Asia-Pacific working group consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an update 2018

Intermittent Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy in Low-Risk Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding May Be Significantly Cost-Saving

BACKGROUND

High-dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, given either intermittently or continuously for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NV-UGIB), is efficacious. Using intermittent PPI for low-risk patients may be cost-saving. Our objective was to estimate the annual cost savings if all low-risk NV-UGIB patients received intermittent PPI therapy.

METHODS

Patients who presented to hospital in Calgary, Alberta, who received a PPI for NV-UGIB from July 2015 to March 2017 were identified using ICD-10 codes. Patients were stratified into no endoscopy, high-risk, and low-risk lesion groups and further subdivided into no PPI, oral PPI, intermittent intravenous (IV), and continuous IV subgroups. Average length of stay (LOS) in each subgroup and costs were calculated.

RESULTS

We identified 4141 patients with NV-UGIBs, (median age 61, 57.4% male). One-thousand two-hundred and thirty-one low-risk patients received continuous IV PPI, with an average LOS of 6.8 days (95% CI 6.2-7.3) versus 4.9 days (95% CI 3.9-5.9) for intermittent IV patients. If continuous IV PPI patients instead received intermittent IV PPI, 3852 patient days and CAD 11,714,390 (2017 CAD)/year could be saved.

CONCLUSIONS

Using real-world administrative data, we demonstrate that a sizable portion of low-risk patients with NV-UGIB who were given continuous IV PPI if switched to intermittent IV therapy could generate significant potential cost savings.

Utility of the CANUKA Scoring System in the Risk Assessment of Upper GI Bleeding

BACKGROUND

The Canada-United Kingdom-Adelaide (CANUKA) score was developed to stratify patients who experience upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) to predict who could be discharged from the emergency department. Our aim was to determine if the CANUKA score could be utilized for UGIB in-patients undergoing endoscopy in predicting adverse outcomes. We additionally sought to establish a CANUKA score cut point to predict adverse outcomes and in-hospital mortality and compare this to established scoring systems.

METHODS

Between January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2019 all patients who underwent upper endoscopy after admission for UGIB were identified. We assigned a CANUKA score and compared the area under the receiver operating curve to established scoring systems.

RESULTS

Our data set included 641 patients, with a mean age of 59.5±14.5 years. A CANUKA score ≥10 was associated with an adverse outcome [unadjusted odds ratio, 3.08 (1.79, 5.27)]. No patients experienced an adverse outcome with a CANUKA score <4. No patients died with a CANUKA score <6. Those with a CANUKA score of <10 had an in-hospital mortality of 2.1% compared with 6.8% for those with a score ≥10 ( P =0.008). AIMS65 had the best area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.809) for predicting mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The CANUKA score may serve utility as a predictor of adverse outcomes and mortality in patients admitted with UGIB undergoing endoscopy. Future studies, ideally prospective and multicenter, will be needed to validate its clinical utility.

Strengths and limitations of risk stratification tools for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Despite advances in the management of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), associated morbidity and mortality remain significant. Most patients, however, will experience favorable outcomes without a need for hospital-based interventions. Risk assessment scores may assist in such early risk-stratification. These scales may optimize identification of low-risk patients, resulting in better resource utilization, including a reduced need for early endoscopy and fewer hospital admissions. The aim of this article is to provide an updated detailed review of risk assessment scores in UGIB.

AREA COVERED

A literature review identified past and currently available pre-endoscopic risk assessment scores for UGIB, with a focus on low-risk prediction. Strengths and weaknesses of the different scales are discussed as well as their impact on clinical decision-making.

EXPERT OPINION

The current evidence supports using the Glasgow Blatchford Score as it is the most accurate tool available when attempting to identify low-risk patients who can be safely managed on an outpatient basis. Currently, no risk assessment tool appears accurate enough in confidently classifying patients as high risk. Future research should utilize more standardized methodologies, while favoring interventional trial designs to better characterize the clinical impact attributable to the use of such risk stratification schemes.

Novel risk score for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in elderly patients: a single-centre retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common reason for emergency hospital admission. Identifying low-risk patients suitable for outpatient management is a clinical and research priority. This study aimed to develop a simple risk score to identify elderly patients with UGIB for whom hospital admission is not required.

DESIGN

This was a single-centre retrospective study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at Zhongda Hospital affiliated with Southeast University in China.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients from January 2015 to December 2020 for the derivation cohort and from January 2021 to June 2022 for the validation cohort were enrolled in this study. A total of 822 patients (derivation cohort=606 and validation cohorts=216) were included in this study. Patients aged ≥65 years with coffee-grounds vomiting, melena or/and haematemesis were included in the analysis. Patients admitted but had UGIB or transferred between hospitals were excluded.

METHODS

Baseline demographic characteristics and clinical parameters were recorded at the first visit. Data were collected from electronic records and databases. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was performed to identify predictors of safe discharge.

RESULTS

304/606 (50.2%) and 132/216 (61.1%) patients were not safely discharged in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively. A clinical risk score of five variables was entered into UGIB risk stratification: Charlson Comorbidity Index >2, systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg, haemoglobin <100 g/L, blood urea nitrogen ≥6.5 mmol/L, albumin <30 g/L. The optimal cut-off value was ≥1, the sensitivity was 97.37% and the specificity was 19.21% for predicting the inability to discharge safely. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.806.

CONCLUSIONS

A novel clinical risk score with good discriminative performance was developed to identify elderly patients with UGIB who were suitable for safe outpatient management. This score can reduce unnecessary hospitalisations.

Position statement from the Indian Society of Gastroenterology, Cardiological Society of India, Indian Academy of Neurology and Vascular Society of India on gastrointestinal bleeding and endoscopic procedures in patients on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy

Antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant agents (collectively known as antithrombotic agents) are used to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events in patients with conditions such as atrial fibrillation, acute coronary syndrome, recurrent stroke prevention, deep vein thrombosis, hypercoagulable states and endoprostheses. Antithrombotic-associated gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is an increasing burden due to the growing population of advanced age with multiple comorbidities and the expanding indications for the use of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants. GI bleeding in antithrombotic users is associated with an increase in short-term and long-term mortality. In addition, in recent decades, there has been an exponential increase in the use of diagnostic and therapeutic GI endoscopic procedures. Since endoscopic procedures hold an inherent risk of bleeding that depends on the type of endoscopy and patients' comorbidities, in patients already on antithrombotic therapies, the risk of procedure-related bleeding is further increased. Interrupting or modifying doses of these agents prior to any invasive procedures put these patients at increased risk of thromboembolic events. Although many international GI societies have published guidelines for the management of antithrombotic agents during an event of GI bleeding and during urgent and elective endoscopic procedures, no Indian guidelines exist that cater to Indian gastroenterologists and their patients. In this regard, the Indian Society of Gastroenterology (ISG), in association with the Cardiological Society of India (CSI), Indian Academy of Neurology (IAN) and Vascular Society of India (VSI), have developed a "Guidance Document" for the management of antithrombotic agents during an event of GI bleeding and during urgent and elective endoscopic procedures.

A Review of Risk Scores within Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency. Thorough initial assessment and appropriate resuscitation are essential to stabilise the patient. Risk scores provide an important tool to discriminate between lower- and higher-risk patients. Very low-risk patients can be safely discharged for out-patient management, while higher-risk patients can receive appropriate in-patient care. The Glasgow Blatchford Score, with a score of 0-1, performs best in the identification of very low-risk patients who will not require hospital based intervention or die, and is recommended by most guidelines to facilitate safe out-patient management. The performance of risk scores in the identification of specific adverse events to define high-risk patients is less accurate, with no individual score performing consistently well. Ongoing developments in the use of machine learning models and artificial intelligence in predicting poor outcomes in UGIB appear promising and will likely form the basis of dynamic risk assessment in the future.

