Predictive factors for rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding after multipolar electrocoagulation: a retrospective analysis

Development and validation of a model to predict rebleeding within three days after endoscopic hemostasis for high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

Peptic ulcer bleeding remains a typical medical emergency with significant morbidity and mortality. Peptic ulcer rebleeding often occurs within three days after emergent endoscopic hemostasis. Our study aims to develop a nomogram to predict rebleeding within three days after emergent endoscopic hemostasis for high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data of 386 patients with bleeding ulcers and high-risk stigmata who underwent emergent endoscopic hemostasis between March 2014 and October 2018. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method was used to identify predictors. The model was displayed as a nomogram. Internal validation was carried out using bootstrapping. The model was evaluated using the calibration plot, decision-curve analyses, and clinical impact curve.

RESULTS

Overall, 386 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled, with 48 patients developed rebleeding within three days after initial endoscopic hemostasis. Predictors contained in the nomogram included albumin, prothrombin time, shock, haematemesis/melena and Forrest classification. The model showed good discrimination and good calibration with a C-index of 0.854 (C-index: 0.830 via bootstrapping validation). Decision-curve analyses and clinical impact curve also demonstrated that it was clinically valuable.

CONCLUSION

This study presents a nomogram that incorporates clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic features, effectively predicting rebleeding within three days after emergent endoscopic hemostasis and identifying high-risk rebleeding patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. Trial registration This clinical trial has been registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04895904) approved by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Gastrointestinal Bleeding Successfully Treated Using Interventional Radiology

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is an emergency medical condition that leads to hemorrhagic shock or circulatory instability if left untreated. A mainstay for treating GI bleeding is endoscopic therapy; more than 90% of GI bleeding can be staunched by endoscopic hemostasis. However, patients with unstable hemodynamics or GI bleeding that cannot be controlled by endoscopy require transcatheter embolization or surgical intervention. The development of several devices and embolization agents that are used in interventional radiology (IVR) leads to safe and accessible treatment via IVR. If endoscopic treatment fails, IVR is the second strategy. Herein, we report cases of GI bleeding that were successfully treated by IVR and discuss the therapeutic strategy.

Outcomes of peptic ulcer bleeding following treatment with proton pump inhibitors in routine clinical practice: 935 patients with high- or low-risk stigmata

OBJECTIVE

To assess rates of further bleeding, surgery and mortality in patients hospitalized owing to peptic ulcer bleeding.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients hospitalized for peptic ulcer bleeding and treated with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (esomeprazole or pantoprazole) were identified retrospectively in 12 centers in Spain. Patients were included if they had high-risk stigmata (Forrest class Ia-IIb, underwent therapeutic endoscopy and received intravenous PPI ≥120 mg/day for ≥24 h) or low-risk stigmata (Forrest class IIc-III, underwent no therapeutic endoscopy and received intravenous or oral PPI [any dose]).

RESULTS

Of 935 identified patients, 58.3% had high-risk stigmata and 41.7% had low-risk stigmata. After endoscopy, 88.3% of high-risk patients and 22.1% of low-risk patients received intravenous PPI therapy at doses of at least 160 mg/day. Further bleeding within 72 h occurred in 9.4% and 2.1% of high- and low-risk patients, respectively (p < 0.001). Surgery to stop bleeding was required within 30 days in 3.5% and 0.8% of high- and low-risk patients, respectively (p = 0.007). Mortality at 30 days was similar in both groups (3.3% in high-risk and 2.3% in low-risk patients).

CONCLUSION

Among patients hospitalized owing to peptic ulcer bleeding and treated with PPIs, patients with high-risk stigmata have a higher risk of further bleeding and surgery, but not of death, than those with low-risk stigmata.

Predictors of early rebleeding after endoscopic therapy in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to high-risk lesions

BACKGROUND

In an era of increasingly shortened admissions, data regarding predictors of early rebleeding among patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) exhibiting high-risk stigmata (HRS) having undergone endoscopic hemostasis are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To determine predictors of early rebleeding, defined as rebleeding before completion of recommended 72 h intravenous proton pump inhibitor infusion postendoscopic hemostasis.

METHODS

Data from a national registry of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (the REASON registry) were accessed. Univariable and multivariable analyses were sequentially performed to identify significant independent predictors among a comprehensive list of clinical and laboratory characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, 393 patients underwent endoscopic hemostasis for NVUGIB with HRS. Forty patients rebled ≤72 h thereafter (32.5% female, mean [± SD] age 70.2 ± 11.8 years, 2.88 ± 2.11 comorbidities), while 21 rebled later (38.1% female, mean 70.5 ± 14.1 years of age, 2.62 ± 2.06 comorbidities). Hematemesis or bright red blood per nasogastric tube aspirate was identified as the sole independent significant predictor of early rebleeding versus later among both NVUGIB and, more specifically, patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (OR 7.94 [95% CI 1.80 to 35.01]; P<0.01, and OR 8.41 [95% CI 1.54 to 46.10]; P=0.014, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

When attempting to determine the optimal duration of pharmacotherapy and timing of discharge for patients following endoscopic hemostasis for NVUGIB with HRS, it is noteworthy that individuals who present with hematemesis or bright red blood per nasogastric tube aspirate are at particularly high risk for rebleeding within the first 72 h.

