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

Expert of Experts Verification and Alignment (EVAL) Framework for Large Language Models Safety in Gastroenterology

Large language models generate plausible text responses to medical questions, but inaccurate responses pose significant risks in medical decision-making. Grading LLM outputs to determine the best model or answer is time-consuming and impractical in clinical settings; therefore, we introduce EVAL (Expert-of-Experts Verification and Alignment) to streamline this process and enhance LLM safety for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). We evaluated OpenAI's GPT-3.5/4/4o/o1-preview, Anthropic's Claude-3-Opus, Meta's LLaMA-2 (7B/13B/70B), and Mistral AI's Mixtral (7B) across 27 configurations, including zero-shot baseline, retrieval-augmented generation, and supervised fine-tuning. EVAL uses similarity-based ranking and a reward model trained on human-graded responses for rejection sampling. Among the employed similarity metrics, Fine-Tuned ColBERT achieved the highest alignment with human performance across three separate datasets (ρ = 0.81-0.91). The reward model replicated human grading with 87.9% of cases across temperature settings and significantly improved accuracy through rejection sampling by 8.36% overall. EVAL offers scalable potential to assess accuracy for high-stakes medical decision-making.

Emergent endoscopy is associated with lower mortality in hemodynamically unstable upper GI bleeding: Single-center experience with 24/7 endoscopy services

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The effectiveness of emergent endoscopy (EE), defined as endoscopy performed within six hours of admission, for improving outcomes in patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of EE on 42-day rebleeding and mortality rates and identify subgroups of patients who benefit most from this approach.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary hospital with 24/7 endoscopy services. Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years, presented with AUGIB, and underwent endoscopy within 24 h of admission. The exclusion criteria included prior interventions at other facilities, in-hospital bleeding for unrelated reasons, or loss to follow-up. All patients were managed under a standardized AUGIB protocol. The primary outcomes were 42-day rebleeding and mortality. The data were analysed via multivariate logistic regression and interaction analyses.

RESULTS

There were 651 patients with a median age of 58.6 years (18-92). The median time from admission to endoscopy was 4.8 h (3.1-8.0). The 42-day rebleeding and mortality rates were 16.7 % and 11.8 %, respectively. EE was significantly associated with 42-day mortality but not rebleeding. Independent risk factors for mortality included hemodynamic instability, malignancy, NSAID use, and elevated serum creatinine. Interaction analysis revealed that EE was associated with reduced 42-day mortality in hemodynamically unstable patients (OR: 0.29, 95 % CI: 0.145-0.579), a benefit not observed in patients with other risk factors for mortality.

CONCLUSION

EE appears to be associated with reduced 42-day mortality in patients presenting with hemodynamically unstable AUGIB.

Non-epinephrine monotherapy matches combination therapy in high-risk PUB patients

Currently, there is no clear indication in the guidelines whether non-epinephrine injection monotherapy requires the addition of epinephrine for hemostasis.The purpose of this study is to compare the hemostatic efficacy of non-epinephrine injection monotherapy with combination therapy including extra epinephrine injection for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) patients . We retrospectively analyzed PUB patients who underwent endoscopic non-epinephrine injection as a monotherapy or combined non-epinephrine injection with epinephrine injection treatment in our center from March 2014 to January 2023 and the patients were divided into MT group or CT group. Subsequently, a propensity score matching analysis (PSM) was performed and rebleeding rates were calculated according to Forrest classifications via a stratified analysis. A total of 548 eligible patients were included in this study. After PSM, for PUB patients with nonbleeding visible vessels(FIIa), the recurrent bleeding rates by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 after PSM were 17.6%, 26.5%, 27.9%, and 27.9% in the MT group, respectively, and rates were 1.4%, 5.6%, 6.9%, and 6.9% in the CT group, respectively, with significant differences observed between the 2 groups (P = 0.001, P = 0.001, P = 0.001 and P = 0.001, respectively).However, for PUB patients with spurting bleeding, oozing bleeding, and adherent clots, there were no significant differences between the two groups. For PUB patients with spurting bleeding(FIa) and oozing bleeding (FIb) ulcers, non-epinephrine injection monotherapy and epinephrine injection combined therapy have similar hemostatic efficacy. However, for PUB patients with visible blood vessel (FIIa) ulcers, combined therapy has higher hemostatic efficacy than non-epinephrine injection monotherapy.

Guidelines for endoscopic management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (second edition)

The Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society has prepared Guidelines for Endoscopic Practice in Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding as part of the initiative to develop evidence-based endoscopic practice guidelines. Hemorrhagic gastroduodenal (peptic) ulcers are the primary cause of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. With the advent of a super-aged society, the cases caused by Helicobacter pylori are on the decline, whereas those caused by drugs (e.g. aspirin) have been increasing. Endoscopic hemostasis is currently the first-line treatment for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and various methods have been devised for this purpose. It is recommended to stabilize the vital signs of the patient before and after endoscopic hemostasis with appropriate management based on an assessment of the severity of illness, in addition to the administration of acid secretion inhibitors. These guidelines describe the evaluation and initial treatment of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, as well as the selection of endoscopic hemostasis for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and its management after endoscopic hemostasis. This is achieved by classifying nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding into two main categories, namely, peptic ulcer and other types of gastrointestinal bleeding. We prepared statements for any available literature with supporting evidence, including the levels of evidence and recommendations. New evidence has been pooled since the publication of the first edition in this area; however, the levels of evidence and recommendations mostly remain low.

Over-the-scope clips for Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized studies

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is a common and potentially life-threatening condition. Over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) have emerged as a promising endoscopic treatment option for NVUGIB. We aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety of OTSCs compared to standard endoscopic treatments (ST) in patients with NVUGIB.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to June 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OTSCs with ST for NVUGIB. The primary outcomes were initial hemostasis and persistent bleeding. Secondary outcomes included rebleeding rates, mortality, hospital stays and others. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random/fixed-effects models.

RESULTS

Six RCTs involving 621 patients were included in the meta-analysis. OTSCs demonstrated significantly higher initial hemostasis (OR 4.80, 95% CI 1.78-12.96; P = 0.002) and lower persistent bleeding rates (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.05-0.56; P = 0.003) compared to ST group. The rebleeding rate was significantly lower in the OTSC group 7-days re-bleeding (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.14-0.53; P = 0.001); 30-days rebleeding (OR 0.40, 95%CI 0.22, 0.70; P = 0.002). No significant differences were observed in mortality (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.31-1.33; P = 0.38) and hospital stay (mean difference 0.79 days 95%CI -0.57, 2.15) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

OTSCs are more effective than ST for achieving hemostasis and preventing rebleeding in patients with NVUGIB, without increasing mortality. Key message What is Already Known  Previous studies have shown that nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is a serious medical condition that needs effective endoscopic interventions. The success rates of standard treatments for achieving hemostasis and preventing rebleeding are not consistent. What This Study Adds  According to this study, over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) have the same mortality rate as standard endoscopic treatments, but they significantly improve initial hemostasis and lower rebleeding rates. Impact on Research, Practice, or Policy  The findings support the use of OTSCs as a preferred intervention for NVUGIB, which could affect clinical guidelines and encourage additional research focused on improving endoscopic techniques and patient outcomes in the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.

