for diagnosis and treatment of acute UGIB. It should be performed within 24 hours of presentation by skilled operators in adequately equipped settings, using a multidisciplinary team approach.

Initial assessment and management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a substantial clinical and economic burden, with an estimated mortality rate between 3% and 15%. The initial management starts with hemodynamic assessment and resuscitation. Blood transfusions may be needed in patients with low hemoglobin levels or massive bleeding, and patients who are anticoagulated may require administration of fresh frozen plasma. Patients with significant bleeding should be started on a proton-pump inhibitor infusion, and if there is concern for variceal bleeding, an octreotide infusion. Patients with UGIB should be stratified into low-risk and high-risk categories using validated risk scores. The use of these risk scores can aid in separating low-risk patients who are suitable for outpatient management or early discharge following endoscopy from patients who are at increased risk for needing endoscopic intervention, rebleeding, and death. Upper endoscopy after adequate resuscitation is required for most patients and should be performed within 24 hours of presentation. Key to improving outcomes is appropriate initial management of patients presenting with UGIB.

A simplified clinical risk score predicts the need for early endoscopy in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Pre-endoscopic triage of patients who require an early upper endoscopy can improve management of patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

AIMS

To validate a new simplified clinical score (T-score) to assess the need of an early upper endoscopy in non variceal bleeding patients. Secondary outcomes were re-bleeding rate, 30-day bleeding-related mortality.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicentre study patients with bleeding who underwent upper endoscopy were enrolled. The accuracy for high risk endoscopic stigmata of the T-score was compared with that of the Glasgow Blatchford risk score.

RESULTS

Overall, 602 patients underwent early upper endoscopy, and 472 presented with non-variceal bleeding. High risk endoscopic stigmata were detected in 145 (30.7%) cases. T-score sensitivity and specificity for high risk endoscopic stigmata and bleeding-related mortality was 96% and 30%, and 80% and 71%, respectively. No statistically difference in predicting high risk endoscopic stigmata between T-score and Glasgow Blatchford risk score was observed (ROC curve: 0.72 vs. 0.69, p=0.11). The two scores were also similar in predicting re-bleeding (ROC curve: 0.64 vs. 0.63, p=0.4) and 30-day bleeding-related mortality (ROC curve: 0.78 vs. 0.76, p=0.3).

CONCLUSIONS

The T-score appeared to predict high risk endoscopic stigmata, re-bleeding and mortality with similar accuracy to Glasgow Blatchford risk score. Such a score may be helpful for the prediction of high-risk patients who need a very early therapeutic endoscopy.

The cost-effectiveness analysis of video capsule endoscopy compared to other strategies to manage acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage in the ED

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Acute upper gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage is a common presentation in hospital-based emergency departments (EDs). A novel diagnostic approach is to use video capsule endoscopy to directly visualize the upper GI tract and identify bleeding. Our objective was to evaluate and compare the relative costs and benefits of video capsule endoscopy compared to other strategies in low- to moderate-risk ED patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage.

METHODS

We constructed a model using standard decision analysis software to examine the cost-effectiveness of 4 available strategies for a base-case patient who presents to the ED with either mild- or moderate-risk scenarios (by Glasgow-Blatchford Score) for requiring invasive hemostatic intervention (ie, endoscopic, surgical, etc) The 4 available diagnostic strategies were (1) direct imaging with video capsule endoscopy performed in the ED; (2) risk stratification using the Glasgow-Blatchford score; (3) nasogastric tube placement; and, finally, (4) an admit-all strategy.

RESULTS

In the low-risk scenario, video capsule endoscopy was the preferred strategy (cost $5691, 14.69 quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) and was more cost-effective than the remaining strategies including nasogastric tube strategy (cost $8159, 14.69 QALYs), risk stratification strategy (cost $10,695, 14.69 QALYs), and admit-all strategy (cost $22,766, 14.68 QALYs). In the moderate-risk scenario, video capsule endoscopy continued to be the preferred strategy (cost $9190, 14.56 QALYs) compared to nasogastric tube (cost $9487, 14.58 QALYs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $15,891) and more cost effective than admit-all strategy (cost, $22,584, 14.54 QALYs.)

CONCLUSION

Video capsule endoscopy may be cost-effective for low- and moderate-risk patients presenting to the ED with acute upper GI hemorrhage.

