Rebleeding and Mortality After Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients Taking Antiplatelets or Anticoagulants

Updated evidence on epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment for colonic diverticular bleeding

Since 2020, multiple large-scale studies (CODE BLUE-J) in Japan have accelerated the accumulation of evidence on colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). This review summarizes the latest findings regarding CDB epidemiology and endoscopic hemostasis. Recent data show that CDB has become the most common cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding in Japan, driven by an aging population and the increased use of antithrombotic medications. Although 70%-90% of patients achieve spontaneous hemostasis, rebleeding occurs in up to 35% of cases within 1 year. Despite an overall mortality rate of < 1%, patients with CDB can present with hypovolemic shock and may require urgent intervention. There are no effective pharmacological treatments for controlling CDB. Therefore, endoscopic therapy plays a crucial role in its management. Based on available evidence, both clipping and endoscopic band ligation are considered effective initial treatments. Recent studies indicate that direct clipping reduces early rebleeding compared with indirect clipping, while endoscopic band ligation achieves lower rebleeding rates (13%-15%) than clipping. The choice between direct clipping and endoscopic band ligation depends on the diverticulum location and the presence of active bleeding. Newer techniques, such as over-the-scope clip and self-assembling peptide application, have shown potential, but require further study. The detection of the bleeding source remains challenging because accurate identification is essential for successful hemostasis. Additional research is needed to refine the endoscopic diagnostic and therapeutic techniques, prevent rebleeding, and improve patient outcomes.

Delphi consensus statement for the management of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding

Background

Delayed post-polypectomy bleeding (DPPB) is the most common adverse event following colonic polypectomy, yet its management remains highly heterogeneous and lacks standardization. A considerable number of colonoscopies performed for DPPB may be unnecessary and do not result in hemostatic intervention.

Objectives

To develop evidence-based statements to guide clinical decision-making in DPPB.

Design

Multidisciplinary Delphi consensus statement.

Methods

A panel of 29 experts in gastroenterology, hematology, radiology, and surgery was assembled. Through a systematic review of the literature and a modified Delphi process, consensus statements were developed through iterative rounds of anonymous voting. Statements were revised following anonymous voting and feedback at each round. Those achieving 80% agreement were accepted.

Results

The expert panel reached a consensus on 36 statements, covering areas such as antithrombotic management, bowel preparation, colonoscopy indications, and therapeutic hemostatic modalities. Key recommendations include guidance for managing self-limited bleeding and risk stratification to reduce the rate of unnecessary colonoscopies, as well as recommendations for hemodynamically unstable patients who may require primary angioembolization. A practical clinical algorithm is proposed.

Conclusion

This document provides a consensus-based framework for managing DPPB. These recommendations aim to improve patient outcomes and optimize healthcare resources while fostering a standardized approach to this common adverse event.

Endoscopic Hemostasis and Antithrombotic Management

This review highlights the available literature for antithrombotic management and hemostasis techniques that can be leveraged when caring for patients on antithrombotic medications who may develop gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Risks of both index GIB as well as risk of recurrent GIB are reviewed with emphasis on the balance between therapeutic benefits and bleeding hazards that are inherent with these medications. For management of these complications, an in-depth review of the various endoscopic hemostasis techniques that can be utilized is also provided.

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.

Progression of Gastrointestinal Injury During Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Secondary Analysis of the OPT-PEACE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Gastrointestinal injury progression induced by antiplatelet therapy in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been well studied.

Objective

To assess the association of aspirin, clopidogrel, and their combination with gastrointestinal injury progression among patients without high bleeding risk after PCI.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This secondary analysis assessed data from the Optimal Antiplatelet Therapy for Prevention of Gastrointestinal Injury Evaluated by ANKON Magnetically Controlled Capsule Endoscopy (OPT-PEACE) double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter randomized clinical trial. The OPT-PEACE trial was conducted at 28 centers in China, and recruitment took place from July 13, 2017, to July 13, 2019. The trial included patients with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation after PCI. Statistical analysis was conducted from September 13, 2022, to January 23, 2023.