AS score: a novel score for predicting clinical outcomes in upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding (UGIB) is an significant cause of admission to emergency departments and hospitalizations.

AIMS

The aim of our study was to compare the pre-endoscopic risk scores used in the literature with our new score (AS score) in patients admitted to the emergency department due to upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB).

METHODS

A total of 541 patients admitted to the emergency department of a tertiary care hospital due to UGIB were included in the study. Pre-endoscopic risk scores and AS score were compared in terms of the need for hospitalization, need for intensive care, need for endoscopic treatment, and mortality.

RESULTS

All of the scores analysed in the study were found to be effective in predicting the need for hospitalization, the need for intensive care, the need for endoscopic treatment, and mortality. The most effective score in predicting mortality was the AS score. In addition, the sensitivity of the AS score was higher than the other scores in predicting the need for intensive care.

CONCLUSIONS

The AS score is a new tool that may be useful in the management of patients admitted to the emergency department due to UGIB because of its advantages, such as not including laboratory parameters, being calculated in a very short time in the triage area at the time of patient presentation, and being integrated with the Charlson comorbidity index.

Efficacy of hemostatic powder monotherapy versus conventional endoscopic treatment for nonvariceal GI bleeding: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Hemostatic powder (HP) is a novel hemostasis modality for nonvariceal GI bleeding. This meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy of HP monotherapy versus conventional endoscopic treatment (CET) for nonvariceal GI bleeding.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from inception to October 16, 2023. The primary outcomes were the initial hemostatic rate and the 30-day recurrent bleeding rate. After the meta-analysis, a trial sequential analysis (TSA) was also conducted to decrease the risk of random errors and validate the result.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 8 studies, incorporating 653 patients in total. Given significant heterogeneity, all analyses were segregated into malignancy-related and nonmalignancy-related GI bleeding lesions. For the former, HP monotherapy significantly improved the initial hemostasis rate and 30-day recurrent bleeding rate compared with CET (relative risk [RR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-1.75; P < .001; RR, .32; 95% CI, .12-.86; P = .02, respectively), and TSA supported the results. For nonmalignancy-related GI bleeding, HP monotherapy and CET have similar initial hemostasis and 30-day recurrent bleeding rates (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, .98-1.19; P = .11; RR, 1.15; 95% CI, .46-2.90; P = .76, respectively), but the TSA failed to confirm the results.

CONCLUSIONS

HP monotherapy surpassed CET in terms of the initial hemostasis rate and 30-day recurrent bleeding rate for patients with malignancy-related GI bleeding. However, their relative efficacy for nonmalignancy-related GI bleeding remains unresolved.

Impact of duration to endoscopy in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: propensity score matching analysis of real-world data from Thailand

BACKGROUND

The findings on mortality, rebleeding rate, and hospital stay in patients who underwent early vs. late endoscopy are conflicting. We aimed to compare in-hospital outcomes and medical resource use in patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding who underwent early or late endoscopy between 2016 and 2019. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes were the need for packed red blood cells and number of transfusions, the proportion of lesions with high-risk stigmata, endoscopic and additional hemostasis, in-hospital rebleeding, duration of stay, and admission cost. Statistical analysis was performed using Pearson's chi-squared or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, Student's t-test, and Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

Early and late endoscopies were performed on 451 and 279 patients, respectively. After 1:1 propensity score matching, 278 patients from each group were included, and patients' baseline characteristics were similar in the matched groups. Compared with the late group, the early group had a significantly increased rate of endoscopic hemostasis (22.7% vs. 13.7%, P = 0.006) and a low rate of packed red blood cell transfusion (53.6% vs. 61.9%, P = 0.048). Duration of stay and admission costs were significantly higher in the late group than in the early group (all P < 0.05). After adjusting for confounding factors, early endoscopy was positively associated with ulcers with high-risk stigmata (adjusted odds ratio = 1.83, P = 0.023) and endoscopic hemostasis (adjusted odds ratio = 1.97, P = 0.004). It was negatively associated with the need for packed red blood cell transfusion (adjusted odds ratio = 0.62, P = 0.017) and duration of stay (adjusted coefficient=-0.10, P < 0.001) with no impact on in-hospital mortality, rebleeding, or radiological interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The timing of endoscopy does not affect in-hospital mortality or rebleeding rate. This study supports using early endoscopy in patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding based on the potential benefits and feasibility of medical resource use.

TC-325 Superiority in Malignant Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

INTRODUCTION

The efficacy of topical hemostatic agents, recommended for peptic ulcer bleeding, remains poorly characterized in malignant gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB).

METHODS

We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis assessing the efficacy of topical hemostatic agents in malignant GIB. The literature was searched using OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases (database inception to November 2023). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing topical hemostatic agents with conventional endoscopic modalities in malignant GIB were included. Original RCT patient-level data were obtained. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Quality of the evidence was evaluated using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The primary outcome was immediate hemostasis; secondary outcomes were 30-day rebleeding and the composite measure of further bleeding (persistent bleeding or 30-day rebleeding). Other outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events, and need for additional nonendoscopic treatment. Odds ratios (ORs) from endpoint comparisons were pooled using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Overall, 985 citations were identified; 3 RCTs (n = 160 patients) were included with all assessing TC-325 (Hemospray). TC-325 achieved immediate hemostasis more often than conventional endoscopic modalities (OR 46.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.89-369.1) (low-level certainty). Thirty-day rebleeding (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.70) and further bleeding (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.05-0.26) were both significantly lower with TC-325 (very-low-level certainty). All-cause mortality and need for additional nonendoscopic treatment did not differ between groups. No adverse events were reported. Subgroup analysis confirmed TC-325 superiority in patients with upper GIB.

DISCUSSION

TC-325 seems superior to conventional endoscopic therapy in managing patients with malignant GIB. TC-325 results in improvements in immediate hemostasis, 30-day rebleeding, and further bleeding, based on very low-to-low certainties of evidence.

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Analysis of 462 hospitalized Chinese patients in Shanghai

While acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) remains clinically critical, the etiology of bleeding and risk factors for mortality remain uncertain. This study aimed to evaluate the underlying causes of AUGIB and identify risk factors associated with fatality. A retrospective survey was conducted in a major clinical hospital in Shanghai, where inpatients diagnosed with AUGIB were meticulously collected and analyzed. This retrospective, single-center study encompassed 462 patients diagnosed with AUGIB from the emergency department of Changhai Hospital between January 1, 2019 to November 30, 2021. The analysis involved various aspects including epidemiology, gastroscopy, imaging, laboratory tests and data, clinical features, and hospital mortality. Among the 462 patients studied, 87% (400 out of 462) were afflicted with noncirrhotic hemorrhage (up to 38% with peptic ulcer), and 4 patients required digital subtraction angiography embolization (two died). The mortality rate was 12% (49/400), of which 49% (24/49) of patients died of malignant tumors. Mortality did not differ according to sex (χ2 = 0. 851, P = .356) but was significantly influenced by age (χ2 = 18.292, P = .001), hemoglobin levels (χ2 = 22.908, P = .001), and comorbidity (χ2 = 17.355, P = .001). In patients with esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding, the mortality rate was as high as 25% (16/62). Their mortality did not vary with sex (χ2 = 0.318, P = .573), hemoglobin levels (χ2 = 4.139, P = .247), or age (χ2 = 7.674, P = .087), but was predominantly associated with hemorrhagic shock (88%, 14/16). Esophageal and gastric variceal bleeding and noncirrhotic hemorrhage patients observed significantly different mortality rates (P = .004). Peptic ulcers remained the primary cause of AUGIB. Old age, low hemoglobin levels, and comorbidities were the main risk factors contributing to mortality; nearly half of the patients died from malignant tumors. Hemorrhagic shock was independently associated with a high risk of in-hospital mortality in patients with cirrhotic hemorrhage.

Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective, Single-Center Experience on the Role of Endoscopy and Outcomes

Background

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common and potentially fatal medical emergency. This study aimed to investigate the frequency, causes, outcomes, and efficacy of endoscopy in the treatment of UGIB at King Fahad Central Hospital in Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

Methods

Between January 2017 and December 2023, a retrospective study was performed including all hospitalized patients with UGIB. This research investigated sociodemographic characteristics, clinical history, endoscopic findings, treatment options, and results using statistical analysis, which included both descriptive and inferential approaches.

Results

The study included 483 patients (of which 74.1% men), with a mean age of 53.9 ± 19.5 years. Hematemesis was observed in 67.5% of the patients, whereas melena occurred in 49.7% of the cases. Two-hundred sixty-two (54.2%) patients underwent endoscopy within the first 24 h from presentation. The most frequent endoscopic findings were esophageal varices (52.2%) and duodenal ulcers (21.7%). Bandings accounted for 48.0% of all endoscopic procedures, whereas 36.9% of the patients received epinephrine injections along with endoclips. Medical therapy mostly consisted of a mix of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and octreotide. A significant minority (43.5%) of the patients stayed in the hospital for 1 - 3 days, while 59.6% did not need blood transfusions. During the first 3 days, 7% of patients experienced rebleeding, with a 6% mortality rate. Using multivariate regression analysis, rebleeding was strongly associated with initial presentation with shock (P < 0.001), renal disease (P = 0.01), and increased transfusion requirement (P = 0.001). Mortality was strongly associated with steroid usage (P = 0.007), increasing transfusion requirements (P < 0.0001), and rebleeding (P = 0.002).

Conclusions

Timely endoscopy and proper treatment dramatically improved UGIB results. Identifying those who are at high risk and acting swiftly is a critical step in reducing the likelihood of recurrent bleeding and fatality.

In-hospital and delayed mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding on antithrombotic treatment: effects of withdrawal and resuming

BACKGROUND

Antithrombotic drugs pose a dual challenge to acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, with associated risks of bleeding complications and thromboembolic events upon withdrawal. We aimed to determine the impact of antithrombotic medications on in-hospital and delayed outcomes and whether suspension and resumption influenced delayed mortality.

METHODS

This study was a prospective registry analysis of patients between 2013-2021. Anticoagulants and antiplatelets were classified as antithrombotic. The examined outcomes included in-hospital mortality and delayed 6-month cardiovascular, bleeding, and mortality events.

RESULTS

A total of 1345 patients were included. 21.7% were taking anticoagulants and 19.1% were taking antiplatelets. Patients on antithrombotic therapy have a longer delay in endoscopic performance (11 ± 11 h vs. 9.6 ± 8 h; p = 0.027) and less need for therapy (38.5% vs. 48.1%;p = 0.002), with gastric erosion being more usual (14.2% vs. 9.1%; p = 0.006).In-hospital mortality was higher in patients not taking antithrombotic (12% vs. 8%;p = 0.022) and suspension < 72 h was associated with increased mortality (14.9% vs. 2.3%;p = 0.001).Delayed mortality was higher in patients taking antithrombotic (9.4% vs. 6%; p=0.034) and in those who suspended them for more than 7days (17% vs. 8.7%; p=0.033), with no differences when it lasted<72h.Patients on antithrombotic therapy exhibited more delayed cardiovascular (13.7% vs. 3.4%; p<0.0001) and hemorrhagic events (22.9% vs. 12.9%; p<0.0001), with no differences observed in patients who withheld antithrombotic medication.Multivariate analysis identified ASA, disseminated malignancy, and NSAIDs as independent risk factors for in-hospital mortality, whereas antithrombotic therapy and hemoglobin levels were protective factors.

CONCLUSION

Patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding treated with antithrombotic drugs had lower in-hospital mortality despite increased comorbidities and older age. Conversely, delayed 6-month mortality was higher. Shorter antithrombotic suspension durations increased in-hospital mortality, whereas suspension for > 7 days increased delayed mortality.

[Choosing the optimal surgical method for duodenal ulcer complicated by bleeding]

The treatment tactics for gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), recommended by surgical societies, involve a certain sequence of actions taking into account the capabilities of the clinical institution. A mandatory requirement for all levels of care is the stabilization of post-hemorrhagic disorders and stopping bleeding by any available means. A mandatory requirement for all levels of care is the stabilization of post-hemorrhagic disorders and stopping bleeding by any available means. A clinical case of treatment of a patient with duodenal ulcer complicated by recurrent bleeding is presented. Taking into account morbid obesity, the indications for the endoscopic method of stopping recurrent bleeding against the background of adequate replacement therapy have been expanded. An analysis of the selected treatment tactics for complicated peptic ulcer was carried out.

Trends for Admission, Mortality and Emergency Surgery in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Study of Eight Years of Admissions in a Tertiary Care Hospital

Introduction

Most studies have shown a declining incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in recent years. Data regarding mortality were controversial; in non-variceal bleeding, the increasing age of the population, increased use of anti-thrombotic and anticoagulant therapy in patients with cardiovascular diseases, and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are counterbalanced by the progress in endoscopic therapy with stable mortality.

Material and Method

We performed a retrospective, cross-sectional study that included patients admitted with UGIB in Clinical Emergency Hospital Craiova during 2013-2020.

Results

3571 patients with UGIB were selected; a trend toward increased admission for UGIB from 2013 to 2019 was noted, with a significant decrease in 2020. Non-variceal bleeding remains the most frequent form, with a slight increase in variceal bleeding, of Mallory-Weiss syndrome and angiodysplasia, and a 3-fold decrease for unknown etiology bleeding (with no endoscopy performed) during the 2017-2020 period as compared to 2013-2016. There was a trend toward decreased mortality, with lower mortality in 2017-2020 (12.83%) compared to 2013-2016 (17.41%). The mortality for variceal bleeding and peptic ulcer bleeding has declined, but mortality for non-variceal bleeding has slightly increased during 2013-2020. Mortality has decreased in admissions during regular hours/after hours and weekdays/weekends, but the difference (off-hours and weekend effects) had increased. The percentage of endoscopies performed in the first 24 hours after admission and the rate of therapeutic endoscopy increased during 2017-2020; the median time between admission and endoscopy was 17.0 hours during 2017-2020 and 59.1 hours during 2013-2016. The proportion of patients who needed emergency surgery for uncontrolled bleeding has significantly declined since 2013-2015, with an average value of 1% in the last 5 years of the study.