Can the presence of endoscopic high-risk stigmata be predicted before endoscopy? A multivariable analysis using the RUGBE database

BACKGROUND

Many aspects in the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding rely on pre-esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) stratification of patients likely to exhibit high-risk stigmata (HRS); however, data predicting the presence of HRS are lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To determine clinical and laboratory predictors of HRS at the index EGD in patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding using retrospective data from a validated national database - the Canadian Registry in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Endoscopy registry. methods: Relevant clinical and laboratory parameters were evaluated. HRS was defined as spurting, oozing, nonbleeding visible vessel or adherent clot after vigorous irrigation. Multivariable modelling was used to identify predictors of HRS including age, sex, hematemesis, use of antiplatelet agents, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, nasogastric tube aspirate, hemoglobin level and elapsed time from the onset of bleeding to EGD.

RESULTS

Of the 1677 patients (mean [± SD] age 66.2 ± 16.8 years; 38.3% female), 28.7% had hematemesis, 57.8% had an ASA score of 3 to 5, and the mean hemoglobin level was 96.8 ± 27.3 g⁄L. The mean time from presentation to endoscopy was 22.2 ± 37.5 h. The best fitting multivariable model included the following significant predictors: ASA score 3 to 5 (OR 2.16 [95% CI 1.71 to 2.74]), a shorter time to endoscopy (OR 0.99 [95% CI 0.98 to 0.99]) and a lower initial hemoglobin level (OR 0.99 [95% CI 0.99 to 0.99]).

CONCLUSION

A higher ASA score, a shorter time to endoscopy and lower initial hemoglobin level all significantly predicted the presence of endoscopic HRS. These criteria could be used to improve the optimal selection of patients requiring more urgent endoscopy.

Multidetector CT angiography for acute gastrointestinal bleeding: technique and findings

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding is a common reason for emergency department admissions and an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Factors that complicate its clinical management include patient debility due to comorbidities; intermittence of hemorrhage; and multiple sites of simultaneous bleeding. Its management, therefore, must be multidisciplinary and include emergency physicians, gastroenterologists, and surgeons, as well as radiologists for diagnostic imaging and interventional therapy. Upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding is usually managed endoscopically, with radiologic intervention reserved as an alternative to be used if endoscopic therapy fails. Endoscopy is often less successful in the management of acute lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding, where colonoscopy may be more effective. The merits of performing bowel cleansing before colonoscopy in such cases might be offset by the resultant increase in response time and should be weighed carefully against the deficits in visualization and diagnostic accuracy that would result from performing colonoscopy without bowel preparation. In recent years, multidetector computed tomographic (CT) angiography has gained acceptance as a first-line option for the diagnosis and management of lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding. In selected cases of upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding, CT angiography also provides accurate information about the presence or absence of active bleeding, its source, and its cause. This information helps shorten the total diagnostic time and minimizes or eliminates the need for more expensive and more invasive procedures.

"First look" unsedated transnasal esogastroduodenoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding? A prospective evaluation

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

With small diameter endoscopes, transnasal esophagogastroduodenoscopy (t-EGD) is routinely performed. The aim of this prospective observational study was to evaluate the role of t-EGD for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred and forty-five consecutive patients (mean age, 66±18.4 years) with suspicion of UGIB were classified a priori into 3 groups according to initial clinical presentation: (1) intensive care unit with EGD under sedation, (2) endoscopy unit with EGD under transient sedation and (3) unsedated t-EGD as "first look". Demographic, clinical and biological parameters, Rockall and Blatchford scores, endoscopic diagnosis and treatment, and outcome were analysed.

RESULTS

Unsedated t-EGD was attempted in 89 patients, performed in 52 (5 failures, 28 contraindications) and the procedure was converted under sedation for 2 patients. Based on ASA classification, clinical (blood pressure, hemodynamical failure) and biological variables (hemoglobin, platelets, creatinine), these patients were less severe than in the other groups. Pre-endoscopic Rockall and Blatchford scores were significantly lower in this group. More patients in this group presented significant cardiovascular co-morbidity (47.2%), taking aspirin, clopidogrel and/or anticoagulant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results strongly support that "first look" unsedated t-EGD can avoid unnecessary sedation in selected patients with UGIB, presenting a low probability for endoscopic haemostatic treatment and high sedation risks.

