Endoscopic direct clipping versus indirect clipping for colonic diverticular bleeding: A large multicenter cohort study

Direct clipping using a half-opened reopenable clip and long hood for colonic diverticular bleeding

Watch a video of this article.

Advances in endoscopic management of colonic diverticular bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is focused on diagnostic and management strategies for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). It aims to present the current state of the field, highlighting the available techniques, and emphasizing findings that influence the choice of therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent guidelines recommend nonurgent colonoscopy (>24 h) for CDB. However, factors such as a shock index ≥1, which may warrant an urgent colonoscopy, remain under investigation.The standard approach to detecting the source of CDB requires a water-jet scope equipped with a cap. Innovative diagnostic techniques, such as the long-cap and tapered-cap, have proven effective in identifying stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). Furthermore, the water or gel immersion methods may aid in managing massive hemorrhage by improving the visualization and stabilization of the bleeding site for subsequent intervention. Innovations in endoscopic hemostasis have significantly improved the management of CDB. New therapeutic methods such as endoscopic band ligation and direct clipping have substantially diminished the incidence of recurrent bleeding. Recent reports also have demonstrated the efficacy of cutting-edge techniques such as over-the-scope clips, which have significantly improved outcomes in complex cases that have historically necessitated surgical intervention.

SUMMARY

Currently available endoscopic diagnostic and hemostatic methods for CDB have evolved with improved outcomes. Further research is necessary to refine the criteria for urgent colonoscopy and to confirm the effectiveness of new endoscopic hemostasis techniques.

High risk stigmata and treatment strategy for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a nationwide study in Japan

BACKGROUND

 The rebleeding risks and outcomes of endoscopic treatment for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) may differ depending on the bleeding location, type, and etiology of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) but have yet to be fully investigated. We aimed to identify high risk endoscopic SRH and to propose an optimal endoscopic treatment strategy.

METHODS

 We retrospectively analyzed 2699 ALGIB patients with SRH at 49 hospitals (CODE BLUE-J Study), of whom 88.6 % received endoscopic treatment.

RESULTS

 30-day rebleeding rates of untreated SRH significantly differed among locations (left colon 15.5 % vs. right colon 28.6 %) and etiologies (diverticular bleeding 27.5 % vs. others [e. g. ulcerative lesions or angioectasia] 8.9 %), but not among bleeding types. Endoscopic treatment reduced the overall rebleeding rate (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.69; 95 %CI 0.49-0.98), and the treatment effect was significant in right-colon SRH (AOR 0.46; 95 %CI 0.29-0.72) but not in left-colon SRH. The effect was observed in both active and nonactive types, but was not statistically significant. Moreover, the effect was significant for diverticular bleeding (AOR 0.60; 95 %CI 0.41-0.88) but not for other diseases. When focusing on treatment type, the effectiveness was not significantly different between clipping and other modalities for most SRH, whereas ligation was significantly more effective than clipping in right-colon diverticular bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

 A population-level endoscopy dataset allowed us to identify high risk endoscopic SRH and propose a simple endoscopic treatment strategy for ALGIB. Unlike upper gastrointestinal bleeding, the rebleeding risks for ALGIB depend on colonic location, bleeding etiology, and treatment modality.

Review article: Advances in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common emergency with substantial associated morbidity and mortality. Elective colonoscopy plays an essential role in management, with an even more important role for radiology in the acute setting. Recent advances in the management of patients with LGIB warrant review as the management has recently evolved.

AIMS

To provide a comprehensive and updated overview of advances in the approach to patients with LGIB METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search to examine the current data for this narrative review supplemented by expert opinion.

RESULTS

The incidence of LGIB is increasing worldwide, partly related to an ageing population and the increasing use of antithrombotics. Diverticulosis continues to be the most common aetiology of LGIB. Pre-endoscopic risk stratification tools, especially the Oakland score, can aid appropriate patient triage. Adequate resuscitation continues to form the basis of management, while appropriate management of antithrombotics is crucial to balance the risk of worsening bleeding against increased cardiovascular risk. Radiological imaging plays an essential role in the diagnosis and treatment of acute LGIB, especially among unstable patients. Colonoscopy remains the gold-standard test for the elective management of stable patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of LGIB has evolved significantly in recent years, with a shift towards radiological interventions for unstable patients while reserving elective colonoscopy for stable patients. A multidisciplinary approach is essential to optimise the outcomes of patients with LGIB.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review and summarize the most recent literature, including evidence-based guidelines, on the evaluation and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB).