External validation of Glasgow-Blatchford, modified Glasgow-Blatchford and CANUKA scores to identify low-risk patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in emergency departments: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a medical emergency with an approximate mortality of 10%, which results in a high hospitalisation rate. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) is recommended to identify low-risk patients who can be discharged from the emergency department (ED). A modified GBS (mGBS) and CANUKA score have recently been proposed but have not been well studied. The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of GBS, mGBS or CANUKA score could identify patients at low risk of death or need for intervention.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective study was performed including patients with suspected UGIB visiting the ED of Saint-Antoine hospital (Paris, France) from January 2016 to December 2018. Demographic and medical data needed to calculate GBS and CANUKA were collected, as well as outcomes data. Need for intervention was defined as the need for blood transfusion, endoscopic haemostasis or rebleeding within 7 days. In-hospital mortality was also collected. Sensitivity, specificity and predictive values were measured for the score thresholds of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 386 patients were included. Median age was 60 years (38-78), 65.3% (n=252) were male and 60% (n=233) were hospitalised. A GBS≤1, mGBS=0 and CANUKA≤2 categorised 24.9%, 18.2% and 18.9% of patients as low risk, respectively. There was a need for intervention in 2.2%, 4.6% and 0% of those patients categorised as low risk by GBS, mGBS and CANUKA, respectively. No deaths occurred in the patients identified as low risk, regardless of the score used. All scores had a high sensitivity and negative predictive value.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with UGIB, the use of a GBS≤1 or CANUKA score ≤2 appears to be safe for identifying patients at low risk of death or need for intervention.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Benign Peptic Ulcer Bleeding After an Emergency Endoscopy Based on Patient Location

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In the efforts toward reducing bleeding-related mortality, it is crucial to determine the risk factors for rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis in benign peptic ulcer (BPU).

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2017, the medical records of 864 BPU patients were selected from 5076 who had undergone emergency endoscopy for suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients who visited the emergency room or were hospitalized for other illnesses were selected. The primary end point was rebleeding within 30 days after initial endoscopy. The risk factors of rebleeding and subgroup analyses according to patient location were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 864 BPU bleeding patients, rebleeding after completion of BPU bleeding occurred in 140 (16.2%). Initial indicators of hypotension (OR 1.878, p = 0.005) and Forrest classes Ia (OR 25.53, p < 0.001), Ib (OR 27.91, p = 0.005), IIa (OR 21.41, p < 0.001), and IIb (OR 23.74, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors of rebleeding compared to Forrest class III, and being inpatients (OR 1.75, p = 0.01). Compared to the outpatients, the inpatients showed significantly higher rebleeding rates (25.6% vs 13.8%, p < 0.001), predictive bleeding scores, red blood transfusion counts, proportion of Forrest classes Ia, Ib, and IIb (p < 0.001), and overall mortality rates (68.8% vs 34.0%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient location was a novel predictive factor of BPU rebleeding. Particularly, being an inpatient correlated with increased rebleeding. Furthermore, Forrest classes Ia, Ib, IIa, and IIb were predictive of rebleeding not only the included BPUs, but also in the inpatient or outpatient groups.

Safety and Efficacy of Sedation During Emergency Endoscopy for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This study aimed to compare patients with and without sedation during emergency endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) and to clarify the safety and efficacy of sedation in emergency endoscopy.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected 389 patients who underwent emergency endoscopy for UGIB at Ureshino Medical Center from 2016 to 2021. Patients were divided into two groups: sedation group during emergency endoscopy and nonsedation group. Clinical characteristics, patient status on admission, and UGIB etiology were evaluated. Treatment outcomes and adverse events were evaluated using propensity score matching (PSM), and risk factors for mortality from UGIB were investigated using Cox multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

The sedation group was significantly younger, composed of a higher proportion of males, and had chronic liver disease. Blood pressure and hemoglobin level on admission were significantly higher in the sedation group. The main cause of bleeding was peptic ulcer, which was significantly higher in the nonsedation group. PSM created 133 matched pairs. The success rate of endoscopic hemostasis was similar in both groups, and procedure time was significantly shorter in the sedation group than in the nonsedation group (17.6 ± 10.0 versus 20.2 ± 10.2 min, P = 0.04). There were no significant differences in adverse events between groups. Cox multivariate analyses revealed that red blood cell transfusion [hazard ratio (HR) 4.45, P < 0.02] and rebleeding (HR 3.30, P = 0.03) were associated with increased risk of 30-day mortality from UGIB.

CONCLUSIONS

Sedation reduced the procedure time during emergency endoscopy for UGIB. Sedation during emergency endoscopy for UGIB is acceptable for safe endoscopic procedures.

Outcomes in Patients Admitted for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding and COVID-19 Infection: A Study of Two Years of the Pandemic

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) represents a major emergency, and patient management requires endoscopic assessment to ensure appropriate treatment. The impact of COVID-19 on patient mortality in UGIB may be related to the combination of respiratory failure and severe bleeding and indirectly to delayed admissions or a reduction in endoscopic procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study involving patients admitted between March 2020 and December 2021 with UGIB and confirmed. Our objective was to compare these types of patients with those negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection, as well as with a pre-pandemic group of patients admitted between May 2018 and December 2019.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients (4.7%) with UGIB had an active COVID-19 infection. A higher mortality rate (58.97%) and a high risk of death (OR 9.04, p < 0.0001) were noted in the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly because of respiratory failure; endoscopy was not performed in half of the cases. Admissions for UGIB have decreased by 23.7% during the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 infection in patients admitted for UGIB was associated with a higher mortality rate because of respiratory failure and possible delays in or contraindications of treatment.

Hemostatic spray (TC-325) vs. standard endoscopic therapy for non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background and study aims  Hemospray (TC-325) is a mineral powder with adsorptive properties designed for use in various gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) scenarios. We conducted a systematic review & meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TC-325 to standard endoscopic therapy (SET) for non-variceal GIB (NVGIB).

Methods  Multiple databases were searched through October 2022. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to determine pooled relative risk (RR) and proportions with 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for primary hemostasis, hemostasis failure, 30-day rebleeding, length of stay (LOS), and need for rescue interventions. Heterogeneity was assessed using I ² %.

Results  Five RCTs with 362 patients (TC-325 178, SET 184) – 123 females and 239 males with a mean age 65 ± 16 years). The most common etiologies were peptic ulcer disease (48 %), malignancies (35 %), and others (17 %). Bleeding was characterized as Forrest IA (7 %), IB (73 %), IIA (3 %), and IIB (1 %). SET included epinephrine injection, electrocautery, hemoclips, or a combination. No statistical difference in primary hemostasis between TC-325 compared to SET, RR 1.09 (CI 0.95–1.25; I ² 43), P =  0.2, including patients with oozing/spurting hemorrhage, RR 1.13 (CI 0.98–1.3; I ² 35), P =  0.08. Failure to achieve hemostasis was higher in SET compared to TC-325, RR 0.30 (CI 0.12–0.77, I ² 0), P =  0.01, including patients with oozing/spurting hemorrhage, RR 0.24 (CI 0.09 – 0.63, I ² 0), P =  0.004. We found no difference between the two interventions in terms of rebleeding, RR 1.13 (CI 0.62–2.07, I ² 26), P =  0.8 and LOS, standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.27 (CI, –0.20–0.74; I ² 62), P =  0.3. Finally, pooled rate of rescue interventions (angiography) was statistically higher in SET compared to TC-325, RR 0.68 (CI 0.5–0.94; I ² 0), P =  0.02.

Conclusions  Our analysis shows that for acute NV GIB, including oozing/spurting hemorrhage, TC-325 does not result in higher rates of primary hemostasis compared to SET. However, lower rates of failures were seen with TC-325 than SET. In addition, there was no difference in the two modalities when comparing rates of rebleeding and LOS.

Aluminum phosphate gel reduces early rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with gastric variceal bleeding treated with histoacryl injection therapy

BACKGROUND

Esophageal-gastro varices bleeding (EGVB) is the most widely known cause of mortality in individuals with cirrhosis, with an occurrence rate of 5% to 15%. Among them, gastric varices bleeding (GVB) is less frequent than esophageal varices bleeding (EVB), but the former is a more critical illness and has a higher mortality rate. At present, endoscopic variceal histoacryl injection therapy (EVHT) is safe and effective, and it has been recommended by relevant guidelines as the primary method for the treatment of GVB. However, gastric varices after endoscopic treatment still have a high rate of early rebleeding, which is mainly related to complications of its treatment, such as bleeding from drained ulcers, rebleeding of varices etc. Therefore, preventing early postoperative rebleeding is very important to improve the quality of patient survival and outcomes.