Regional differences in outcomes of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in Saskatchewan

BACKGROUND

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is associated with significant mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To examine several factors that may impact the mortality and 30-day rebleed rates of patients presenting with NVUGIB.

METHODS

A retrospective study of the charts of patients admitted to hospital in either the Saskatoon Health Region (SHR) or Regina Qu'Appelle Health Region (RQHR) (Saskatchewan) in 2008 and 2009 was performed. Mortality and 30-day rebleed end points were stratified according to age, sex, day of admission, patient status, health region, specialty of the endoscopist and time to endoscopy. Logistic regression modelling was performed, controlling for the Charlson comorbidity index, age and sex as covariates.

RESULTS

The overall mortality rate observed was 12.2% (n=44), while the overall 30-day rebleed rate was 20.3% (n=80). Inpatient status at the time of the rebleeding event was associated with a significantly increased risk of both mortality and rebleed, while having endoscopy performed in the RQHR versus SHR was associated with a significantly decreased risk of rebleed. A larger proportion of endoscopies were performed both within 24 h and by a gastroenterologist in the RQHR.

CONCLUSION

Saskatchewan has relatively high rates of mortality and 30-day rebleeding among patients with NVUGIB compared with published rates. The improved outcomes observed in the RQHR, when compared with the SHR, may be related to the employ of a formal call-back endoscopy team for the treatment of NVUGIB.

Predictors of favourable outcome in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: implications for early discharge?

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of validated predictors on which to decide the timing of discharge in patients already hospitalized for upper nonvariceal bleeding.

AIMS

Identify factors that appear to protect nonvariceal bleeders from the development of negative outcome (rebleeding, surgery, death).

METHODS

Secondary analysis of two prospective multicenter studies. Multivariate analyses for each investigated outcome were performed; a single model was developed including all factors that were statistically significant in each sub-model. A final score was developed to predict favourable outcomes. Prognostic accuracy was tested with ROC curve analysis.

RESULTS

Out of 2398 patients, 211 (8.8%) developed one or more adverse outcomes: 87 (3.63%) had rebleeding, 46 (1.92%) needed surgery and 107 (4.46%) died. Predictors of favourable prognosis were: ASA score 1 or 2, absence of neoplasia, outpatient bleeding, use of low-dose aspirin, no need for transfusions, clean-based ulcer, age <70 years, no haemodynamic instability successful endoscopic diagnosis/therapy, no Dieulafoy's lesion at endoscopy, no hematemesis on presentation and no need for endoscopic treatment. Overall prognostic accuracy of the model was 83%. The final score accurately identified 20-30% of patients that eventually do not develop any negative outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

The "good luck score" may be a useful tool in deciding when to discharge a patient already hospitalized for acute non-variceal bleeding.

Video capsule endoscopy in the emergency department: a prospective study of acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Video capsule endoscopy has been used to diagnose gastrointestinal hemorrhage and other small bowel diseases but has not been tested in an emergency department (ED) setting. The objectives in this pilot study are to demonstrate the ability of emergency physicians to detect blood in the upper gastrointestinal tract with capsule endoscopy after a short training period, measure ED patient acceptance of capsule endoscopy, and estimate the test characteristics of capsule endoscopy to detect acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

METHODS

During a 6-month period at a single academic hospital, eligible patients underwent video capsule endoscopy (Pillcam Eso2; Given Imaging) in the ED. Video images were reviewed by 4 blinded physicians (2 emergency physicians with brief training in capsule endoscopy interpretation and 2 gastroenterologists with capsule endoscopy experience).

RESULTS

A total of 25 subjects with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage were enrolled. There was excellent agreement between gastroenterologists and emergency physicians for the presence of fresh or coffee-ground blood (0.96 overall agreement; κ=0.90). Capsule endoscopy was well tolerated by 96% of patients and showed an 88% sensitivity (95% confidence interval 65% to 100%) and 64% specificity (95% confidence interval 35% to 92%) for the detection of fresh blood. Capsule endoscopy missed 1 bleeding lesion located in the postpyloric region, which was not imaged because of expired battery life.