Conclusion

Increased admissions for UGIB, with lower mortality, especially for peptic ulcer bleeding and variceal bleeding were noted; higher percentages of therapeutic endoscopies and endoscopies performed during the first 24 hours after admission were also recorded.

Comparison and validation of several scoring systems for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective study

Various scoring systems have been developed to predict outcomes in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). However, their accuracy remains unclear. This study aimed to compare and validate the predictive performance of several established scoring systems in patients with NVUGIB: Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) and the age, blood tests, and comorbidities (ABC), mental status-anesthesiologist score-pulse-albumin-systolic blood pressure-hemoglobin (MAP(ASH)), Japanese, and Charlson comorbidity index-in-hospital onset-albumin-mental status-Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status-steroids (CHAMPS) scores. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 1,241 patients who presented to the emergency department with NVUGIB and subsequently required hospitalization. Each scoring system was evaluated for its ability to predict in-hospital mortality, rebleeding, and the need for radiological or surgical intervention. The ABC score showed the highest accuracy in predicting in-hospital mortality. The MAP(ASH) score was the most effective predictor of rebleeding and the need for interventions. Different scoring systems have been optimized for various clinical outcomes. The ABC score was the best for predicting mortality, whereas the MAP(ASH) score excelled in identifying rebleeding risks and intervention needs. The selection of an appropriate scoring tool based on specific clinical scenarios can improve patient management and resource allocation in NVUGIB.

Analysis of upper gastrointestinal bleeding complicated with deep vein thrombosis in elderly gastric cancer patients by gastric cancer imaging

Tumor imaging represents an ideal environment for collecting novel biomarkers from different technologies, as patients with tumors often undergo multiple imaging studies.With the aging of the Chinese population, the number of elderly patients with gastric cancer is also increasing. In the past, patients with gastric cancer in the elderly have been conservative in whether surgical treatment can be performed, and advanced age is regarded as a relative contraindication to the effect of surgical treatment on gastric cancer patients. To investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage complicated by deep vein thrombosis in elderly patients with gastric cancer. One patient with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage complicated by deep venous thrombosis, and elderly gastric cancer patients admitted to our hospital on 11 October 2020, were selected. After anti-shock symptomatic support, filter placement, prevention and treatment of thrombosis, gastric cancer eradication, anticoagulation, immune regulation, etc. Treatment and long-term follow-up observation. Long-term follow-up showed that the patient's condition was stable, there was no sign of metastasis or recurrence after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, and there were no serious pre- and post-operative complications such as upper gastrointestinal bleeding and deep vein thrombosis, and the prognosis was satisfactory. How to choose the appropriate operation timing and method for elderly gastric cancer patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding and deep vein thrombosis at the same time to maximize benefits, clinical experience in this area is particularly valuable.

Blue Laser Triggered Hemostatic Peptide Hydrogel for Gastrointestinal Bleeding Treatment

In an emergency, nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB), endoscopic hemostasis is considered the gold standard intervention. However, current endoscopic hemostasis is very challenging to manage bleeding in large-diameter or deep lesions highly prone to rebleeding risk. Herein, a novel hemostatic peptide hydrogel (HPH) is reported, consisting of a self-assembly peptide sequence CFLIVIGSIIVPGDGVPGDG (PFV) and gelatin methacryloyl (GelMA), which can be triggered by blue laser endoscopy (BLE) for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding treatment without recurring bleeding concerns. Upon contact with GelMA solution, PFV immediately fibrillates into β-sheet nanofiber and solvent-induced self-assembly to form HPH gel. HPH nanofiber networks induced ultrafast coagulation by enveloping blood cells and activating platelets and coagulation factors even to the blood with coagulopathy. Besides its remarkable hemostatic performance in artery and liver injury models, HPH achieves instant bleeding management in porcine NVUGIB models within 60 s by preventing the rebleeding risk. This work demonstrates an extraordinary hemostatic agent for NVUGIB intervention by BLE for the first time, broadening potential application scenarios, including patients with coagulopathy and promising clinical prospects.

Left inferior phrenic arterial malformation mimicking gastric varices: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Gastric submucosal arterial dilation resulting from splenic artery occlusion represents an exceedingly rare etiology of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Although endoscopy is a widely utilized diagnostic and therapeutic modality for gastrointestinal bleeding, it has limitations in detecting arterial abnormalities.

CASE SUMMARY

This report presents a rare case of massive UGIB in a 57-year-old male with a tortuous left inferior phrenic artery accompanied by splenic artery occlusion. "Gastric varices" was identified during the patient's endoscopy one year before hemorrhage. Despite initial hemostasis by endoscopic clipping, the patient experienced massive rebleeding after one month, requiring intervention with transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) to achieve hemostasis.

CONCLUSION

This is the first case to report UGIB due to a tortuous left inferior phrenic artery. This case highlights the limitations of endoscopy in identifying arterial abnormalities and emphasizes the potential of TAE as a viable alternative for the management of arterial bleeding in the gastrointestinal tract.

Ideal strategy for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Over 300 000 hospital admissions in the United States each year are due to patients with upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (UGIB). Common etiologies of nonvariceal UGIB include peptic ulcers, mucosal erosions of the esophagus, stomach or duodenum, Mallory-Weiss tears, Dieulafoy lesions, upper GI tract malignancy, or other etiology.

RECENT FINDINGS

Peptic ulcers classified as Forrest Ia, Ib, or IIa require endoscopic hemostasis, while IIb ulcers may be considered for endoscopic clot removal with endoscopic treatment of any underlying major stigmata. Endoscopic hemostasis for ulcers classified as Forrest IIc or III is not advised due to the low risk of recurrent bleeding. Endoscopic hemostasis in ulcer bleeding can be achieved using injection, thermal, and/or mechanical modalities.

SUMMARY

This review focuses on the currently recommended endoscopic therapies of patients presenting with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

Current status and clinical outcome of endoscopic hemostatic powder in gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective multicenter study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Few multicenter studies have investigated the efficacy of hemostatic powders in gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. We aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of hemostatic powder therapy and the independent factors affecting rebleeding rates.

METHODS

We retrospectively recruited patients who underwent a new hemostatic adhesive powder (UI-EWD; Next-Biomedical) treatment for upper and lower GI bleeding between January 1, 2020 and March 1, 2023. We collected patients' medical records and bleeding lesions. The primary outcomes were clinical and technical success rates, and the secondary outcomes were early, delayed, and refractory bleeding, mortality, and factors affecting early rebleeding rates.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 135 patients (age: 67.7±13.6 years, male: 74.1%) from five hospitals. Indications for UI-EWD were peptic ulcers (51.1%), post-procedure-related bleeding (23.0%), and tumor bleeding (19.3%). The clinical and technical success rates were both 97%. The early, delayed, and refractory rebleeding rates were 19.3%, 11.1%, and 12.8%, respectively. Initially elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels (p=0.014) and Forrest classification IA or IB compared with IIA or IIB (p=0.036) were factors affecting early rebleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

UI-EWD showed high clinical and technical success rates; however, rebleeding after UI-EWD therapy in patients with initially high BUN levels and active bleeding, according to the Forrest classification, should be considered.