AIM

To assess the efficacy of aluminium phosphate gel (APG) combined with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) in preventing early rebleeding after EVHT in individuals with GVB.

METHODS

Medical history of 196 individuals with GVB was obtained who were diagnosed using endoscopy and treated with EVHT in Shenzhen People's Hospital from January 2016 to December 2021. Based on the selection criteria, 101 patients were sorted into the PPI alone treatment group, and 95 patients were sorted into the PPI combined with the APG treatment group. The incidences of early rebleeding and corresponding complications within 6 wk after treatment were compared between both groups. Statistical methods were performed by two-sample t-test, Wilcoxon rank sum test and χ 2 test.

RESULTS

No major variations were noted between the individuals of the two groups in terms of age, gender, Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score, coagulation function, serum albumin, hemoglobin, type of gastric varices, the dose of tissue glue injection and EV that needed to be treated simultaneously. The early rebleeding rate in PPI + APG group was 3.16% (3/95), which was much lower than that in the PPI group (12.87%, 13/101) (P = 0.013). Causes of early rebleeding: the incidence of gastric ulcer bleeding in the PPI + APG group was 2.11% (2/95), which was reduced in comparison to that in the PPI group (11.88%, 12/101) (P = 0.008); the incidence of venous bleeding in PPI + APG group and PPI group was 1. 05% (1/95) and 0.99% (1/101), respectively, and there was no significant difference between them (0.999). The early mortality rate was 0 in both groups within 6 wk after the operation, and the low mortality rate was related to the timely hospitalization and active treatment of all patients with rebleeding. The overall incidence of complications in the PPI + APG group was 12.63% (12/95), which was not significantly different from 13.86% (14/101) in the PPI group (P = 0.800). of abdominal pain in the PPI + APG group was 3.16% (3/95), which was lower than that in the PPI group (11.88%, 12/101) (P = 0.022). However, due to aluminum phosphate gel usage, the incidence of constipation in the PPI + APG group was 9.47% (9/95), which was higher than that in the PPI group (1.98%, 2/101) (P = 0.023), but the health of the patients could be improved by increasing drinking water or oral lactulose. No patients in either group developed spontaneous peritonitis after taking PPI, and none developed hepatic encephalopathy and ectopic embolism within 6 wk of EVHT treatment.

CONCLUSION

PPI combined with APG can significantly reduce the incidence of early rebleeding and postoperative abdominal pain in cirrhotic patients with GVB after taking EVHT.

Effects of proton pump inhibitor on gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis: A randomized controlled trial from China

Aims

Proton pump inhibitors (PPI) are widely used for gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis after endoscopic therapy, although the effect of PPI on these patients remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of PPI on gastroesophageal varices in patients with cirrhosis after endoscopic therapy, including variceal bleeding and adverse events.

Methods

Cirrhotic patients with endoscopically confirmed gastroesophageal varices were enrolled in this study between May 2017 and June 2019. Eligible patients were randomized into two groups: one group received PPI for 14 days and the other group did not receive PPI treatment (n = 53 in each group). All patients were followed for 8 weeks.

Results

During the follow‐up period, three patients (5.66%) in the PPI group experienced variceal bleeding on days 9, 16, and 25 after endoscopic therapy, including two patients with acute bleeding and one with primary prophylaxis. In the non‐PPI group, three patients (5.66%) experienced variceal bleeding on days 7, 42, and 56 after endoscopic therapy, including one patient with acute bleeding and two with secondary prophylaxis (p = 0.990). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the two groups (37.74% vs. 28.30%, p = 0.30).

Conclusions

PPI did not appear to reduce variceal bleeding and adverse events in patients with cirrhosis after endoscopic therapy.

Comparison of urgent and early endoscopy for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in high-risk patients

OBJECTIVE

Data regarding early (within 24h) and urgent endoscopy (within 12h) in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NV-UGIB) revealed conflicting results. This study aimed to investigate the impact of endoscopy timing on the outcomes of high-risk patients with NV-UGIB.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From February 2020 to February 2021, consecutive high-risk (Glasgow-Blatchford score ≥12) adults admitted to the emergency department with NV-UGIB were analyzed retrospectively. The primary composite outcome was 30-day mortality from any cause, inpatient rebleeding, need for endoscopic re-intervention, need for surgery or angiographic embolization.

RESULTS

240 patients were enrolled: 152 (63%) patients underwent urgent endoscopy (<12h) and 88 (37%) patients underwent early endoscopy (12-24h). One or more components of the composite outcome were observed in 53 (22.1%) patients: 30 (12.5%) had 30-day mortality, rebleeding occurred in 27 (11.3%), 7 (2.9%) underwent endoscopic re-intervention, and 5 (2.1%) required surgery or angiographic embolization. The composite outcome was similar between the groups. Multivariate analysis showed only hemodynamic instability on admission (OR: 3.05, p=0.006), and the previous history of cancer (OR: 2.42, p=0.029) were significant in predicting composite outcome. In terms of secondary outcomes, the endoscopic intervention was higher in the urgent endoscopy group (p=0.006), whereas the number of transfused erythrocyte suspensions and the length of hospital stay was higher in the early endoscopy group (p=0.002 and p=0.040, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent endoscopy leads to a significant reduction in the length of hospitalization and the number of transfused erythrocyte suspensions in NV-UGIB, which can contribute to patient satisfaction, reduce healthcare expenditure, and improve hospital bed availability. The composite outcome and its sub-outcomes were the same among both groups.

No Association between Gastrointestinal Rebleeding and DOAC Therapy Resumption: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

There are recommendations for anticoagulation resumption after gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), although data addressing this topic by direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs)-treated patients is lacking. We aim to determine the safety and efficacy of restarting DOACs after GIB.

METHODS

Studies that reported rebleeding, thromboembolic events, and mortality after restarting or withholding DOACs were selected. The systematic research was conducted in five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Scopus). The random effect model was implemented to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR). The ROBINS-I tool was used for risk of bias assessment, and the certainty of the evidence was evaluated with the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

Four retrospective cohort studies (1722 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. We did not find a significant increase in the risk of rebleeding in patients restarting DOACs after index GIB (OR = 1.12; 95% CI: 0.74-1.68). The outcomes of thromboembolic events and mortality data were not suitable for meta-analytic calculations. Single studies did not show statistically significant differences. Data quality assessment showed a serious overall risk of bias and very low quality of evidence (GRADE D).

CONCLUSION

DOAC resumption after a GIB episode may not elevate the risk of rebleeding. However, the need for high-quality randomized clinical trials is crucial.

New strategy in hemorrhagic gastric cancer: A case report of complete pathological remission after neoadjuvant chemotherapy

RATIONALE

Strategy for hemorrhagic gastric cancer should both handle the potential life-threatening situation caused by bleeding and increase probability of long-term survival. For hemorrhagic patients with locally advanced gastric cancer, surgical resection is always the preferred option for the reason that it eliminates both the tumor and risk of rebleeding. However, the long-term survival after resection is still unsatisfactory.

PATIENT CONCERNS

Here, we report a patient with hemorrhagic locally advanced gastric cancer achieved pathological complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

DIAGNOSES

In this case, a 58-year-old man presenting with gastrointestinal hemorrhage and hemodynamic instability was admitted to the emergency department. Gastroscopy and biopsy revealed a large hemorrhagic ulcerated carcinoma located in the antrum, gastric angle, and lower part of gastric body. Abdominal CT indicated an infiltrative ulcerated carcinoma with perigastric lymph nodes metastasis.

INTERVENTIONS

After fluid resuscitation, blood transfusion, application of proton pump inhibitors, and Octreotide, the patient recovered gradually. Then, nasojejunal feeding tube was placed for enteral nutrition and tumor exclusion. Subsequently, the patient received 5 cycles of neoadjuvant S-1 plus oxaliplatin regimen, without signs of rebleeding, followed by radical distal gastrectomy.