CONCLUSION

Video capsule endoscopy is a sensitive way to identify upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage in the ED. It is well tolerated and there is excellent agreement in interpretation between gastroenterologists and emergency physicians.

Provision of an out-of-hours emergency endoscopy service: the Leicester experience

INTRODUCTION

The British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Strategy document 'Care of patients with Gastrointestinal (GI) disorders' recommends that all acute hospitals should have arrangements for out-of-hours (OOH) endoscopy staffed with appropriately trained endoscopists. The UK national audit published in 2010 found that only 52% of hospitals across the UK had a formal consultant-led OOH endoscopy on-call rota. The University Hospitals of Leicester (UHL) established a consultant-led rota in 2006, which now provides 24/7 endoscopy cover. To define the workload of a newly established OOH service, we examined procedures performed since the introduction of an OOH service in 2006.

METHODS

The audit period covered August-January (6 months) for each of five consecutive years. Data were gathered from formal endoscopy reports on Unisoft reporting tool and OOH record books. We examined indication for endoscopy, timing of procedure, findings at index endoscopy, intervention and immediate outcome.

RESULTS

Across the three UHL sites, data on 982 patients were analysed. Eighty-one percent of procedures performed were gastroscopies. 63% of the procedures were performed for GI bleed indications. Over the five years, there was an overall increase in the number of procedures performed where no pathology was found. Immediate outcomes postendoscopy were good, with over 90% being returned to their base ward.

CONCLUSIONS

The experience at UHL appears to show a trend towards an increasing number of procedures performed OOH, with fewer positive findings and less need for therapy. A likely contributing factor is the ongoing shortage of medical beds, requiring more routine work to be done OOH in order to expedite discharges. However, early specialist endoscopic input is likely to improve patient management. The impact of an OOH service on other services, however, needs to be carefully considered.

Novel nasogastric tube-related criteria for urgent endoscopy in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Patients with active upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) require urgent endoscopy, but appropriate criteria for urgent endoscopy in these patients have not yet been established.

AIMS

The goal of this study is to establish a simple system for the selection of UGIB patients who may benefit from urgent endoscopy.

METHODS

Of the 335 patients who required emergency hospitalization for UGIB from May 2010 to March 2012 at Nagoya Daini Red Cross Hospital, 166 patients who underwent placement of a nasogastric tube (NGT) were retrospectively identified. Active bleeding on the endoscopic image was used as an endpoint that reflected the need for urgent endoscopy.

RESULTS

The ratio of the heart rate to the systolic blood pressure (HR/SBP ratio) and aspiration of fresh or dark red fluid from the NGT [NGT(+)] were significant predictors of active bleeding in the univariate analysis [HR/SBP ratio, P=0.016; NGT(+), P<0.001]. The HR/SBP ratio [odds ratio (OR) 8.118; 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.696-38.850; P=0.009] and NGT(+) (OR 4.630; 95% CI 2.092-10.204; P<0.001) were also significantly associated with active bleeding in the multivariate analysis. Moreover, receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed a setting with HR/SBP ratio>1.4 or NGT(+) to be optimal criteria to predict active bleeding. These criteria were associated with a sensitivity of 64.9% (24/37) and a specificity of 76.7% (99/129) for the prediction of active bleeding; consequently, they are superior to the sensitivity and specificity of previously proposed criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel and simple criteria system using NGT(+) and HR/SBP is a good predictor of the need for urgent endoscopy in patients with nonvariceal UGIB.

Emergency physicians accurately interpret video capsule endoscopy findings in suspected upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a video survey

BACKGROUND

Acute upper gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage is a common emergency department (ED) presentation whose severity ranges from benign to life-threatening and the best tool to risk stratify the disease is an upper endoscopy, either by scope or by capsule, a procedure performed almost exclusively by gastroenterologists. Unfortunately, on-call gastroenterology specialists are often unavailable, and emergency physicians (EPs) currently lack an alternative method to endoscopically visualize a suspected acute upper GI hemorrhage. Recent reports have shown that video capsule endoscopy is well tolerated by ED patients and has similar sensitivity and specificity to endoscopy for upper GI hemorrhage.

OBJECTIVES

The study objective was to determine if EPs can detect upper GI bleeding on capsule endoscopy after a brief training session.