Interventions

Patients underwent magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCE) at baseline and after 6 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin (100 mg/d) plus clopidogrel (75 mg/d). Those with no evidence of gastrointestinal ulcers or bleeding (ie, the intention-to-treat [ITT] cohort) were randomized (1:1:1) to aspirin (100 mg/d) plus matching placebo (aspirin alone), clopidogrel (75 mg/d) plus matching placebo (clopidogrel alone), or DAPT for an additional 6 months. A third MCE was performed 12 months after PCI.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the rate of gastric injury progression as assessed with the results of the 3 MCEs (at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months) in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population. The key secondary outcome was the rate of small-intestinal injury progression. Gastric or small-intestinal injury progression was defined as a quantitative increase in erosions or ulcers between the second and third MCEs (at 6 and 12 months, respectively).

Results

This study included the 394 patients in the mITT cohort. Their mean (SD) age was 56.9 (8.7) years, and most were men (296 [75.1%]). A total of 132 patients were randomized to aspirin alone, 132 to clopidogrel alone, and 130 to DAPT. Gastric injury progression occurred in 49 aspirin users (37.1%), 64 clopidogrel users (48.5%), and 69 DAPT users (53.1%) (P = .02), reflecting a lower rate of gastric injury progression among aspirin users vs DAPT users (risk ratio [RR], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.49-0.99]; P = .009). No significant difference was observed between clopidogrel alone and DAPT (48.5% vs 53.1%; P = .46) or between aspirin alone and clopidogrel alone (37.1% vs 48.5%; P = .06). A total of 51 aspirin users (38.6%), 65 clopidogrel users (49.2%), and 71 DAPT users (54.6%) (P = .03) developed progressive small-intestinal injury, reflecting a lower rate of small-intestinal injury among aspirin users vs DAPT users (RR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.50-0.99]; P = .01). No difference was observed between patients treated with clopidogrel vs DAPT (49.2% vs 54.6%; P = .38) or with aspirin vs clopidogrel (38.6% vs 49.2%; P = .08).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, ongoing use of aspirin, clopidogrel, or their combination between 6 and 12 months after PCI was associated with progressive gastric and small-intestinal injury in a substantial proportion of patients, more so with DAPT than with monotherapy. Clopidogrel was at least as likely as aspirin to induce gastrointestinal injury progression. Future research is warranted to determine what impact the findings from MCEs would have on decision-making of antiplatelet therapy.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03198741.

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.

German guideline diverticular disease/diverticulitis: Part I: Methods, pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical characteristics (definitions), natural course, diagnosis and classification

Diverticulosis and diverticular disease are ranked among the most common gastroenterological diseases and conditions. While for many years diverticulitis was found to be mainly an event occurring in the elder population, more recent work in epidemiology demonstrates increasing frequency in younger subjects. In addition, there is a noticeable trend towards more complicated disease. This may explain the significant increase in hospitalisations observed in recent years. It is not a surprise that the number of scientific studies addressing the clinical and socioeconomic consequences in the field is increasing. As a result, diagnosis and conservative as well as surgical management have changed in recent years. Diverticulosis, diverticular disease and diverticulitis are a complex entity and apparently an interdisciplinary challenge. To meet theses considerations the German Societies for Gastroenterology and Visceral Surgery decided to create joint guidelines addressing all aspects in a truely interdisciplinary fashion. The aim of the guideline is to summarise and to evaluate the current state of knowledge on diverticulosis and diverticular disease and to develop statements as well as recommendations to all physicians involved in the management of patients with diverticular disease.

Risk factors for short-term re-bleeding in patients with colonic diverticular bleeding: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Few studies have evaluated risk factors for short-term re-bleeding in patients with colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). We aimed to reveal risk factors for re-bleeding within a month in patients with CDB.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical course of patients with CDB diagnosed at 10 institutions between 2015 and 2019. Risk factors for re-bleeding within a month were assessed by Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Among 370 patients, 173 (47%) patients had been under the use of antithrombotic agents (ATs) and 34 (9%) experienced re-bleeding within a month. Multivariate analysis revealed that the use of ATs was an independent risk factor for re-bleeding within a month (HR 2.38, 95% CI 1.10-5.50, p = .028). Furthermore, use of multiple ATs and continuation of ATs were found to be independent risk factors for re-bleeding within a month (HR 3.88, 95% CI 1.49-10.00, p = .007 and HR 3.30, 95% CI 1.23-8.63, p = .019, respectively). Two of 370 patients, who discontinued ATs, developed thromboembolic event.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of ATs was an independent risk factor for short-term re-bleeding within a month in patients with CDB. This was especially the case for the use of multiple ATs and continuation of ATs. However, discontinuation of ATs may increase the thromboembolic events those patients.