OUTCOMES

Pathological examination confirmed that the patient received pathological complete response.

LESSONS

This case suggests that neoadjuvant chemotherapy is feasible in selected hemorrhagic gastric cancer patients and tumor exclusion is helpful in reducing rebleeding risk.

Cost-Effectiveness of Vonoprazan Compared With Proton Pump Inhibitors in Patients Taking Low-Dose Aspirin for Secondary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Japan

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin (LDA) is used to prevent recurrent cardiovascular (CV) events, but is associated with upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding; concomitant use of a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) reduces this risk. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of vonoprazan compared with PPIs (lansoprazole and esomeprazole) in patients taking LDA for secondary prevention of CV events.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A Markov simulation model was developed to predict the number of GI bleeding and acute CV events using 3 strategies (vonoprazan+LDA, esomeprazole+LDA, and lansoprazole+LDA), which were translated into quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and costs. Transition probabilities and utilities were derived from the results of published literature, and medical costs were based on the Japanese National Health Insurance fee table and claims databases in 2020. Outcomes were projected over 30 years starting at age 65 years and discounted at 2% annually. Expected costs with esomeprazole 20 mg, lansoprazole 15 mg and vonoprazan 10 mg were JPY 1,225,657, JPY 943,930, and JPY 1,059,510, respectively. The QALY gain for vonoprazan vs. esomeprazole was 0.35, thus vonoprazan was dominant against esomeprazole. The QALY gain for vonoprazan vs. lansoprazole was 0.29 and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was JPY 398,551, thus, vonoprazan was more cost-effective than lansoprazole.

CONCLUSIONS

Vonoprazan is dominant or cost-effective compared with esomeprazole and lansoprazole in patients taking LDA for secondary prevention of CV events.

Hemostatic Powders in Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: The Open Questions

Hemostatic powder (HP) is a relatively recent addition to the arsenal of hemostatic endoscopic procedures (HEPs) for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) due to benign and malignant lesions. Five types of HP are currently available: TC-325 (Hemospray™), EndoClot™, Ankaferd Blood Stopper^®, and, more recently, UI-EWD (Nexpowder^TM) and CEGP-003 (CGBio™). HP acts as a mechanical barrier and/or promotes platelet activation and coagulation cascade. HP may be used in combination with or as rescue therapy in case of failure of conventional HEPs (CHEPs) and also as monotherapy in large, poorly accessible lesions with multiple bleeding sources. Although the literature on HP is abundant, randomized controlled trials are scant, and some questions remain open. While HP is highly effective in inducing immediate hemostasis in GIB, the rates of rebleeding reported in different studies are very variable, and conditions affecting the stability of hemostasis have not yet been fully elucidated. It is not established whether HP as monotherapy is appropriate in severe GIB, such as spurting peptic ulcers, or should be used only as rescue or adjunctive therapy. Finally, as it can be sprayed on large areas, HP could become the gold standard in malignancy-related GIB, which is often nonresponsive or not amenable to treatment with CHEPs as a result of multiple bleeding points and friable surfaces. This is a narrative review that provides an overview of currently available data and the open questions regarding the use of HP in the management of non-variceal upper GIB due to benign and malignant diseases.

Role of the endoscopic Doppler probe in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The effectiveness of the Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP) remains unclear in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). We thus performed a systematic review characterizing the effectiveness of DEP in patients with NVUGIB addressing this question.

METHODS

A literature search was done until July 2021 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science. A series of meta-analyses were performed assessing outcomes among observational and interventional studies for DEP signal positive and negative lesions as well as DEP-assisted versus standard endoscopies. The primary outcome was "overall rebleeding"; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, bleeding-related mortality, need for surgery, length of stay, intensive care unit stay, and angiography.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies were included from 1911 citations identified. Observational studies compared bleeding lesions with DEP-positive versus DEP-negative signals (11 studies, n = 800 prehemostasis; five studies, n = 148 with posthemostasis data). Three interventional studies (n = 308) compared DEP-assisted to standard endoscopy management. DEP signal positive versus negative lesions either prior to or following any possible hemostasis were at greater risk of overall rebleeding (odds ratio [OR] 6.54 [2.36, 18.11] and OR 25.96 [6.74, 100.0], respectively). The use of DEP during upper endoscopy significantly reduced overall rebleeding rates (OR 0.27 [0.14, 0.54]). When removing outcomes analysis for which only one study was available, all evaluable outcomes were improved with DEP characterization of management guidance except for all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

Although with low certainty evidence, DEP-related information improves on sole visual prediction of rebleeding in NVUGIB, with DEP-guided management yielding decreased overall rebleeding, bleeding-related mortality, and need for surgery.

The Predictive Value of Glasgow-Blatchford Score: The Experience of an Emergency Department

INTRODUCTION

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) is a common emergency and a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. An early and accurate assessment at admission is essential to estimate the severity of each case, assisting in the management of patients. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) is currently recommended for risk stratification of UGB in the emergency department (ED), helping triage patients to in-hospital vs. ambulatory management. The aim of this study was to test the validity of the GBS in an ED.

METHODS

Patients who presented to the ED with a diagnosis of UGB between 2017 and 2018 were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean GBS value of the 149 patients included in the study was 10.3. Of the patients, 4.3% had values ≤1 and 8.7% had values ≤3. The sensitivity and negative predictive value for intervention needs (98.9% and 91.7%) and complications in 30 days (100% and 100%) remained high with a threshold ≤3. In the receiver operating characteristic curves, GBS presented an area under the curve of 0.883 and 0.625, regarding the need for intervention and complications in 30 days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In our population, the threshold ≤2, and eventually ≤3, allows the identification of twice as many low-risk patients, manageable as outpatients, without significant increases in intervention needs or complications in 30 days.

Re-bleeding and all-cause mortality risk in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: focusing on patients receiving oral anticoagulant therapy

OBJECTIVE

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) in patients receiving oral anticoagulants (OACs) may be fatal; however, little is known about re-bleeding and all-cause mortality after successful hemostasis. We investigated the clinical characteristics and risk factors for re-bleeding and death after successful hemostasis.

METHODS

Patients receiving OACs and diagnosed with NVUGIB between 2007 and 2021 were enrolled. All NVUGIB incidents were confirmed if definite bleeding in the upper gastrointestinal tract was detected via esophagogastroduodenoscopy.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients receiving OACs were diagnosed with NVUGIB. Males were the majority (72, 54.5%), and bleeding was detected mostly in the stomach (99, 75%) and was most often due to peptic ulcers (PU) (88, 66.7%). After successful hemostasis of index NVUGIB, 40 patients (30.3%) experienced re-bleeding. Among them, 15 (37.5%) died, and among those, 3 (2.3%) were related to re-bleeding. Multivariate analysis revealed that duodenal bleeding (odds ratio [OR]: 3.305; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.152-9.479, p = 0.026) and Charlson comorbidity index score (CCI) (OR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.052-1.419, p = 0.009) were significant risk factors for re-bleeding. Index albumin levels (OR: 0.134; 95% CI: 0.035-0.506, p = 0.003), previous PU or upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) history (OR: 4.626; 95% CI: 1.375-15.567, p = 0.013), and CCI (OR: 1.293; 95% CI: 1.058-1.581, p = 0.012) were related all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

CCI and duodenal bleeding are risk factors for re-bleeding in patients with NVUGIB who were receiving OACs, while low index albumin levels and previous PU and UGIB history are associated with all-cause mortality.

Role of multidetector computed tomography angiography in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A comprehensive review

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is a common gastroenterological emergency associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is currently recommended as the gold standard modality for both diagnosis and treatment, with computed tomography traditionally playing a limited role in the diagnosis of acute NVUGIB. Following the introduction of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT), this modality is emerging as a promising tool in the diagnosis of NVUGIB. However, to date, evidence concerning the role of MDCT in the NVUGIB diagnosis is still lacking. The aim of our study was to review the current evidence concerning the role of MDCT in the diagnosis of acute NVUGIB.