METHODS

A survey study was designed to demonstrate video examples of capsule endoscopy to EPs and determine if they could detect upper GI bleeding after a brief training session. All videos were generated from a prior ED-based study on patients with suspected acute upper GI hemorrhage. The training session consisted of less than 10 minutes of background information and capsule endoscopy video examples. EPs were recruited at the American College of Emergency Physicians Scientific Assembly in Denver, Colorado, from October 8, 2012, to October 10, 2012. Inclusion criteria included being an ED resident or attending physician and the exclusion criteria included any formal endoscopy training. The authors analyzed the agreement between the EPs and expert adjudicated capsule endoscopy readings for each capsule endoscopy video. For the outcome categories of blood (fresh or coffee grounds type) or no blood detected, the sensitivity and specificity were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 126 EPs were enrolled. Compared to expert gastroenterology-adjudicated interpretation, the sensitivity to detect blood was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.91 to 0.96) and specificity was 0.87 (95% CI = 0.80 to 0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

After brief training, EPs can accurately interpret video capsule endoscopy findings of presence of gross blood or no blood with high sensitivity and specificity.

Challenges in the management of acute peptic ulcer bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency worldwide, a major cause of which are bleeding peptic ulcers. Endoscopic treatment and acid suppression with proton-pump inhibitors are cornerstones in the management of the disease, and both treatments have been shown to reduce mortality. The role of emergency surgery continues to diminish. In specialised centres, radiological intervention is increasingly used in patients with severe and recurrent bleeding who do not respond to endoscopic treatment. Despite these advances, mortality from the disorder has remained at around 10%. The disease often occurs in elderly patients with frequent comorbidities who use antiplatelet agents, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and anticoagulants. The management of such patients, especially those at high cardiothrombotic risk who are on anticoagulants, is a challenge for clinicians. We summarise the published scientific literature about the management of patients with bleeding peptic ulcers, identify directions for future clinical research, and suggest how mortality can be reduced.

State-of-the-art management of acute bleeding peptic ulcer disease

The management of patients with non variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding has evolved, as have its causes and prognosis, over the past 20 years. The addition of high-quality data coupled to the publication of authoritative national and international guidelines have helped define current-day standards of care. This review highlights the relevant clinical evidence and consensus recommendations that will hopefully result in promoting the effective dissemination and knowledge translation of important information in the management of patients afflicted with this common entity.

Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage: Development of the Severity Score

Background

Emergency endoscopy for every patient with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage is not possible in many medical centers. Simple guidelines to select patients for emergency endoscopy are lacking. The aim of the present report is to develop a simple scoring system to classify upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) severity based on patient clinical profiles at the emergency departments.

Methods

Retrospective data of patients with UGIH in a university affiliated hospital were analyzed. Patients were criterion-classified into 3 severity levels: mild, moderate and severe. Clinical and laboratory information were compared among the 3 groups. Significant parameters were selected as indicators of severity. Coefficients of significant multivariable parameters were transformed into item scores, which added up as individual severity scores. The scores were used to classify patients into 3 urgency levels: non-urgent, urgent and emergent groups. Score-classification and criterion-classification were compared.

Results

Significant parameters in the model were age ≥ 60 years, pulse rate ≥ 100/min, systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg, hemoglobin < 10 g/dL, blood urea nitrogen ≥ 35 mg/dL, presence of cirrhosis and hepatic failure. The score ranged from 0 to 27, and classifying patients into 3 urgency groups: non-urgent (score < 4, n = 215, 21.2%), urgent (score 4 - 16, n = 677, 66.9%) and emergent (score > 16, n = 121, 11.9%). The score correctly classified 81.4% of the patients into their original (criterion-classified) severity groups. Under-estimation (7.5%) and over-estimation (11.1%) were clinically acceptable.

Conclusions

Our UGIH severity scoring system classified patients into 3 urgency groups: non-urgent, urgent and emergent, with clinically acceptable small number of under- and over-estimations. Its discriminative ability and precision should be validated before adopting into clinical practice.