Importance of risk assessment, endoscopic hemostasis, and recent advancements in the management of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB) is a common medical emergency in clinical practice. While the incidence has significantly reduced, the mortality rates have not undergone a similar reduction in the last few decades, thus presenting a significant challenge. This editorial outlines the key causes and risk factors of ANVUGIB and explores the current standards and recent updates in risk assessment scoring systems for predicting mortality and endoscopic treatments for achieving hemostasis. Since ANUVGIB predominantly affects the elderly population, the impact of comorbidities may be responsible for the poor outcomes. A thorough drug history is important due to the increasing use of antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants in the elderly. Early risk stratification plays a crucial role in deciding the line of management and predicting mortality. Emerging scoring systems such as the ABC (age, blood tests, co-morbidities) score show promise in predicting mortality and guiding clinical decisions. While conventional endoscopic therapies remain cornerstone approaches, novel techniques like hemostatic powders and over-the-scope clips offer promising alternatives, particularly in cases refractory to traditional modalities. By integrating validated scoring systems and leveraging novel therapeutic modalities, clinicians can enhance patient care and mitigate the substantial morbidity and mortality associated with ANVUGIB.

Optimizing antithrombotic therapy in patients with coexisting cardiovascular and gastrointestinal disease

Balancing the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic agents in patients with gastrointestinal disorders is challenging because of the potential for interference with the absorption of antithrombotic drugs and for an increased risk of bleeding. In this Review, we address considerations for enteral antithrombotic therapy in patients with cardiovascular disease and gastrointestinal comorbidities. For those with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), we summarize a general scheme for risk stratification and clinical evidence on risk reduction approaches, such as limiting the use of concomitant medications that increase the risk of GIB and the potential utility of gastrointestinal protection strategies (such as proton pump inhibitors or histamine type 2 receptor antagonists). Furthermore, we summarize the best available evidence and potential gaps in our knowledge on tailoring antithrombotic therapy in patients with active or recent GIB and in those at high risk of GIB but without active or recent GIB. Finally, we review the recommendations provided by major medical societies, highlighting the crucial role of teamwork and multidisciplinary discussions to customize the antithrombotic regimen in patients with coexisting cardiovascular and gastrointestinal diseases.

Validating the CHAMPS Score: A Novel and Reliable Prognostic Score of Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Introduction

The Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥2, in-Hospital onset, Albumin <2.5 g/dL, altered Mental status, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance status ≥2, Steroid use (CHAMPS) score is a novel and promising prognostic tool. We present an initial external validation of the CHAMPS score for predicting mortality in acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) across multiple clinical outcomes.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was conducted on adult patients with NVUGIB admitted to the Department of Gastroenterology between November 2022 and June 2023. The CHAMPS score performance in predicting in-hospital outcomes was evaluated by employing area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves, followed by a comparative analysis with five pre-existing scores.

Results

A total of 140 patients were included in the study. The CHAMPS score showed its highest performance in predicting mortality rates (AUROC = 0.89), significantly outperforming the Glasgow-Blatchford Bleeding Score (GBS) as well as the Albumin level <3.0 mg/dL, International normalized ratio >1.5, altered Mental status, Systolic blood pressure ≤90 mmHg, and age >65 years (AIMS65) score (AUROC = 0.72 and 0.71, respectively; all p < 0.05). Subgroup analysis for bleeding-related and non-bleeding-related mortality further confirmed the robust predictive capability of the CHAMPS score (AUROC = 0.88 and 0.87, respectively). The CHAMPS score failed to predict rebleeding and intervention reliably, exhibiting AUROC values of 0.43 and 0.55, respectively. The optimal CHAMPS score cutoff value for predicting mortality was 3 points, achieving 100% sensitivity and 71.2% specificity. In the low-risk category defined by both CHAMPS and GBS scores, mortality and rebleeding rates were 0%. However, within the CHAMPS score-based low-risk group, 58.8% required intervention, contrasting with a 0% intervention rate for the GBS score-based low-risk group (GBS score ≤1).

Conclusion

The CHAMPS score consistently demonstrated a robust predictive performance for mortality (AUROC > 0.8), facilitating the identification of high-risk patients requiring aggressive treatment and low-risk patients in need of localized treatment or safe discharge after successful bleeding control.

Diagnostics and Treatment of Peptic Ulcer in Adults (Clinical Guidelines of the Russian Gastroenterological Association, the Russian Society of Colorectal Surgeons, the Russian Endoscopic Society and the Scientific Society for the Clinical Study of Human Microbiome)

Aim. The guidelines set out the modern methods of diagnostics and treatment of peptic ulcer and are created for gastroenterologists, primary care physicians, general practitioners, surgeons, endoscopists.

Key points. The clinical guidelines contain modern views on the etiology and pathogenesis of peptic ulcer, its clinical features, methods of laboratory and instrumental diagnostics, the main approaches to conservative and surgical treatment. They include the criteria for assessment of the quality of medical care, the algorithm of the doctor's actions, as well as information for the patient.

Conclusion. Knowledge of modern methods of diagnostics and therapy of peptic ulcers will contribute to improving the results of its treatment.

Acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding management in older people taking or not taking anticoagulants: a literature review

Acute upper and lower gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding may be a potentially life-threatening event that requires prompt recognition and an early effective management, being responsible for a considerable number of hospital admissions. Methods. We perform a clinical review to summarize the recent international guidelines, helping the physician in clinical practice. Older people are a vulnerable subgroup of patients more prone to developing GI bleeding because of several comorbidities and polypharmacy, especially related to an increased use of antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs. In addition, older patients may have higher peri-procedural risk that should be evaluated. The recent introduction of reversal strategies may help the management of GI bleeding in this subgroup of patients. In this review, we aimed to (1) summarize the epidemiology and risk factors for upper and lower GI bleeding, (2) describe treatment options with a focus on pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of different proton pump inhibitors, and (3) provide an overview of the clinical management with flowcharts for risk stratification and treatment. In conclusion, GI is common in older patients and an early effective management may be helpful in the reduction of several complications.

Review article: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding - review of current evidence and implications for management

BACKGROUND

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common emergency requiring hospital-based care. Advances in care across pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases have led to improvements in clinical outcomes.

AIMS

To provide a detailed, evidence-based update on major aspects of care across pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases.

METHODS

We performed a structured bibliographic database search for each topic. If a recent high-quality meta-analysis was not available, we performed a meta-analysis with random effects methods and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Pre-endoscopic management of UGIB includes risk stratification, a restrictive red blood cell transfusion policy unless the patient has cardiovascular disease, and pharmacologic therapy with erythromycin and a proton pump inhibitor. Patients with cirrhosis should be treated with prophylactic antibiotics and vasoactive medications. Tranexamic acid should not be used. Endoscopic management of UGIB depends on the aetiology. For peptic ulcer disease (PUD) with high-risk stigmata, endoscopic therapy, including over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) and TC-325 powder spray, should be performed. For variceal bleeding, treatment should be customised by severity and anatomic location. Post-endoscopic management includes early enteral feeding for all UGIB patients. For high-risk PUD, PPI should be continued for 72 h, and rebleeding should initially be evaluated with a repeat endoscopy. For variceal bleeding, high-risk patients or those with further bleeding, a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt can be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of acute UGIB should include treatment plans for pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases of care, and customise treatment decisions based on aetiology and severity of bleeding.