A multicenter prospective study of the treatment and outcome of patients with gastroduodenal peptic ulcer bleeding in Japan

Gastroduodenal peptic ulcers are the main cause of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). We believe that recent advances in endoscopic techniques and devices for diagnosing upper gastrointestinal tract tumors have advanced hemostasis for UGIB. However, few prospective multicenter studies have examined how these changes affect the prognosis. This prospective study included 246 patients with gastroduodenal peptic ulcers treated at 14 participating facilities. The primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality within 4 weeks, and the secondary endpoints required intervention and refractory bleeding. Subsequently, risk factors affecting these outcomes were examined using various clinical items. Furthermore, the usefulness of the risk stratification using the Glasgow-Blatchford score, rockall score and AIMS65 based on data from the day of the first urgent endoscopy were examined in 205 cases in which all items were complete there are two periods. Thirteen (5%) patients died within 4 weeks; and only 2 died from bleeding. Significant risk factors for poor outcomes were older age and severe comorbidities. Hemostasis was required in 177 (72%) cases, with 20 cases of refractory bleeding (2 due to unsuccessful endoscopic treatment and 18 due to rebleeding). Soft coagulation was the first choice for endoscopic hemostasis in 57% of the cases and was selected in more than 70% of the cases where combined use was required. Rockall score and AIMS65 predicted mortality equally, and Glasgow-Blatchford score was the most useful in predicting the requirement for intervention. All scores predicted refractory bleeding similarly. Although endoscopic hemostasis for UGIB due to peptic ulcer had a favorable outcome, old age and severe comorbidities were risk factors for poor prognosis. We recommend that patients with UGIB should undergo early risk stratification using a risk scoring system.

A prospective, open-labeled, and randomized trial for assessing safety and clinical utility of gastric biopsies during emergency gastroscopy for patients with bleeding gastric ulcers

OBJECTIVE

There is no consensus on whether a gastroscopic biopsy is necessary during the emergency treatment of gastrointestinal (GI) diseases such as gastric ulcer bleeding. In this study, we examined the clinical utility and safety of an emergency gastroscopic biopsy for the assessment of gastric ulcer bleeding.

METHODS

We enrolled 150 patients with a single bleeding gastric ulcer after emergency gastroscopy (EG) from April 2020 to April 2022. The patients were randomly divided into the biopsy and no biopsy groups, and they were followed-up until June 2022 to examine whether recurrent gastric ulcer bleeding had occurred.

RESULTS

Re-bleeding occurred in 15 out of 150 (10%) patients. We diagnosed malignancies in 17 (11.3%) patients and validated 14 (9.3%) of them during the initial gastroscopy procedure. Factors that could predict the occurrence of gastric ulcer re-bleeding with biopsy during EG included an absence of ischemic heart disease (odds ratio [OR] = 0.395, confidence interval [CI]: 0.24-0.65, p ≤ .005), renal disease (OR = 1.74, CI: 0.77-1.59, p ≤ .005), and using warfarin or oral anticoagulants (OR = 11.953, CI: 3.494-39.460, p ≤ .005). No significant differences were observed in 60-day bleeding (p = .077) and the duration of hospitalization (p = .700) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing biopsy during EG did not exhibit an increased risk of re-bleeding compared with those who did not undergo a biopsy. An early biopsy facilitates an early pathologic diagnosis, early clinical intervention, safe discharge of low-risk patients, and improved outcomes in high-risk patients.

Update on the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common emergency presentation requiring prompt resuscitation and management. Peptic ulcers are the most common cause of the condition. Thorough initial management with a structured approach is vital with appropriate intravenous fluid resuscitation and use of a restrictive transfusion threshold of 7-8 g/dL. Pre-endoscopic scoring tools enable identification of patients at high risk and at very low risk who might benefit from specific management. Endoscopy should be carried out within 24 h of presentation for patients admitted to hospital, although optimal timing for patients at a higher risk within this period is less clear. Endoscopic treatment of high risk lesions and use of subsequent high dose proton pump inhibitors is a cornerstone of non-variceal bleeding management. Variceal haemorrhage results in higher mortality than non-variceal haemorrhage and, if suspected, antibiotics and vasopressors should be administered urgently, before endoscopy. Oesophageal variceal bleeding requires endoscopic band ligation, whereas bleeding from gastric varices requires thrombin or tissue glue injection. Recurrent bleeding is managed by repeat endoscopic treatment. If uncontrolled bleeding occurs, interventional radiological embolisation or surgery is required for non-variceal bleeding or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement for variceal bleeding.

Gut microbiome and microbial metabolites in NAFLD and after bariatric surgery: Correlation and causality

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is currently related to a heavy socioeconomic burden and increased incidence. Since obesity is the most prevalent risk factor for NAFLD, weight loss is an effective therapeutic solution. Bariatric surgery (BS), which can achieve long-term weight loss, improves the overall health of patients with NAFLD. The two most common surgeries are the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. The gut-liver axis is the complex network of cross-talking between the gut, its microbiome, and the liver. The gut microbiome, involved in the homeostasis of the gut-liver axis, is believed to play a significant role in the pathogenesis of NAFLD and the metabolic improvement after BS. Alterations in the gut microbiome in NAFLD have been confirmed compared to that in healthy individuals. The mechanisms linking the gut microbiome to NAFLD have been proposed, including increased intestinal permeability, higher energy intake, and other pathophysiological alterations. Interestingly, several correlation studies suggested that the gut microbial signatures after BS become more similar to those of lean, healthy controls than that of patients with NAFLD. The resolution of NAFLD after BS is related to changes in the gut microbiome and its metabolites. However, confirming a causal link remains challenging. This review summarizes characteristics of the gut microbiome in patients with NAFLD before and after BS and accumulates existing evidence about the underlying mechanisms of the gut microbiome.

Scheduled second look endoscopy after endoscopic hemostasis to patients with high risk bleeding peptic ulcers: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The recommendation of second look endoscopy (SLOGD) in selected patients at high risk for rebleeding has been inconclusive. This study aimed to evaluate the benefit of SLOGD in selected patients predicted at high risk of recurrent bleeding.

METHODS

From a cohort of 939 patients with bleeding peptic ulcers who underwent endoscopic hemostasis, we derived a 9-point risk score (age > 60, Male, ulcer ≥ 2 cm in size, posterior bulbar or lesser curve gastric ulcer, Forrest I bleeding, haemoglobin < 8 g/dl) to predict recurrent bleeding. We then validated the score in another cohort of 1334 patients (AUROC 0.77). To test the hypothesis that SLOGD in high-risk patients would improve outcomes, we did a randomized controlled trial to compare scheduled SLOGD with observation alone in those predicted at high risk of rebleeding (a score of ≥ 5). The primary outcome was clinical bleeding within 30 days of the index bleed.

RESULTS

Of 314 required, we enrolled 157 (50%) patients (SLOGD n = 78, observation n = 79). Nine (11.8%) in SLOGD group and 14 (18.2%) in observation group reached primary outcome (absolute difference 6.4%, 95% CI - 5.0% to 17.8%). Twenty-one of 69 (30.4%) patients who underwent SLOGD needed further endoscopic treatment. No surgery for bleeding control was needed. There were 6 vs. 3 of 30-day deaths in either group (p = 0.285, log rank). No difference was observed regarding blood transfusion and hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

In this aborted trial that enrolled patients with bleeding peptic ulcers at high-risk of recurrent bleeding, scheduled SLOGD did not significantly improve outcomes.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov:NCT02352155.

Timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a territory-wide cohort study

OBJECTIVE

While it is recommended that patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) should receive endoscopic intervention within 24 hours, the optimal timing is still uncertain. We aimed to assess whether endoscopy timing postadmission would affect outcomes.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective, territory-wide, cohort study with healthcare data from all public hospitals in Hong Kong. Adult patients (age ≥18) that presented with AUGIB between 2013 and 2019 and received therapeutic endoscopy within 48 hours (n=6474) were recruited. Patients were classified based on endoscopic timing postadmission: urgent (t≤6), early (6

RESULTS

Results showed that urgent timing (n=1008) had worse outcomes compared with early endoscopy (n=3865), with higher 30-day all-cause mortality (p<0.001), repeat endoscopy rates (p<0.001) and ICU admission rates (p<0.001). Late endoscopy (n=1601) was associated with worse outcomes, with higher 30-day mortality (p=0.003), in-hospital mortality (p=0.022) and 30-day transfusion rates (p=0.018).