Management by the intensivist of gastrointestinal bleeding in adults and children

Intensivists are regularly confronted with the question of gastrointestinal bleeding. To date, the latest international recommendations regarding prevention and treatment for gastrointestinal bleeding lack a specific approach to the critically ill patients. We present recommendations for management by the intensivist of gastrointestinal bleeding in adults and children, developed with the GRADE system by an experts group of the French-Language Society of Intensive Care (Société de Réanimation de Langue Française (SRLF), with the participation of the French Language Group of Paediatric Intensive Care and Emergencies (GFRUP), the French Society of Emergency Medicine (SFMU), the French Society of Gastroenterology (SNFGE), and the French Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SFED). The recommendations cover five fields of application: management of gastrointestinal bleeding before endoscopic diagnosis, treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding unrelated to portal hypertension, treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding related to portal hypertension, management of presumed lower gastrointestinal bleeding, and prevention of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in intensive care.

Management of patients with ulcer bleeding

This guideline presents recommendations for the step-wise management of patients with overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Hemodynamic status is first assessed, and resuscitation initiated as needed. Patients are risk-stratified based on features such as hemodynamic status, comorbidities, age, and laboratory tests. Pre-endoscopic erythromycin is considered to increase diagnostic yield at first endoscopy. Pre-endoscopic proton pump inhibitor (PPI) may be considered to decrease the need for endoscopic therapy but does not improve clinical outcomes. Upper endoscopy is generally performed within 24h. The endoscopic features of ulcers direct further management. Patients with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessels receive endoscopic therapy (e.g., bipolar electrocoagulation, heater probe, sclerosant, clips) and those with an adherent clot may receive endoscopic therapy; these patients then receive intravenous PPI with a bolus followed by continuous infusion. Patients with flat spots or clean-based ulcers do not require endoscopic therapy or intensive PPI therapy. Recurrent bleeding after endoscopic therapy is treated with a second endoscopic treatment; if bleeding persists or recurs, treatment with surgery or interventional radiology is undertaken. Prevention of recurrent bleeding is based on the etiology of the bleeding ulcer. H. pylori is eradicated and after cure is documented anti-ulcer therapy is generally not given. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are stopped; if they must be resumed low-dose COX-2-selective NSAID plus PPI is used. Patients with established cardiovascular disease who require aspirin should start PPI and generally re-institute aspirin soon after bleeding ceases (within 7 days and ideally 1-3 days). Patients with idiopathic ulcers receive long-term anti-ulcer therapy.

Impact of nasogastric lavage on outcomes in acute GI bleeding

BACKGROUND

Nasogastric lavage (NGL) is often performed early in the management of GI bleeding. This practice assumes that NGL results can assist with timely risk stratification and management.

OBJECTIVE

We performed a retrospective analysis to test whether NGL is associated with improved process measures and outcomes in GI bleeding.

DESIGN

Propensity-matched retrospective analysis.

SETTING

University-based Veterans Affairs medical center.

PATIENTS

A total of 632 patients admitted with GI bleeding.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Thirty-day mortality rate, length of hospital stay, transfusion requirements, surgery, and time to endoscopy.

RESULTS

Patients receiving NGL were more likely to take nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and be admitted to intensive care, but less likely to have metastatic disease or tachycardia, be taking warfarin, or present on weekdays. After propensity matching, NGL did not affect mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-1.92), length of hospital stay (7.3 vs 8.1 days, P = .57), surgery (OR 1.51; 95% CI, 0.42-5.43), or transfusions (3.2 vs 3.0 units, P = .94). However, NGL was associated with earlier time to endoscopy (hazard ratio 1.49; 95% CI, 1.09-2.04), and bloody aspirates were associated high-risk lesions (OR 2.69; 95% CI, 1.08-6.73).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing NGL is associated with the earlier performance of endoscopy, but does not affect clinical outcomes. Performing NGL at initial triage may promote more timely process of care, but further studies will be needed to confirm these findings.

The overall approach to the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

This article presents a practical overview of the approach to managing a patient presenting with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). The authors focus on initial resuscitation and risk stratification strategies that should be used in the Emergency Department, and put into context the subsequent optimal use of pharmacologic and endoscopic therapies and postendoscopic management. It is hoped that this framework will provide the reader with a practical and evidence-based approach to the management of NVUGIB from the patient's initial presentation through to hospital discharge.