Risk factors of re‐bleeding within a year in colonic diverticular bleeding patients

Background/Aims

Although colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) is common, few reports have described the effects of antithrombotic agents (ATs) on CDB. This study aimed to clarify the risk factors of re‐bleeding within a year in CDB patients.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed the risk of re‐bleeding in CDB patients. Among 324 patients who were hospitalized for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding at our institution during the period from 2015 to 2019, we used 76 patients who were diagnosed as CDB. Risk factors for re‐bleeding were determined by Cox proportional hazard models.

Results

Of 76 patients analyzed, 32 were taking ATs, nine of whom were taking multiple agents. Twenty‐six patients re‐bled within a year. Compared with the patients without re‐bleeding, patients with re‐bleeding within a year had been treated by antithrombotic therapy more frequently (62% vs. 32%, p = 0.013). Cox proportional hazard model revealed that treatment with ATs (hazard ratio 3.89, 95% confidence interval 1.53–10.74, p = 0.004) was an independent risk factor for re‐bleeding within a year.

Conclusion

ATs were found to be an independent risk factor related to re‐bleeding within a year in patients with CDB.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that the initial assessment of patients presenting with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding should include: a history of co-morbidities and medications that promote bleeding; hemodynamic parameters; physical examination (including digital rectal examination); and laboratory markers. A risk score can be used to aid, but should not replace, clinician judgment.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends that, in patients presenting with a self-limited bleed and no adverse clinical features, an Oakland score of ≤ 8 points can be used to guide the clinician decision to discharge the patient for outpatient investigation.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 7 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of 7-9 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and a history of acute or chronic cardiovascular disease, a more liberal red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 8 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of ≥ 10 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients with major acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding, colonoscopy should be performed sometime during their hospital stay because there is no high quality evidence that early colonoscopy influences patient outcomes.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends that patients with hemodynamic instability and suspected ongoing bleeding undergo computed tomography angiography before endoscopic or radiologic treatment to locate the site of bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends withholding vitamin K antagonists in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding and correcting their coagulopathy according to the severity of bleeding and their thrombotic risk. In patients with hemodynamic instability, we recommend administering intravenous vitamin K and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), or fresh frozen plasma if PCC is not available.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends temporarily withholding direct oral anticoagulants at presentation in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE does not recommend withholding aspirin in patients taking low dose aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention. If withheld, low dose aspirin should be resumed, preferably within 5 days or even earlier if hemostasis is achieved or there is no further evidence of bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 10: ESGE does not recommend routinely discontinuing dual antiplatelet therapy (low dose aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor antagonist) before cardiology consultation. Continuation of the aspirin is recommended, whereas the P2Y12 receptor antagonist can be continued or temporarily interrupted according to the severity of bleeding and the ischemic risk. If interrupted, the P2Y12 receptor antagonist should be restarted within 5 days, if still indicated.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

New Trends and Advances in Non-Variceal Gastrointestinal Bleeding-Series II

The gastrointestinal tract is a long tubular structure wherein any point in the mucosa along its entire length could be the source of a hemorrhage. Upper (esophagel and gastroduodenal) and lower (jejunum, ileum, and colon) gastrointestinal bleeding are common. Gastroduodenal and colonic bleeding are more frequent than bleeding from the small bowel, but nowadays the entire gastrointestinal tract can be explored endoscopically and bleeding lesions can be locally treated successfully to stop or prevent further bleeding. The extensive use of antiplatelet and anticoagulants drugs in cardiovascular patients is, at least in part, the cause of the increasing number of patients suffering from gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients with these conditions are usually older and more fragile because of their comorbidities. The correct management of antithrombotic drugs in cases of gastrointestinal bleeding is essential for a successful outcome for patients. The influence of the microbiome in the pathogenesis of small bowel bleeding is an example of the new data that are emerging as potential therapeutic target for bleeding prevention. This text summarizes the latest research and advances in all forms of acute gastrointestinal bleeding (i.e., upper, small bowel and lower). Diagnosis is approached, and medical, endoscopic or antithrombotic management are discussed in the text in an accessible and comprehensible way.

Revising the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) research priorities: a research progress update

BACKGROUND

One of the aims of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) is to encourage high quality endoscopic research at a European level. In 2016, the ESGE research committee published a set of research priorities. As endoscopic research is flourishing, we aimed to review the literature and determine whether endoscopic research over the last 4 years had managed to address any of our previously published priorities.