CONCLUSION

Compared with urgent and late endoscopy among patients who have received therapeutic endoscopies, early endoscopy was associated with superior outcomes especially among patients with non-variceal bleeding. This supports the notion that non-variceal AUGIB patients should receive endoscopy within 24 hours, but also emphasises the importance of prior resuscitation and pharmacotherapy.

Collapse

Key Words

• gastrointesinal endoscopy
• gastrointestinal bleeding
• therapeutic endoscopy

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Acute Disease
• Adult
• Cohort Studies
• Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal/methods
• Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis
• Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology
• Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy
• Humans
• Retrospective Studies

Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Cosmos L T Guo Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Sunny H Wong Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
Louis H S Lau Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Rashid N S Lui Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Joyce W Y Mak Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Raymond S Y Tang Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Terry C F Yip Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Medical Data Analytics Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
William K K Wu Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Grace L H Wong Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Medical Data Analytics Centre, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Francis K L Chan Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
James Y W Lau Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Joseph J Y Sung Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Institute of Digestive Disease, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Collapse

Nomogram for predicting rebleeding after initial endoscopic epinephrine injection monotherapy hemostasis in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although the current guidelines recommend endoscopic combination therapy, endoscopic epinephrine injection (EI) monotherapy is still a simple, common and effective modality for treating peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). However, the rebleeding risk after EI monotherapy is still high, and identifying rebleeding patients after EI monotherapy is unclear, which is highly important in clinical practice. This study aimed to identify risk factors and constructed a predictive nomogram related to rebleeding after EI monotherapy.

METHODS

We consecutively and retrospectively analyzed 360 PUB patients who underwent EI monotherapy between March 2014 and July 2021 in our center. Then we identified independent risk factors associated with rebleeding after initial endoscopic EI monotherapy by multivariate logistic regression. A predictive nomogram was developed and validated based on the above predictors.

RESULTS

Among all PUB patients enrolled, 51 (14.2%) had recurrent hemorrhage within 30 days after endoscopic EI monotherapy. After multivariate logistic regression, shock [odds ratio (OR) = 12.691, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.129-31.399, p < 0.001], Rockall score (OR = 1.877, 95% CI 1.250-2.820, p = 0.002), tachycardia (heart rate > 100 beats/min) (OR = 2.610, 95% CI 1.098-6.203, p = 0.030), prolonged prothrombin time (PT > 13 s) (OR = 2.387, 95% CI 1.019-5.588, p = 0.045) and gastric ulcer (OR = 2.258, 95% CI 1.003-5.084, p = 0.049) were associated with an increased risk of rebleeding after an initial EI monotherapy treatment. A nomogram incorporating these independent high-risk factors showed good discrimination, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.876 (95% CI 0.817-0.934) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a predictive nomogram of rebleeding after EI monotherapy, which had excellent prediction accuracy. This predictive nomogram can be conveniently used to identify low-risk rebleeding patients after EI monotherapy, allowing for decision-making in a clinical setting.

Comparison of risk scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients after renal transplantation: a retrospective observational study in Hunan, China

Background

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common complication in renal transplant recipients. However, the risk stratification value of bleeding scoring systems in these patients is unclear, and data regarding risk factors are limited.

Methods

Clinical data of renal transplant recipients in The Third Xiangya hospital were collected. The predictive ability of Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS), pre-endoscopy Rockall score (pRS), and AIMS65 score were assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Risk factors of UGIB were analyzed using binary logistic regression analysis.

Results

A total of 220 patients were enrolled, of which 55 with UGIB. Endoscopy improved the overall survival rate of patients. Glasgow Blatchford score (AUROC 0.868) performed best at predicting UGIB patients who need intervention or death, with a threshold of 10, sensitivity and specificity were 82.4% and 70%, respectively. In terms of predicting mortality, the GBS score was comparable with AIMS65 score (p = 0.30) and pRS score (p = 0.42). Viral hepatitis, intravenous hormone usage, low platelet count, and low albumin level were significant factors associated with UGIB.

Conclusions

The Glasgow Blatchford score (AUROC 0.868) was best at predicting the need for intervention or death. However, their ability to predict mortality was limited, with AUROC less than 0.8. Our study also identified four independent risk factors for renal transplant recipients with UGIB.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-022-02426-3.

Prediction of the need for emergency endoscopic treatment for upper gastrointestinal bleeding and new score model: a retrospective study

Background

Gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the major gastrointestinal diseases. In this study, our objective was to compare Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), AIMS65 score, MAP score, Modified GBS, and Iino score as outcome measures for upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In addition, we extracted factors associated with hemostatic procedures including endoscopy, and proposed a new robust score model.

Methods

From January 2015 to December 2019, 675 patients with symptoms such as hematemesis who visited the National Hospital Organization Disaster Medical Center and underwent urgent upper endoscopy with diagnosis of suspected non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding were retrospectively reviewed. We evaluated the GBS, AIMS65 score, MAP score, Modified GBS, and Iino score, and assessed the outcomes of patients requiring hemostatic treatments at the subsequent emergency endoscopy. We performed logistic regression analysis of factors related to endoscopic hemostasis and upper gastrointestinal bleeding, created a new score model, and evaluated the prediction of hemostatic treatment and mortality in the new score and the existing scores.

Results

The factors associated with endoscopic treatment were hematemesis, heart rate, HB (hemoglobin), blood pressure, blood urea nitrogen (BUN). Based on these predictors and the partial regression coefficients, a new score named H3B2 (using the initial letters of hematemesis, heart rate, HB, blood pressure, and BUN) was generated. H3B2 score was slightly more discriminatory compared to GBS and Modified GBS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUROC): 0.73 versus 0.721 and 0.7128, respectively) in predicting hemostatic treatment in emergency endoscopy. The H3B2 score also showed satisfactory prediction accuracy for subsequent deaths (AUROC: 0.6857. P < 0.001).

Conclusions

We proposed a new score, the H3B2 score, consisting of simple and objective indices in cases of suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The H3B2 score is useful in identifying high-risk patients with suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding who require urgent hemostatic treatment including emergency endoscopy.

Consensus document of the Spanish Society of Digestives Diseases and the Spanish Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis on massive nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding and direct-acting oral anticoagulants

INTRODUCTION

there is limited experience and understanding of massive nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding during therapy with direct-acting oral anticoagulants.

OBJECTIVES

to provide evidenced-based definitions and recommendations.

METHODS

a consensus document developed by the Spanish Society of Digestives Diseases and the Spanish Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis using modified Delphi methodology. A panel was set up of 24 gastroenterologists with experience in gastrointestinal bleeding, and consensus building was assessed over three rounds. Final recommendations are based on a systematic review of the literature using the GRADE system.

RESULTS

panelist agreement was 91.53 % for all 30 items as a group, a percentage that was improved during rounds 2 and 3 for items where clinical experience is lower. Explicit disagreement was only 1.25 %. A definition of massive nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding in patients on direct-acting oral anticoagulants was established, and recommendations to optimize this condition's management were developed.

CONCLUSION

the approach to these critically ill patients must be multidisciplinary and protocolized, optimizing decisions for an early identification of the condition and patient stabilization according to the tenets of damage control resuscitation. Thus, consideration must be given to immediate anticoagulation reversal, preferentially with specific antidotes (idarucizumab for dabigatran and andexanet alfa for direct factor Xa inhibitors); hemostatic resuscitation, and bleeding point identification and management.

[Clinical Management of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding]

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is defined as bleeding proximal to the ligament of Treitz in the absence of varices. As a common clinical problem, NVUGIB entails a heavy burden on the healthcare system. In addition to endoscopic hemostasis, evaluation and treatment before and after endoscopy are also of critical importance for the clinical management of NVUGIB patients. In recent years, based on the rapid development of endoscopic technology and clinical management of NVUGIB, the research evidence and clinical guidelines have been updated internationally, while some clinical decisions remain controversial. In this article, we mainly reviewed and discussed the current status of NVUGIB patient management before, during, and after endoscopy, aiming to deepen the understanding of the disease for clinicians, and to promote standardized management of patients with NVUGIB.