RECENT FINDINGS

LGIB primarily presents in the elderly, often on the background of comorbidities, and constitutes a significant healthcare and economic burden worldwide. Therefore, acute LGIB requires rapid evaluation, informed decision-making, and evidence-based management decisions. LGIB management involves withholding and possibly reversing precipitating medications and concurrently addressing risk factors, with definitive diagnosis and therapy for the source of bleeding usually performed by endoscopic or radiological means. Recent advancements in LGIB diagnosis and management, including risk stratification tools and novel endoscopic therapeutic techniques have improved LGIB management and patient outcomes. In recent years, the various society guidelines on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding have been revised and updated accordingly.

SUMMARY

By integrating the most recently published high-quality clinical studies and society guidelines, we provide clinicians with an up-to-date and comprehensive overview on acute LGIB diagnosis and management.

LONG-HOSP Score: A Novel Predictive Score for Length of Hospital Stay in Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding - A Multicenter Nationwide Study

INTRODUCTION

Length of stay (LOS) in hospital affects cost, patient quality of life, and hospital management; however, existing gastrointestinal bleeding models applicable at hospital admission have not focused on LOS. We aimed to construct a predictive model for LOS in acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the records of 8,547 patients emergently hospitalized for ALGIB at 49 hospitals (the CODE BLUE-J Study). A predictive model for prolonged hospital stay was developed using the baseline characteristics of 7,107 patients and externally validated in 1,440 patients. Furthermore, a multivariate analysis assessed the impact of additional variables during hospitalization on LOS.

RESULTS

Focusing on baseline characteristics, a predictive model for prolonged hospital stay was developed, the LONG-HOSP score, which consisted of low body mass index, laboratory data, old age, nondrinker status, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, facility with ≥800 beds, heart rate, oral antithrombotic agent use, symptoms, systolic blood pressure, performance status, and past medical history. The score showed relatively high performance in predicting prolonged hospital stay and high hospitalization costs (area under the curve: 0.70 and 0.73 for derivation, respectively, and 0.66 and 0.71 for external validation, respectively). Next, we focused on in-hospital management. Diagnosis of colitis or colorectal cancer, rebleeding, and the need for blood transfusion, interventional radiology, and surgery prolonged LOS, regardless of the LONG-HOSP score. By contrast, early colonoscopy and endoscopic treatment shortened LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

At hospital admission for ALGIB, our novel predictive model stratified patients by their risk of prolonged hospital stay. During hospitalization, early colonoscopy and endoscopic treatment shortened LOS.

Differences between patients with inpatient-onset and outpatient-onset acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: An observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The clinical severity and course of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) are believed to differ between inpatient-onset and outpatient-onset cases, but no reports have investigated these issues in detail. We aimed to evaluate the clinical differences between inpatient-onset and outpatient-onset ALGIB.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who had undergone emergency colonoscopy for ALGIB were retrospectively reviewed. The severity was evaluated using the NOBLADS score. Patients with obvious ALGIB relapse and/or persistent iron-deficiency anemia after emergency colonoscopy were considered to exhibit a poor clinical course.

RESULTS

We reviewed 723 patients with ALGIB and divided them into the inpatient-onset cohort (172 patients) and outpatient-onset cohort (551 patients). Compared with the outpatient-onset cohort, the inpatient-onset cohort had a significantly higher proportion of patients with a poor clinical course (51.2% vs 21.6%; P < 0.001) and a significantly higher mean NOBLADS score (3.6 ± 1.1 vs 2.5 ± 1.0; P < 0.001). The most common bleeding source was acute hemorrhagic rectal ulcer (52.3%) in the inpatient-onset cohort and colonic diverticular bleeding (29.4%) in the outpatient-onset cohort. Multivariate analysis showed that a platelet count < 15 × 104 /μL and albumin concentration < 3 g/dL were significantly associated with a poor clinical course in the inpatient-onset cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical course was significantly worse in the inpatient-onset cohort than in the outpatient-onset cohort. The bleeding source, clinical characteristics, and clinical course differed between the inpatient-onset and outpatient-onset cohorts. The clinical course in the inpatient-onset cohort may depend on the patient's condition at ALGIB onset.