Value of multidetector computed tomography angiography in severe non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective study in a referral bleeding unit

BACKGROUND

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding 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. As historically played a limited role in the diagnosis of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, multidetector-row computed tomography angiography is emerging as a promising tool in the diagnosis of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, especially for severe cases. However, to date, evidence concerning the role of multidetector-row computed tomography angiography in the non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding diagnosis is still lacking.

AIM

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively investigate the diagnostic performance of emergent multidetector-row computed tomography angiography performed prior to any diagnostic modality or following urgent upper endoscopy to identify the status, the site, and the underlying etiology of severe non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

METHODS

Institutional databases were reviewed in order to identify severe acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients who were admitted to our bleeding unit and were referred for emergent multidetector-row computed tomography angiography prior to any hemostatic treatment (< 3 h) or following (< 3 h) endoscopy, between December 2019 and October 2022. The study aim was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of multidetector-row computed tomography angiography to detect the status, the site, and the etiology of severe non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding with endoscopy, digital subtraction angiography, surgery, pathology, or a combination of them as reference standards.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients (38 men, median age 69 years [range 25-96]) were enrolled. The overall multidetector-row computed tomography angiography sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy to diagnose bleeding status were 77.8% (95% CI: 65.5-87.3), 40% (95% CI: 5.3-85.3), and 75% (95% CI: 63.0-84.7), respectively. Finally, the overall multidetector-row computed tomography angiography sensitivity to identify the bleeding site and the bleeding etiology were 92.4% (95% CI: 83.2-97.5) and 79% (95% CI: 66.8-88.3), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although esophagogastroduodenoscopy is the mainstay in the diagnosis and treatment of most non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding cases, multidetector-row computed tomography angiography seems to be a feasible and effective modality in detecting the site, the status, and the etiology of severe acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. It may play a crucial role in the management of selected cases of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, especially those clinically severe and/or secondary to rare and extraordinary rare sources, effectively guiding timing and type of treatment. However, further large prospective studies are needed to clarify the role of multidetector-row computed tomography angiography in the diagnostic process of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Advancements in hemostatic strategies for managing upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A comprehensive review

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage presents a substantial clinical challenge. Initial management typically involves resuscitation and endoscopy within 24 h, although the benefit of very early endoscopy (< 12 h) for high-risk patients is debated. Treatment goals include stopping acute bleeding, preventing rebleeding, and using a multimodal approach encompassing endoscopic, pharmacological, angiographic, and surgical methods. Pharmacological agents such as vasopressin, prostaglandins, and proton pump inhibitors are effective, but the increase in antithrombotic use has increased GI bleeding morbidity. Endoscopic hemostasis, particularly for nonvariceal bleeding, employs techniques such as electrocoagulation and heater probes, with concerns over tissue injury from monopolar electrocoagulation. Novel methods such as Hemospray and Endoclot show promise in creating mechanical tamponades but have limitations. Currently, the first-line therapy includes thermal probes and hemoclips, with over-the-scope clips emerging for larger ulcer bleeding. The gold probe, combining bipolar electrocoagulation and injection, offers targeted coagulation but has faced device-related issues. Future advancements involve combining techniques and improving endoscopic imaging, with studies exploring combined approaches showing promise. Ongoing research is crucial for developing standardized and effective hemorrhage management strategies.

Role of second look endoscopy in endoscopic submucosal dissection and peptic ulcer bleeding: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Second-look endoscopy (SLE) to prevent recurrent bleeding in patients with peptic ulcer disease (PUD) and those undergoing endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is routinely being performed. Conflicting evidence exists regarding efficacy, risk, benefit, and cost-effectiveness.

AIM

To identify the role and effectiveness of SLE in ESD and PUD, associated rebleeding and PUD-related outcomes like mortality, hospital length of stay, need for endoscopic or surgical intervention and blood transfusions.

METHODS

A systematic review of literature databases PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was conducted from inception to January 5, 2023. Randomized controlled trials that compared patients with SLE to those who did not have SLE or evaluated the role of prophylactic hemostasis during SLE compared to other conservative interventions were included. The study was conducted per PRISMA guidelines, and the protocol was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42023427555:). RevMan was used to perform meta-analysis, and Mantel-Haenszel Odds ratio (OR) were generated using random effect models.

RESULTS

A total of twelve studies with 2687 patients were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis, of which 1074 patients underwent SLE after ESD and 1613 patients underwent SLE after PUD-related bleeding. In ESD, the rates of rebleeding were 7% in the SLE group compared to 4.4% in the non-SLE group with OR 1.65, 95% confidence intervals (CI) of 0.96 to 2.85; P = 0.07, whereas it was 11% in the SLE group compared to 13% in the non-SLE group with OR 0.8 95%CI: 0.50 to 1.29; P = 0.36. The mean difference in the blood transfusion rates in the SLE and no SLE group in PUD was OR 0.01, 95%CI: -0.22 to 0.25; P = 0.91. In SLE vs non-SLE groups with PUD, the OR for Endoscopic intervention was 0.29, 95%CI: 0.08 to 1.00; P = 0.05 while it was OR 2.03, 95%CI: 0.95 to 4.33; P = 0.07, for surgical intervention. The mean difference in the hospital length of stay was -3.57 d between the SLE and no SLE groups in PUD with 95%CI: -7.84 to 0.69; P = 0.10, denoting an average of approximately 3 fewer days of hospital stay among patients with PUD who underwent SLE. For mortality between SLE and non-SLE groups in PUD, the OR was 0.88, 95%CI: 0.45 to 1.72; P = 0.70.

CONCLUSION

SLE does not confer any benefit in preventing ESD and PUD-associated rebleeding. SLE also does not provide any significant improvement in mortality, need for interventions, or blood transfusions in PUD patients. SLE decreases the hospital length of stay on average by 3.5 d in PUD patients.

Medical therapy has similar hemostatic efficacy with endoscopic treatment for PUB patients with adherent clot (FIIb ulcers)

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is no clear consensus on whether medical treatment or endoscopic treatment should be used for peptic ulcer bleeding patients with adherent clot. The aim of this study is to investigate the hemostatic effects of medical treatment, single endoscopic treatment, and combination endoscopic treatment for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) patients with adherent clot.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed PUB patients with adherent clot who underwent endoscopic examination or treatment in our center from March 2014 to January 2023 and received intravenous administration of proton pump inhibitors. Patients were divided into medical treatment (MT) group, single endoscopic treatment (ST) group, and combined endoscopic treatment (CT) group. Subsequently, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to calculate the rebleeding rate.