METHODS

As the previously published priorities were grouped under seven different domains, a working party with at least two European experts was created for each domain to review all the priorities under that domain. A structured review form was developed to standardize the review process. The group conducted an extensive literature search relevant to each of the priorities and then graded the priorities into three categories: (1) no longer a priority (well-designed trial, incorporated in national/international guidelines or adopted in routine clinical practice); (2) remains a priority (i. e. the above criterion was not met); (3) redefine the existing priority (i. e. the priority was too vague with the research question not clearly defined).

RESULTS

The previous ESGE research priorities document published in 2016 had 26 research priorities under seven domains. Our review of these priorities has resulted in seven priorities being removed from the list, one priority being partially removed, another seven being redefined to make them more precise, with eleven priorities remaining unchanged. This is a reflection of a rapid surge in endoscopic research, resulting in 27 % of research questions having already been answered and another 27 % requiring redefinition.

CONCLUSIONS

Our extensive review process has led to the removal of seven research priorities from the previous (2016) list, leaving 19 research priorities that have been redefined to make them more precise and relevant for researchers and funding bodies to target.

Management of Bleeding Events Associated with Antiplatelet Therapy: Evidence, Uncertainties and Pitfalls

Bleeding complications are common in patients treated with antiplatelet agents (APA), but their management relies on poor evidence. Therefore, practical guidelines and guidance documents are mainly based on expert opinion. The French Working Group on Perioperative Haemostasis provided proposals in 2018 to enhance clinical decisions regarding the management of APA-treated patients with a bleeding event. In light of these proposals, this review discusses the evidence and uncertainties of the management of patients with a bleeding event while on antiplatelet therapy. Platelet transfusion is the main option as an attempt to neutralise the effect of APA on primary haemostasis. Nevertheless, efficacy of platelet transfusion to mitigate clinical consequences of bleeding in patients treated with APA depends on the type of antiplatelet therapy, the time from the last intake, the mechanism (spontaneous versus traumatic) and site of bleeding and the criteria of efficacy (in vitro, in vivo). Specific antidotes for APA neutralisation are needed, especially for ticagrelor, but are not available yet. Despite the amount of information that platelet function tests are expected to give, little data support the clinical benefit of using such tests for the management of bleeding events in patients treated or potentially treated with APA.

Risk of Major Gastrointestinal Bleeding With New vs Conventional Oral Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is controversy over whether use of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) associates with increased risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) compared with conventional therapies (such as vitamin K antagonists or anti-platelet agents). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomized controlled trials and high-quality real-world studies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov Website databases (through Oct 12, 2018) for randomized controlled trials and high-quality real-world studies that reported major GIB events in patients given NOACs or conventional therapy. Relative risks (RRs) for randomized controlled trials and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for real-world studies were calculated separately using random-effects models.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 43 randomized controlled trials (183,752 patients) and 41 real-world studies (1,879,428 patients). The pooled major rates of GIB for patients on NOACs (1.19%) vs conventional treatment (0.92%) did not differ significantly (RR from randomized controlled trials, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.91-1.31 and aHR from real-world studies, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.10; Pinteraction=.52). Rivaroxaban, but not other NOACs, was associated with an increased risk for major GIB (RR from randomized controlled trials, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.17-1.65 and aHR from real-world studies, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.23; Pinteraction = .06). Analyses of subgroups, such as patients with different indications, dosage, or follow-up time, did not significantly affect results. Meta-regression analysis failed to detect any potential confounding to impact the primacy outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomized controlled trials and real-world studies, we confirmed that there is no significant difference in risk of major GIB between patients receiving NOACs vs conventional treatment. Rivaroxaban users had a 39% increase in risk for major GIB.

Risk of rebleeding, vascular events and death after gastrointestinal bleeding in anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet users

BACKGROUND

Patients with gastrointestinal bleeding during anticoagulant and/or antiplatelet therapy represent a clinical challenge.

AIM

To determine the risk/rates of rebleeding, vascular events and death in patients treated with antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents who developed major gastrointestinal bleeding METHODS: This was an observational cohort study of patients who developed gastrointestinal bleeding while on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy. Drug use information was collected prospectively during bleeding events. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate rebleeding, vascular events and death.