Live view video capsule endoscopy enables risk stratification of patients with acute upper GI bleeding in the emergency room: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification of patients with acute upper GI bleeding (UGIB) in the emergency room (ER) enables appropriate triage to urgent endoscopy and therapeutic intervention.

AIM

The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of Live View Video Capsule Endoscopy (VCE) with Pillcam Eso(®) to accurately identify high and low risk patients with UGIB.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients with a history of UGIB within 48 h of admission to the ER were randomized to VCE versus standard clinical assessment. VCE was read real-time at the bedside and later reviewed after download. Positive VCE findings included coffee grounds, blood clot, red blood, or a bleeding lesion. VCE positive patients underwent EGD within 6 h. Control patients and VCE negative patients underwent EGD within 24 h.

RESULTS

Seven of 12 patients were VCE positive. All seven had confirmatory stigmata at EGD. Of the five VCE negative patients, four had no stigmata at EGD and one was not endoscoped due to comorbidities. The actual lesion was visualized at VCE in four of 12 patients during live view and in an additional two patients after download (6/12). Time to endoscopy in the VCE positive group was significantly shorter than control patients (2.5 vs. 8.9 h, P = 0.029). There was no mortality. Blood transfusion requirement and length of stay were not significantly different in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Live view VCE accurately identifies high and low risk ER patients with UGIB. Use of VCE to risk stratify these patients significantly reduced time to emergent EGD and therapeutic intervention.

Clinical triage decision vs risk scores in predicting the need for endotherapy in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) is a common reason for hospitalization with substantial associated morbidity, mortality, and cost. Differentiation of high- and low-risk patients using established risk scoring systems has been advocated. The aim of this study was to determine whether these scoring systems are more accurate than an emergency physician's clinical decision making in predicting the need for endoscopic intervention in acute UGIH.

METHODS

Patients presenting to a tertiary care medical center with acute UGIH from 2003 to 2006 were identified from the hospital database, and their clinical data were abstracted. One hundred ninety-five patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The clinical Rockall score and Blatchford score (BS) were calculated and compared with the clinical triage decision (intensive care unit vs non-intensive care unit admission) in predicting the need for endoscopic therapy.

RESULTS

Clinical Rockall score greater than 0 and BS greater than 0 were sensitive predictors of the need for endoscopic therapy (95% and 100%) but were poorly specific (9% and 4%), with overall accuracies of 41% and 39%. At higher score cutoffs, clinical Rockall score greater than 2 and BS greater than 5 remained sensitive (84% and 87%) and were more specific (29% and 33%), with overall accuracies of 48% and 52%. Clinical triage decision, as a surrogate for predicting the need for endoscopic therapy, was moderately sensitive (67%) and specific (75%), with an overall accuracy (73%) that exceeded both risk scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical use of risk scoring systems in acute UGIH may not be as good as clinical decision making by emergency physicians.

Etiology and outcome of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a study from South of Iran

BACKGROUND/AIM

The prevalence of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) has undergone a change after implementation of eradication therapy for Helicobacter pylori in peptic ulcers effective prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding and eventually, progressive use of low dose aspirin and other nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). To evaluate this subject, we performed a prospective study in two main University Hospitals of Shiraz (the largest city of southern Iran).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All adults who were admitted in emergency room with impression of AUGIB and existing patients who developed AUGIB were included in the study. Gastroscopy was done with a follow-up for the next 15 days.

RESULTS

572 patients (mean age: 54.9 years) entered in the study. The most common presenting symptom was hematemesis or coffee-ground vomits (68%). 75% of patients gave history of consumption of low dose aspirin or other NSAIDs regularly. Gastric and/or duodenal ulcers were the most common causes (252/572, 44%) of AUGIB (Gastric ulcer: 173/572, 30% and duodenal ulcer: 93/572, 16%, respectively). Esophageal varices were the third common cause (64/572, 11%). 36 (6%) of the patients died. Mean age of these patients was higher than the patients who were alive (64.8 vs. 54.2 years, P = 0.001). Other than age, orthostatic hypotension on arrival (267/536 vs. 24/36, P = 0.018) and consumption of steroids (43/536 vs. 10/36, P = 0.001) were significant factors for increasing mortality.

CONCLUSION

The most common cause of AUGIB, secondary only to NSAIDs consumption, is gastric ulcer. Mortality of older patients, patients who consumed NSAIDs and steroids concomitantly, and patients with hemodynamic instability on arrival were higher.