Meta-analysis: predictors of rebleeding after endoscopic treatment for bleeding peptic ulcer

BACKGROUND

Determining the risk of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) may be useful for establishing additional haemostatic measures in very high-risk patients.

AIM

To identify predictors of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy.

METHODS

Bibliographic database searches were performed to identify studies assessing rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for PUB. All searches and data abstraction were performed in duplicate. A parameter was considered to be an independent predictor of rebleeding when it was detected as prognostic by multivariate analyses in ≥2 studies. Pooled odds ratios (pOR) were calculated for prognostic variables.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies met the prespecified inclusion criteria. Pre-endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were: (i) Haemodynamic instability: significant in 9 of 13 studies evaluating the variable (pOR: 3.30, 95% CI: 2.57-4.24); (ii) Haemoglobin value: significant in 2 of 10 (pOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.14-2.62) and (iii) Transfusion: significant in two of six (pOR not calculable). Endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were: (i) Active bleeding: significant in 6 of 12 studies (pOR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.31-2.22); (ii) Large ulcer size: significant in 8 of 12 studies (pOR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.98-4.00); (iii) Posterior duodenal ulcer location: significant in four of eight studies (pOR: 3.83, 95% CI: 1.38-10.66) and (iv) High lesser gastric curvature ulcer location: significant in three of eight studies (pOR: 2.86; 95% CI: 1.69-4.86).

CONCLUSIONS

Major predictors for rebleeding in patients receiving endoscopic therapy are haemodynamic instability, active bleeding at endoscopy, large ulcer size, ulcer location, haemoglobin value and the need for transfusion. These risk factors may be useful for guiding clinical management in patients with PUB.

Epidemiology and demographics of upper gastrointestinal bleeding: prevalence, incidence, and mortality

Despite major advances in diagnosis, prevention, and treatment, nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding still is a serious problem in clinical practice. Current evidence indicates that most peptic ulcer bleeding-linked deaths are not a direct sequela of the bleeding ulcer itself. Instead, mortality derives from multiorgan failure, cardiopulmonary conditions, or terminal malignancy, suggesting that improving further current treatments for the bleeding ulcer may have a limited impact on mortality unless supportive therapies are developed for the global management of these patients.

Model to predict rebleeding following endoscopic therapy for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Following endoscopic therapy, up to 20% of patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage experience rebleeding. The aim of the present study was to determine risk factors for recurrent hemorrhage in these patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients admitted to a tertiary care hospital between 1 July 1999 and 30 June 2004, with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Patients were evaluated for rebleeding within 30 days of successful therapeutic endoscopy. Using the hospital's endoscopic database, 236 patients were identified. Risk factors were identified using multivariable logistic regression with backward selection. Internal validation was carried out using bootstrapping.

RESULTS

Six risk factors were identified: failure to use a proton pump inhibitor post-procedure (P = 0.056), Endoscopically demonstrated bleeding (P = 0.053), peptic ulcer as the bleeding source (P = 0.018), treatment with epinephrine monotherapy (P = 0.0026), post-procedure intravenous or low molecular weight heparin use (P = 0.0014), and moderate or severe cirrhosis (P = 0.032) (PEPTIC). The risk of rebleeding increased as the number of risk factors present increased. The observed rates of rebleeding were: 7.1%, 16.4%, 37.0%, 75.0% and 100% for zero, one, two, three or four risk factors, respectively (no patients had five or six risk factors present). The bias-adjusted area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve for the number of risk factors predicting rebleeding was 0.69.

CONCLUSIONS

We have identified six easily remembered risk factors, which, when summed, predict recurrent hemorrhage following endoscopic therapy for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

Validation of the Rockall scoring system for outcomes from non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a Canadian setting

AIM: To validate the Rockall scoring system for predicting outcomes of rebleeding, and the need for a surgical procedure and death.

METHODS: We used data extracted from the Registry of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Endoscopy including information of 1869 patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding treated in Canadian hospitals. Risk scores were calculated and used to classify patients based on outcomes. For each outcome, we used χ² goodness-of-fit tests to assess the degree of calibration, and built receiver operating characteristic curves and calculated the area under the curve (AUC) to evaluate the discriminative ability of the scoring system.