RESULTS

A total of 605 eligible patients were included in this study. After IPTW, the rebleeding rate in the MT group on days 3, 7, 14, and 30 were 13.3 (7.3), 14.2 (7.8), 14.5 (7.9), and 14.5 (7.9), respectively; the rebleeding rates in the ST group were 17.4 (5.1), 20.8 (6.1), 20.8 (6.1), and 20.8 (6.1), respectively; the rebleeding rates in the CT group were 0.4 (0.9), 1.7 (3.3), 2.3 (4.5), and 2.3 (4.5), respectively. Although the rebleeding rate in the medical treatment group was higher, there was no significant difference among the three groups on days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.132, 0.442, 0.552, and 0.552).

CONCLUSIONS

Medical therapy has similar hemostatic efficacy with endoscopic treatment for PUB patients with adherent clot (FIIb ulcers). However, for patients with more risk factors and access to well-equipped endoscopy centers, endoscopic treatment may be considered. The choice of treatment approach should be based on the individual conditions of the patient, as well as other factors such as medical resources available.

MH-STRALP: A scoring system for prognostication in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency and early assessment of its outcomes is vital for treatment decisions.

AIM

To develop a new scoring system to predict its prognosis.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 692 patients with UGIB were enrolled from two centers and divided into a training (n = 591) and a validation cohort (n = 101). The clinical data were collected to develop new prognostic prediction models. The endpoint was compound outcome defined as (1) demand for emergency surgery or vascular intervention, (2) being transferred to the intensive care unit, or (3) death during hospitalization. The models' predictive ability was compared with previously established scores by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.

RESULTS

Totally 22.2% (131/591) patients in the training cohort and 22.8% (23/101) in the validation cohort presented poor outcomes. Based on the stepwise-forward Logistic regression analysis, eight predictors were integrated to determine a new post-endoscopic prognostic scoring system (MH-STRALP); a nomogram was determined to present the model. Compared with the previous scores (GBS, Rockall, ABC, AIMS65, and PNED score), MH-STRALP showed the best prognostic prediction ability with area under the ROC curves (AUROCs) of 0.899 and 0.826 in the training and validation cohorts, respectively. According to the calibration curve, decision curve analysis, and internal cross-validation, the nomogram showed good calibration ability and net clinical benefit in both cohorts. After removing the endoscopic indicators, the pre-endoscopic model (pre-MH-STRALP score) was conducted. Similarly, the pre-MH-STRALP score showed better predictive value (AUROCs of 0.868 and 0.767 in the training and validation cohorts, respectively) than the other pre-endoscopic scores.

CONCLUSION

The MH-STRALP score and pre-MH-STRALP score are simple, convenient, and accurate tools for prognosis prediction of UGIB, and may be applied for early decision on its management strategies.

Mortality Risk Scoring System in Patients after Bleeding from Cancers in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract

Background/Aims

: Risk scoring systems for upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding have not been well validated for tumor bleeding. This study aimed to identify risk factors for mortality in patients with UGI cancer bleeding and to develop a predictive model.

Methods

: Consecutive patients with UGI cancers who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy for suspected bleeding were retrospectively included. Patient characteristics, endoscopic findings and 30-day mortality were assessed. A predictive model was made based on risk factors for mortality using logistic regression, and the area under the curve (AUC) of this model was calculated. It was then compared with other risk scoring systems.

Results

: In a total of 264 patients, 193 had tumor bleeding. Among them, 108 (56.0%), 76 (39.4%), and nine (4.7%) patients received conservative treatment, endoscopic therapy, and non-endoscopic hemostasis, respectively. Rebleeding occurred in 23 (21.3%), 26 (34.2%), and one (11.1%) patient(s), respectively. Our new model is composed of altered mental status, renal failure, rebleeding, age older than 65 years, and low serum albumin (all p<0.05). This model predicted 30-day mortality with an AUC of 0.79 (95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 0.86), which was significantly higher than AUCs of the Glasgow-Blatchford score, Rockall, and AIMS65 score (AUC=0.61, 0.64, and 0.69, respectively, all p<0.05).

Conclusions

: Our new scoring system provides a better prediction of 30-day mortality than existing scoring systems in patients with UGI cancer bleeding. This new scoring system can be used to predict and prepare these patients who are known to have high mortality.

Early warning system enables accurate mortality risk prediction for acute gastrointestinal bleeding admitted to intensive care unit

Acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding are potentially life-threatening conditions. Early risk stratification is important for triaging patients to the appropriate level of medical care and intervention. Patients admitted to intensive care unit (ICU) has a high mortality, but risk tool is scarce for these patients. This study aimed to develop and validate a risk score to improve the prognostication of death at the time of patient admission to ICU. We developed and internally validated a nomogram for mortality in patients with acute GI bleeding from the eICU Collaborative Research Database (eICU-CRD), and externally validated it in patients from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III database (MIMIC-III) and Wuhan Tongji Hospital. The performance of the model was assessed by examining discrimination (C-index), calibration (calibration curves) and usefulness (decision curves). 4750 patients were included in the development cohort, with 1184 patients in the internal validation cohort, 1406 patients in the MIMIC-III validation cohort, and 342 patients in the Tongji validation cohort. The nomogram, which incorporated ten variables, showed good calibration and discrimination in the training and validation cohorts, yielded C-index ranged from 0.832 (95%CI 0.811-0.853) to 0.926 (95CI% 0.905-0.947). The nomogram-defined high-risk group had a higher mortality than the low-risk group (44.8% vs. 3.5%, P < 0.001; 41.4% vs 3.1%, P < 0.001;53.6% vs 7.5%, P < 0.001; 38.2% vs 4.2%, P < 0.001). The model performed better than the conventional Glasgow-Blatchford score, AIMS65 and the newer Oakland and Sengupta scores for mortality prediction in both the derivation and validation cohorts concerning discrimination and usefulness. Our nomogram is a reliable prognostic tool that might be useful to identify high-risk acute GI bleeding patients admitted to ICU.

A systematic review of failed endoscopic hemostasis for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is a surgical emergency, usually managed via endoscopy. Approximately 2% of patients will have another significant bleed after therapeutic endoscopy and may require either transarterial embolization (TAE) or surgery. In 2011, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines recommended that TAE should be the preferred option offered in this setting.

METHODS

This study aimed to conduct an appraisal of guidelines on NVUGIB using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. A specific review of their recommendations on the management of adult patients with failed endoscopic hemostasis that required TAE or surgery was conducted.

RESULTS

The quality of the guidelines was moderate; most could be recommended with changes. However, their recommendations regarding TAE vs surgery were widely heterogeneous. A closer review of the underpinning evidence showed that most studies were retrospective, with a small sample size and missing data.

CONCLUSION

Because of the heterogeneity in evidence, the decision regarding TAE vs surgery requires further research. Deciding between these modalities is primarily based on TAE availability and patient comorbidities. However, surgery should not be dismissed as a key option after failed endoscopic hemostasis.