Prospective evaluation of a clinical guideline recommending early patients discharge in bleeding peptic ulcer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To validate an early discharge policy in patients admitted with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) due to ulcers.

METHODS

Patients with gastroduodenal ulcer or erosive gastritis/duodenitis were included in a previous study aiming to develop a practice guideline for early discharge of patients with UGIB. Variables associated with unfavorable evolution were analyzed in order to identify patients with low-risk of re-bleeding. After that, a one-year prospective analysis of all UGIB episodes was carried out.

RESULTS

A total of 341 patients were identified in the retrospective study. Variables associated with unfavorable evolution were: systolic blood pressure < or = 100 mmHg, heart rate > or = 100 bpm, and a Forrest endoscopic classification of severe. 10% of patients were immediately discharged; however, if predictive variables obtained in the multivariate analysis had been used, hospitalization could have been prevented in 34% of patients. A total of 77 patients were included in the prospective analysis. Although only 19.5% of patients were immediately discharged without complications, 29 patients (37.7%) were theoretically suitable for early discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with UGIB who have clean-based ulcers and are stable on admission can be safely discharged immediately after endoscopy. Implementation of the clinical practice guideline safely reduced hospital admission for those patients.

The role of endoscopy in the management of obscure GI bleeding

This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, we performed a search of the medical literature by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time the guidelines were drafted. Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommendations are based on reviewed studies and are graded on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1).(1) The strength of individual recommendations is based both upon the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as "we suggest," whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as "we recommend." This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient's condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.

[Classification and management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding]

The upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains the most frequent emergency in gastroenterology. Due to the different therapeutic approach a distinction between the variceal and the non-variceal bleeding has been established. A risk assessment for the individual patient is crucial for timing of the endoscopic procedure as well as for the estimation of prognosis. This review gives an overview on modern therapeutic techniques for both, variceal and non-variceal bleeding highlighting on success rates but also on potential complications of the different therapeutic interventions.

Proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated prior to endoscopic diagnosis in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

There is conflicting evidence regarding the clinical efficacy of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) initiated before endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of PPI treatment initiated before endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases and major conference proceedings to September 2005, using the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases model. Searches were re-run in February 2006 and October 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of hospitalised participants with unselected upper gastrointestinal bleeding, undergoing active treatment with a proton pump inhibitor PPI (oral or intravenous) and control treatment with either placebo, histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) or no treatment prior to endoscopy. Outcomes were assessed at 30 days and included mortality, rebleeding and surgery. Also assessed were stigmata of recent haemorrhage (SRH; active bleeding, non bleeding visible vessel or adherent clot) at index endoscopy, length of hospital stay, blood transfusion requirements and requirement for endoscopic therapy at index endoscopy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors assessed eligibility criteria and extracted data regarding outcomes and factors affecting methodological quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Six RCTs comprising 2223 participants were included. There was no statistical heterogeneity among trials for dichotomous outcomes. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality, rebleeding or surgery between PPI and control treatment. Unweighted pooled mortality rates were 6.1% and 5.5% respectively (odds ratio (OR)1.12; 95% CI 0.72 to 1.73). Unweighted pooled rebleeding rates were 13.9% and 16.6% respectively (OR 0.81; 95%CI 0.61 to 1.09). Pooled rates for surgery were 9.9% and 10.2% respectively (OR 0.96 95% CI 0.68 to 1.35). PPI treatment compared to control significantly reduced the proportion of participants with SRH at index endoscopy; unweighted pooled rates were 37.2% and 46.5% respectively (OR 0.67; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.84). However, this result was not robust to sensitivity analysis. PPI treatment compared to control significantly reduced endoscopic therapy at index endoscopy; unweighted pooled rates were 8.6% and 11.7% respectively (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.93). For continuous outcomes (length of hospital stay and blood transfusion requirements), quantitative analysis could not be performed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

PPI treatment initiated before endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding might reduce the proportion of participants with SRH at index endoscopy and significantly reduces requirement for endoscopic therapy during index endoscopy. However, there is no evidence that PPI treatment affects clinically important outcomes, namely mortality, rebleeding or need for surgery.