RESULTS: For rebleeding, the χ² goodness-of-fit test indicated an acceptable fit for the model [χ² (8) = 12.83, P = 0.12]. For surgical procedures [χ² (8) = 5.3, P = 0.73] and death [χ² (8) = 3.78, P = 0.88], the tests showed solid correspondence between observed proportions and predicted probabilities. The AUC was 0.59 (95% CI: 0.55-0.62) for the outcome of rebleeding and 0.60 (95% CI: 0.54-0.67) for surgical procedures, representing a poor discriminative ability of the scoring system. For the outcome of death, the AUC was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.69-0.78), indicating an acceptable discriminative ability.

CONCLUSION: The Rockall scoring system provides an acceptable tool to predict death, but performs poorly for endpoints of rebleeding and surgical procedures.

Duodenoportal fistula caused by peptic ulcer after extended right hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma

Background

A fistula between the duodenum and the main portal vein near a peptic ulcer is extremely rare, and only two cases of duodenal ulcers have been reported in the past.

Case presentation

We report a 68-year-old man with a diagnosis of anemia who had a history of extended right hepatectomy for hilar cholangiocarcinoma 20 months previously. The first endoscopic examination revealed a giant peptic ulcer with active bleeding at the posterior wall of the duodenal bulbs, and hemostasis was performed. Endoscopic treatment and transarterial embolization were performed repeatedly because of uncontrollable bleeding from the duodenal ulcer. Nevertheless, he died of sudden massive hematemesis on the 20^th hospital day. At autopsy, communication with the main portal vein and duodenal ulcer was observed.

Conclusion

It should be borne in mind that the main portal vein is exposed at the front of the hepatoduodenal ligament in cases with previous extrahepatic bile duct resection.

A comparison of oral omeprazole and intravenous cimetidine in reducing complications of duodenal peptic ulcer

Background

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a common problem and its most common etiology is peptic ulcer disease. Ulcer rebleeding is considered a perilous complication for patients. To reduce the rate of rebleeding and to fasten the improvement of patients' general conditions, most emergency departments in Iran use H2-blockers before endoscopic procedures (i.e. intravenous omeprazole is not available in Iran). The aim of this study was to compare therapeutic effects of oral omeprazole and intravenous cimetidine on reducing rebleeding rates, duration of hospitalization, and the need for blood transfusion in duodenal ulcer patients.

Methods

In this clinical trial, 80 patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to duodenal peptic ulcer and endoscopic evidence of rebleeding referring to emergency departments of Imam and Sina hospitals in Tabriz, Iran were randomly assigned to two equal groups; one was treated with intravenous cimetidine 800 mg per day and the other, with 40 mg oral omeprazole per day.

Results

No statistically significant difference was found between cimetidine and omeprazole groups in regards to sex, age, alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, NSAID consumption, endoscopic evidence of rebleeding, mean hemoglobin and mean BUN levels on admission, duration of hospitalization and the mean time of rebleeding. However, the need for blood transfusion was much lower in omeprazole than in cimetidine group (mean: 1.68 versus 3.58 units, respectively; p < 0.003). Moreover, rebleeding rate was significantly lower in omeprazole group (15%) than in cimetidine group (50%) (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

This study demonstrated that oral omeprazole significantly excels intravenous cimetidine in reducing the need for blood transfusion and lowering rebleeding rates in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Though not statistically significant (p = 0.074), shorter periods of hospitalization were found for omeprazole group which merits consideration for cost minimization.

The effect of octreotide as an adjunct treatment in active nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

GOALS

The aim of this study was to determine the effect ofoctreotide on active or recent gastrointestinal bleeding from benign peptic ulcers.

STUDY

This is a prospective, randomized study including 110 patients with gastric or duodenal peptic ulcers presenting with active spurting or oozing bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessel. All patients were subjected to endoscopic hemostasis by injection of noradrenaline, and they were then randomized to either receive octreotide (55 patients) or placebo (55 patients). The groups did not differ with respect to age, sex, use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, previous history of ulcer or bleeding, Helicobacter pylori infection, site, and severity of bleeding.

RESULTS

The rebleeding rate was 36% in placebo and 32% in octreotide group, which does not present a statistically significant difference. Surgical intervention was required for 18 patients (32.7%) in the placebo group and for 16 patients (29%) in the octreotide group. The mortality rate was 2 patients (3.6%) in the placebo and 4 patients (7.2%) in the octreotide group. All the above presented no statistical difference. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to the number of blood units transfused and hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of octreotide as an adjunct treatment in patients with acutely bleeding benign peptic ulcer or/and visible vessel did not seem to offer significant benefits regarding their outcome.