Timing of endoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

The optimal timing of endoscopy in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains controversial. In this study, we investigated the clinical outcomes of urgent endoscopy in patients with UGIB compared with elective endoscopy. From January 2016 to December 2018, consecutive patients who visited the emergency department and underwent endoscopy for clinical manifestations of acute UGIB, including variceal bleeding, were eligible. Urgent endoscopy (within 6 h) and elective endoscopy (after 6 h) were defined as the time taken to perform endoscopy after presentation to the emergency department. The primary outcome was mortality rate within 30 days. A total of 572 patients were included in the analysis. Urgent endoscopy was performed in 490 patients (85.7%). The 30-day mortality rate did not differ between the urgent and elective endoscopy groups (5.3% and 6.1%, p = 0.791). There was no difference regarding the recurrent bleeding rate, total amount of transfusion, or length of hospital between the groups. In multivariate analysis, age and the amount of transfusion were associated with mortality. Urgent endoscopy was not associated with a lower 30-day mortality rate compared with elective endoscopy in patients with acute UGIB.

The Effects of COVID-19 on Clinical Outcomes of Non-COVID-19 Patients Hospitalized for Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding during the Pandemic

This study aims to investigate the effects of COVID-19 on clinical outcomes of non-COVID-19 patients hospitalized for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) during the pandemic. A retrospective review is conducted. We recruited patients with UGIB admitted during the pandemic’s first wave (April 2020 to June 2020), and the year before the pandemic. The outcomes between the two groups were compared using propensity score matching (PSM). In total, 60 patients (pandemic group) and 460 patients (prepandemic group) are included. Patients admitted during the pandemic (mean age of 67 ± 14 years) had a mean Glasgow−Blatchford score of 10.8 ± 3.9. They were older (p = 0.045) with more underlying malignancies (p = 0.028), had less history of NSAID use (p = 0.010), had a lower platelet count (p = 0.007), and had lower serum albumin levels (p = 0.047) compared to those admitted before the pandemic. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was performed less frequently during the pandemic (43.3% vs. 95.4%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the procedure was less likely to be performed within 24 h after admission (p < 0.001). After PSM, admissions during the pandemic were significantly associated with decreased chances of receiving an endoscopy (adjusted odds Ratio (OR), 0.02; 95% CI, 0.003−0.06, p < 0.001) and longer hospital stay (adjusted OR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.13−3.20, p < 0.001). Additionally, there was a slight increase in 30-day mortality without statistical significance (adjusted OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.71−5.19, p = 0.199) and a marginally higher rebleeding rate (adjusted OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.44−4.03, p = 0.605). During the pandemic, the number of EGDs performed in non-COVID-19 patients with UGIB decreased with a subsequent prolonged hospitalization and potentially increased 30-day mortality and rebleeding rate.

Forrest Classification for Bleeding Peptic Ulcer: A New Look at the Old Endoscopic Classification

The management of peptic ulcer bleeding is clinically challenging. For decades, the Forrest classification has been used for risk stratification for nonvariceal ulcer bleeding. The perception and interpretation of the Forrest classification vary among different endoscopists. The relationship between the bleeder and ulcer images and the different stages of the Forrest classification has not been studied yet. Endoscopic still images of 276 patients with peptic ulcer bleeding for the past 3 years were retrieved and reviewed. The intra-rater agreement and inter-rater agreement were compared. The obtained endoscopic images were manually drawn to delineate the extent of the ulcer and bleeding area. The areas of the region of interest were compared between the different stages of the Forrest classification. A total of 276 images were first classified by two experienced tutor endoscopists. The images were reviewed by six other endoscopists. A good intra-rater correlation was observed (0.92–0.98). A good inter-rater correlation was observed among the different levels of experience (0.639–0.859). The correlation was higher among tutor and junior endoscopists than among experienced endoscopists. Low-risk Forrest IIC and III lesions show distinct patterns compared to high-risk Forrest I, IIA, or IIB lesions. We found good agreement of the Forrest classification among different endoscopists in a single institution. This is the first study to quantitively analyze the obtained and explain the distinct patterns of bleeding ulcers from endoscopy images.

Comparisons of six endoscopy independent scoring systems for the prediction of clinical outcomes for elderly and younger patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

OBJECTIVES

To compare the predictive ability of six pre-endoscopic scoring systems (ABC, AIMS65, GBS, MAP(ASH), pRS, and T-score) for outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in elderly and younger patients.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 1260 patients, including 530 elderly patients (age [Formula: see text] 65) and 730 younger patients (age < 65) presenting with UGIB, was performed at Zhongda Hospital Southeast University, from January 2015 to December 2020. Six scoring systems were used.

RESULTS

ABC had the largest areas under the curve (AUCs) of 0.827 (0.792-0.858), and 0.958 (0.929-0.987) for elderly and younger groups for predicting mortality respectively. The differences of the AUCs for predicting the outcome of mortality and rebleeding between the two groups were significant for ABC and pRS (p < 0.01). For intervention prediction, significant differences were observed only for pRS [AUC 0.623 (0.578-0.669) vs. 0.699 (0.646-0.752)] (p < 0.05) between the two groups. For intensive care unit (ICU) admission, the AUC for MAP (ASH) [0.791 (0.718-0.865) vs. 0.891 (0.831-0.950)] and pRS [0.610 (0.514-0.706) vs. 0.891 (0.699-0.865)] were more effective for the younger group (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). For comparison of scoring systems in the same cohort, ABC was significantly higher than pRS: AUC 0.710 (0.699-0.853, p < 0.05) and T-score 0.670 (0.628-0.710, p < 0.01) for predicting mortality in the elderly group. In the younger group, ABC was significantly higher than GBS and T-score (p < 0.01). MAP(ASH) performs the best in predicting intervention in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ABC and pRS are more accurate for predicting mortality and rebleeding in the younger cohort, and pRS may not be suitable for elderly patients. There was no difference between the two study populations for GBS, AIMS65, and T-score. Except for ICU admission, MAP(ASH) showed fair accuracy for both cohorts.

Acute Upper Non-variceal and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common surgical emergency requiring hospital admission and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Appropriate decision-making is essential to make a prompt diagnosis, accurate risk assessment, and proper resuscitation of patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. Despite multiple randomized trials and meta-analyses, there is still controversy on various management issues like appropriate risk stratification, the timing of endoscopy, choosing an appropriate endoscopic, and radiological intervention in these groups of patients. As the usage of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiplatelet, and antithrombotic agents is common in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding, the physician is challenged with proper management of these drugs. The present review summarizes the current strategies for risk stratification, localization of bleeding source, endoscopic and radiological intervention in patients with acute nonvariceal upper GI, middle GI, and lower GI bleeding.

A novel scoring system to predict therapeutic intervention for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Various scoring systems have been developed to predict the need for endoscopic treatment in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). However, they have rarely been applied in clinical practice because the processes are complicated. The aim of this study was to establish a simple scoring system that predicts the need for endoscopic intervention in patients with NVUGIB. We retrospectively enrolled 509 consecutive patients with suspected NVUGIB who underwent emergency endoscopy. In the development cohort (from January 2016 to December 2018), risk factors that predict the need for endoscopic intervention were determined from 349 patients' data by multivariate logistic regression analysis. This led to the development of a novel scoring system named the Nagoya University score (N score). In the validation cohort (from January 2019 to September 2020), we evaluated the diagnostic value of the N score, the Hirosaki score, and the Glasgow-Blatchford scores (GBS) by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves using another 160 patients' data. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed syncope, hematemesis, blood urea nitrogen (BUN), and BUN/Cr as significant predictive factors for endoscopic intervention. In the validation study, the N score was superior to the GBS and equal to the Hirosaki score in predicting the endoscopic intervention (AUC, N score 0.776 [95% CI 0.702-0.851] vs. GBS 0.615 [0.523-0.708], Hirosaki 0.719 [0.636-0.803]). The N score revealed a sensitivity of 84.5% and a specificity of 61.8%. Our N score, which is consisted of only four factors, would select patients who require endoscopic intervention with high probability.