A Review of Colonoscopy in Intestinal Diseases

Since the development of the fiberoptic colonoscope in the late 1960s, colonoscopy has been a useful tool to diagnose and treat various intestinal diseases. This article reviews the clinical use of colonoscopy for various intestinal diseases based on present and future perspectives. Intestinal diseases include infectious diseases, inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), neoplasms, functional bowel disorders, and others. In cases of infectious diseases, colonoscopy is helpful in making the differential diagnosis, revealing endoscopic gross findings, and obtaining the specimens for pathology. Additionally, colonoscopy provides clues for distinguishing between infectious disease and IBD, and aids in the post-treatment monitoring of IBD. Colonoscopy is essential for the diagnosis of neoplasms that are diagnosed through only pathological confirmation. At present, malignant tumors are commonly being treated using endoscopy because of the advancement of endoscopic resection procedures. Moreover, the characteristics of tumors can be described in more detail by image-enhanced endoscopy and magnifying endoscopy. Colonoscopy can be helpful for the endoscopic decompression of colonic volvulus in large bowel obstruction, balloon dilatation as a treatment for benign stricture, and colon stenting as a treatment for malignant obstruction. In the diagnosis of functional bowel disorder, colonoscopy is used to investigate other organic causes of the symptom.

Management of Patients With Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Updated ACG Guideline

Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common reason for hospitalization in the United States and is associated with significant utilization of hospital resources, as well as considerable morbidity and mortality. These revised guidelines implement the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools, thresholds for red blood cell transfusion, reversal agents for patients on anticoagulants, diagnostic testing including colonoscopy and computed tomography angiography (CTA), endoscopic therapeutic options, and management of antithrombotic medications after hospital discharge. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools to identify patients with LGIB at low risk of a hospital-based intervention, the role for reversal agents in patients with life-threatening LGIB on vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants, the increasing role for CTA in patients with severe LGIB, and the management of patients who have a positive CTA. We recommend that most patients requiring inpatient colonoscopy undergo a nonurgent colonoscopy because performing an urgent colonoscopy within 24 hours of presentation has not been shown to improve important clinical outcomes such as rebleeding. Finally, we provide updated recommendations regarding resumption of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications after cessation of LGIB.

Efficacy of Combination Therapy with Epinephrine Local Injection and Hemostatic Clips on Active Diverticular Bleeding

Epinephrine local injection is a hemostatic procedure used in active diverticular bleeding that elicits vasoconstriction and tamponade effects. We compared the additional benefit of combination therapy with HSE-C (hypertonic saline epinephrine injection with clipping) to clipping monotherapy. Retrospective data on diverticular bleeding between 2011 and 2016 was reviewed. Those with an active bleeding source confirmed by colonoscopy (excluding non-bleeding vessels and adherent clots) who received either HSE-C or clipping were evaluated. Endpoints were rates of successful primary hemostasis, recurrent bleeding, and surgical intervention during hospitalization. A total of 320 patients with diverticular bleeding were evaluated, on which either HSE-C (n = 35) or clipping monotherapy (n = 18) was performed. Rates of successful primary hemostasis (91.4% vs. 66.7%, p = 0.048) and direct placement of endoclips (60.0% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.004) were significantly higher in the HSE-C group. Although not statistically significant, the HSE-C group had a higher rate of early rebleeding (18.8% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.653), while no difference was seen in the number of patients requiring surgery (11.4% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.651). HSE-C is associated with a higher rate of successful primary hemostasis for severe active diverticular bleeding but has no significant difference in reducing early recurrent bleeding or the number of patients requiring surgery, suggesting that hemostatic effects may be temporary.