RESULTS

Among 871 patients (mean age 78.9 ± 8.6 years), 38.9% used an anticoagulant, 52.5% used an antiplatelet and 8.6% used both; 93.1% interrupted treatment after gastrointestinal bleeding and 80.5% restarted therapy within 7.6 ± 36.4 days; 38.7% had upper gastrointestinal bleeds, 46.7% lower gastrointestinal bleeds and 14.6% gastrointestinal bleeds of unknown origin. Median follow-up was 24.9 months (IQR: 7.0-38.0). Resumption of both therapies was associated with a higher risk of rebleeding, lower risk of ischaemic events or death and a similar risk for upper and lower gastrointestinal events. Resumption of therapy ≤ 7 days after bleeding showed a similar pattern with no differences in death. Rebleeding rates were higher in anticoagulant vs antiplatelet patients (138.0 vs 99.0 events per 1000 patient-years), and the bleeding location was identical in 61.8% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Resumption of anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy after a gastrointestinal bleeding event was associated with a lower risk of vascular events and death and a higher rebleeding risk. The benefits of early reinstitution of anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy outweigh the gastrointestinal-related risks.

Risk factors of early rebleeding in the endoscopic management of colonic diverticular bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The risk factors for early rebleeding following the management of colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) are unclear. This study aimed to determine the risk factors for early rebleeding following initial colonoscopy.

METHODS

Overall, 370 patients with CDB were divided as having presumptive (229) or definite CDB with stigmata of recent hemorrhage (141) on the basis of initial colonoscopy. Definite CDB cases were treated by either endoscopic clipping (EC) or endoscopic band ligation (EBL) as a first-line treatment. Time-to-event analysis for early rebleeding was performed by Kaplan-Meier methods with log-rank test between the three groups (presumptive, EC, and EBL). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify risk factors for early rebleeding.

RESULTS

There were 38 and 103 patients in the EC and EBL groups, respectively. Early rebleeding developed in 61 cases (16.5%). The cumulative incidence rates of early rebleeding at 1, 5, and 30 days were 7.7%, 16.4%, and 17.9% in the presumptive group; 1.9%, 7.0%, and 9.5% in the EBL group; and 2.6%, 34.9%, and 37.7% in the EC group, respectively (log-rank test, P = 0.00059). Moreover, 90.2% of early rebleeding occurred within 5 days. Adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was marginally lower in the presumptive group (HR = 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.01; P = 0.052) and significantly lower in the EBL-treated group than in the EC group (HR = 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.50; P = 0.0004).

CONCLUSIONS

Most early rebleeding occurred within 5 days after initial colonoscopy. EC was less effective than EBL in terms of early rebleeding.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: guidelines from the British Society of Gastroenterology

This is the first UK national guideline to concentrate on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) and has been commissioned by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG). The Guidelines Development Group consisted of representatives from the BSG Endoscopy Committee, the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, the British Society of Interventional Radiology, the Royal College of Radiologists, NHS Blood and Transplant and a patient representative. A systematic search of the literature was undertaken and the quality of evidence and grading of recommendations appraised according to the GRADE(Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. These guidelines focus on the diagnosis and management of acute LGIB in adults, including methods of risk assessment and interventions to diagnose and treat bleeding (colonoscopy, computed tomography, mesenteric angiography, endoscopic therapy, embolisation and surgery). Recommendations are included on the management of patients who develop LGIB while receiving anticoagulants (including direct oral anticoagulants) or antiplatelet drugs. The appropriate use of blood transfusion is also discussed, including haemoglobin triggers and targets.

Initial management for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common indication for hospital admission. Patients with LGIB often experience persistent or recurrent bleeding and require blood transfusions and interventions, such as colonoscopic, radiological, and surgical treatments. Appropriate decision-making is needed to initially manage acute LGIB, including emergency hospitalization, timing of colonoscopy, and medication use. In this literature review, we summarize the evidence for initial management of acute LGIB. Assessing various clinical factors, including comorbidities, medication use, presenting symptoms, vital signs, and laboratory data is useful for risk stratification of severe LGIB, and for discriminating upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Early timing of colonoscopy had the possibility of improving identification of the bleeding source, and the rate of endoscopic intervention, compared with elective colonoscopy. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography before colonoscopy may help identify stigmata of recent hemorrhage on colonoscopy, particularly in patients who can be examined immediately after the last hematochezia. How to deal with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antithrombotic agents after hemostasis should be carefully considered because of the risk of rebleeding and thromboembolic events. In general, aspirin as primary prophylaxis for cardiovascular events and NSAIDs were suggested to be discontinued after LGIB. Managing acute LGIB based on this information would improve clinical outcomes. Further investigations are needed to distinguish patients with LGIB who require early colonoscopy and hemostatic intervention.