Pros and Cons of Performing Early Endoscopy in Geriatric Patients Admitted with Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Analysis of the US National Inpatient Database

BACKGROUND

Age greater than 65 years is a well-defined risk factor for increased mortality in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVGIB). Endoscopy is indicated in most patients at any age but presents unique risks in the elderly cohort, and ideal timing is unclear. This study examined the association between outcomes and early (within 24 h) esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) among elderly patients with NVGIB.

METHODS

All patients over age 65 admitted primarily for NVGIB who underwent EGD were included from the National Inpatient Sample 2016-2017. Clinical outcomes stratified by early EGD versus late EGD were compared after adjustment for comorbidities and bleeding severity using inverse probability of treatment weighting with survey-adjusted linear and logistic regression.

RESULTS

Out of estimated 625,530 admissions with a primary diagnosis of NVGIB, 120,835 met eligibility criteria; 24,830 underwent early EGD. Mean length of stay and total charges decreased by 1.17 days (95%CI 1.04-1.30, P < 0.001) and $5717.24 (95%CI 4034.57-7399.91, P < 0.001), respectively, in the early EGD group. Early EGD increased the odds ratio of death 1.32 (95%CI 1.06-1.64, P 0.01) and transfer to other hospitals 1.48 (95%CI 1.22-1.81, P < 0.001). No change was seen in the requirement for surgery or angiography. Rates of discharge to a nursing facility or home health were similar.

CONCLUSION

In a comprehensive cohort of geriatric patients with NVGIB, early EGD is associated with decreased hospital stay and charges, but also with increased mortality and inter-hospital transfer. Further research is needed to determine the optimal management of this vulnerable population.

Evaluation of Six Preendoscopy Scoring Systems to Predict Outcomes for Older Adults with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Objectives

To compare the ability of six preendoscopic scoring systems (ABC, AIMS65, Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS), MAP(ASH), pRS, and T-score) to predict outcomes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in older adults.

Methods

This was a retrospective study of 602 older adults (age ≥ 65) presenting with UGIB at Zhongda Hospital Southeast University from January 2015 to June 2021. Six scoring systems were used to analyze all patients.

Results

ABC had the largest area under the curve (AUC) (0.833; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.801–0.862) and was significantly higher than pRS 0.696 (95% CI: 0.658–0.733, p < 0.01) and T-score 0.667 (95% CI: 0.628–0.704, p < 0.01) in predicting mortality. MAP(ASH) (0.783; 95% CI: 0.748–0.815) performs the best in predicting intervention and was similar to GBS, T-score, ABC, and AIMS65. The AUCs for MAP(ASH) (0.732; 95% CI: 0.698–0.770), AIMS65 (0.711; 95% CI: 0.672–0.746), and ABC (0.718; 95% CI: 0.680–0.754) were fair for rebleeding, while those of GBS (0.662; 95% CI: 0.617–0.694), T-score (0.641; 95% CI: 0.606–0.684), and pRS (0.609; 95% CI: 0.569–0.648) were performed poorly. MAP(ASH) performs the best in predicting ICU admission (0.784; 95% CI: 0.749–0.816). All the five scores were significantly higher than pRS (p < 0.05 for ABC, AIMS65 and T-score, p < 0.01 for GBS and MAP).

Conclusions

Mortality, intervention, rebleeding, and ICU admission in UGIB for older adults can be predicted well using MAP(ASH). ABC is the most accurate for predicting mortality. Except for rebleeding, GBS has an acceptable performance in predicting ICU admission, mortality, and intervention. AIMS65 and T-score performed moderately, and pRS may not be suitable for the target cohort.

Does off-hours endoscopic hemostasis affect outcomes of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding?

Aim: Different researches showed controversial results about the 'off-hours effect' in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). Materials & methods: A total of 301 patients with NVUGIB were divided into regular-hours group and off-hours group based on when they received endoscopic hemostasis, and the relationship of the clinical outcomes with off-hours endoscopic hemostasis was evaluated. Results: Patients who received off-hours endoscopy were sicker and more likely to experience worse clinical outcomes. Off-hours endoscopic hemostasis was a significant predictor of the composite outcome in higher-risk patients (adjusted OR: 4.63; 95% CI: 1.35-15.90). However, it did not associate with the outcomes in lower-risk patients. Conclusion: Off-hours effect may affect outcomes of higher-risk NVUGIB patients receiving endoscopic hemostasis (GBS ≥12).

Treatment and outcome of gastrointestinal bleeding due to peptic ulcers and erosions - (BLUE study)

OBJECTIVES

Peptic ulcers and erosions are the most common causes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The aim of this study was to investigate the management and outcomes of these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 543 patients with endoscopically confirmed bleeding from peptic ulcers and erosions were included from March 2015 to December 2017. The patient characteristics, endoscopic findings, Forrest classification and endoscopic treatment were recorded. Moreover, the rebleeding rates, repeated endoscopies and transcatheter angiographic embolization and surgery incidences were registered. A follow-up endoscopy after discharge from the hospital was scheduled.

RESULTS

Among the patients, high-risk stigmata ulcers were present in 36% (198/543) and low-risk stigmata ulcers and erosions in 60% (327/543) at first endoscopy. Endoscopic therapy was performed in 30% (165/543) of the patients, and hemostasis was achieved in 94% (155/165). The incidence of rebleeding was 9% (49/543) for the whole cohort and 14.8% (23/155) for those patients who had received successful endoscopic treatment. Moreover, rebleeding was significantly more frequent in duodenal ulcers than in gastric ulcers (11.9% vs 4.0%, p = .004). In a multivariable analysis, rebleeding was significantly related to comorbidity and Forrest classification. Transcatheter angiographic embolization and surgery were required in 6% (34/543) and 0.07% (4/543) of patients, respectively. Complete peptic ulcer healing was found at follow-up in 73.3% (270/368) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic hemostasis was achieved in the majority of patients with high-risk ulceration, although the occurrence of rebleeding is a significant challenge, especially in patients with duodenal ulcers. Clinical trial registration: Bleeding Ulcer and Erosions Study (BLUE Study), ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03367897.

Hemostasis Techniques for Non-variceal Upper GI Hemorrhage: Beyond Injection and Cautery

B. Nulsen D. M. Jensen.

Impact of time to esophagogastroduodenoscopy in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

There is conflicting evidence regarding the benefit of urgent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for reducing mortality and rebleeding, in the context of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

AIM

To describe the decrease in the risk for mortality, rebleeding, and red blood cell transfusion, with the performance of urgent EGD, in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a search for cohort studies or controlled clinical trials, published from December 1966 to May 2020, that compared urgent EGD versus elective EGD in the management of adults with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, utilizing the MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Our primary outcome was the hospital mortality comparison. The incidence of rebleeding and the mean number of red blood cell units transfused were also compared. A random effects model was utilized for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies that met the eligibility criteria were included, involving 489,622 patients. We found no differences in the mortality of subjects exposed to urgent EGD versus elective EGD (RR 1.12 [0.72-1.72]). There was a significant increase in the risk for rebleeding (RR 1.30 [1.05-1.60]) in the subjects exposed to urgent EGD, and fewer red blood cell units were transfused in those patients (RR 0.52 [0.05-0.99]).

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent EGD in subjects with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding does not appear to have a significant impact on short-term mortality.

Analysis of the Effect of Intelligent Red Blood Cell Distribution Diagnosis Model on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Bleeding

In order to explore the role of red blood cell distribution width in the diagnosis and treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding, this paper applies map feature recognition technology to red blood cell distribution broadband and constructs an intelligent red blood cell distribution width diagnosis model. To extract the content-level features of the image safely and effectively, this paper introduces the mechanism of jitter quantization to extract the content-level features at the lowest frequency of the image. In addition, this article employs an experimental approach to investigate the function of red blood cell distribution width in the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal bleeding in the elderly. Finally, this article establishes an experimental group and a control group and then performs a research study using real-life hospital case studies. According to the statistical findings, the red blood cell distribution width index may play a significant role in the diagnosis and management of gastrointestinal bleeding, particularly in the case of severe bleeding.