Risk factors for rebleeding in gastroduodenal ulcers

BACKGROUND

Rebleeding after hemostasis of the gastroduodenal ulcer (GDU) is one of the indicators associated with death among GDU patients. However, there are few studies on risk score that contribute to rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding peptic ulcers.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with rebleeding, including patient factors, after endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding gastroduodenal ulcers and to stratify the risk of rebleeding.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 587 consecutive patients who were treated for Forrest Ia to IIa bleeding gastroduodenal ulcers with endoscopic hemostasis at three institutions. Risk factors associated with rebleeding were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The Rebleeding Nagoya University (Rebleeding-N) scoring system was developed based on the extracted factors. The Rebleeding-N score was internally validated using bootstrap resampling methods.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients (11%) had rebleeding after hemostasis of gastroduodenal ulcers. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed four independent rebleeding risk factors: blood transfusion, albumin <2.5, duodenal ulcer, and diameter of the exposed vessel ≧2 mm. Patients with 4 risk factors in the Rebleeding-N score had a 54% rebleeding rate, and patients with 3 risk factors had 44% and 25% rebleeding rates. In the internal validation, the mean area under the curve of the Rebleeding-N score was 0.830 (95% CI = 0.786-0.870).

CONCLUSIONS

Rebleeding after clip hemostasis of bleeding gastroduodenal ulcers was associated with blood transfusion, albumin <2.5, diameter of the exposed vessel ≧2 mm, and duodenal ulcer. The Rebleeding-N score was able to stratify the risk of rebleeding.

Three Simple Parameters on Admission to the Emergency Department are Predictors for Endoscopic Intervention in Patients with Suspected Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

A considerable number of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) need endoscopic intervention.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine factors that predict the need for endoscopic intervention at the time of admission to the emergency department.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision diagnosis code K92.2 (gastrointestinal hemorrhage) who underwent upper endoscopy between February 2019 and February 2022, including patients diagnosed with nonvariceal UGIB in the emergency department in the study were reviewed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups: those treated endoscopically and those not treated endoscopically. These two groups were compared according to clinical and laboratory findings at admission and independent predictors for endoscopic intervention were determined using multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

Although 123 patients (30.3%) were treated endoscopically, endoscopic treatment was not required in 283 (69.7%) patients. Syncope, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and blood urea nitrogen (BUN) at admission were independent predictors for endoscopic intervention in the multivariate analysis, after adjusting for endoscopy time. The area under the curve of the syncope+MAP+BUN combination for endoscopic intervention was 0.648 (95% CI 0.588-0.708). Although the syncope+MAP+BUN combination predicted the need for intervention significantly better than pre-endoscopy Rockall and AIMS65 scores (p = 0.010 and p < 0.001, respectively), there was no significant difference in its comparison with the Glasgow-Blatchford score (p = 0.103).

CONCLUSIONS

Syncope, MAP, and BUN at admission were independent predictors for endoscopic therapy in patients with nonvariceal UGIB. Rather than using complicated scores, it would be more practical and easier to predict the need for endoscopic intervention with these three simple parameters, which are included in the Glasgow-Blatchford score.

Development and validation of machine learning models to predict the need for haemostatic therapy in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Background

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. This presentation however is not universally high risk as only 20-30% of bleeds require urgent haemostatic therapy. Nevertheless, the current standard of care is for all patients admitted to an inpatient bed to undergo endoscopy within 24 h for risk stratification which is invasive, costly and difficult to achieve in routine clinical practice.

Objectives

To develop novel non-endoscopic machine learning models for AUGIB to predict the need for haemostatic therapy by endoscopic, radiological or surgical intervention.

Design

A retrospective cohort study.

Method

We analysed data from patients admitted with AUGIB to hospitals from 2015 to 2020 (n = 970). Machine learning models were internally validated to predict the need for haemostatic therapy. The performance of the models was compared to the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) using the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves.

Results

The random forest classifier [AUROC 0.84 (0.80-0.87)] had the best performance and was superior to the GBS [AUROC 0.75 (0.72-0.78), p < 0.001] in predicting the need for haemostatic therapy in patients with AUGIB. A GBS cut-off of ⩾12 was associated with an accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.74, 0.49, 0.81, 0.41 and 0.85, respectively. The Random Forrest model performed better with an accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 0.82, 0.54, 0.90, 0.60 and 0.88, respectively.

Conclusion

We developed and validated a machine learning algorithm with high accuracy and specificity in predicting the need for haemostatic therapy in AUGIB. This could be used to risk stratify high-risk patients to urgent endoscopy.

The Importance of Arterial Blood Flow Detection for Risk Stratification and Eradication to Achieve Definitive Hemostasis of Severe Non-Variceal UGI Hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is a common medical problem worldwide. Independent endoscopic risk factors for rebleeding and mortality of NVUGIB that are treatable are stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) and arterial blood flow underneath SRH. The specific aims of this paper are to describe the importance of arterial blood flow detection for risk stratification and as a guide to definitive hemostasis of severe NVUGIB.

METHODS

This is a review of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort study methodologies and results which utilized a Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP) for the detection of arterial blood underneath SRH, for risk stratification, and as a guide to definitive hemostasis. The results are compared to visually guided hemostasis based upon SRH.

RESULTS

Although SRH have been utilized to guide endoscopic hemostasis of NVUGIB for 50 years, when most visually guided treatments are applied to lesions with major SRH, arterial blood flow underneath SRH is not obliterated in 25-30% of patients and results in rebleeding. Definitive hemostasis, significantly lower rebleeding rates, and improvements in other clinical outcomes resulted when DEP was used for risk stratification and as a guide to obliteration of arterial blood flow underneath SRH.

CONCLUSIONS

DEP-guided endoscopic hemostasis is a very effective and safe new method to improve patient outcomes for NVUGIB.

Urgent endoscopy versus early endoscopy: Does urgent endoscopy play a role in acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding?

INTRODUCTION

The main clinical practice guidelines recommend endoscopy within 24hours after admission to the Emergency Department in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. However, it is a wide time frame and the role of urgent endoscopy (<6hours) is controversial.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prospective observational study carried out at La Paz University Hospital, where all patients were selected, from January 1, 2015 to April 30, 2020, who attended the Emergency Room and underwent endoscopy for suspected upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Two groups of patients were established: urgent endoscopy (<6hours) and early endoscopy (6-24hours). The primary endpoint of the study was 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 1096 were included, of whom 682 underwent urgent endoscopy. Mortality at 30days was 6% (5% vs 7.7%, P=.064) and rebleeding was 9.6%. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality, rebleeding, need for endoscopic treatment, surgery and/or embolization, but there were differences in the necessity for transfusion(57.5% vs 68.4%, P<.001) and the number of concentrates of transfused red blood cells (2.85±4.01 vs 3.51±4.09, P=.008).

CONCLUSION

Urgent endoscopy, in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding, as well as the high-risk subgroup (GBS ≥12), was not associated with lower 30-day mortality than early endoscopy. However, urgent endoscopy in patients with high-risk endoscopic lesions (ForrestI-IIB), was a significant predictor of lower mortality. Therefore, more studies are required for the correct identification of patients who benefit from this medical approach (urgent endoscopy).

Weekend Effect on Clinical Outcomes of Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Large Multicenter Cohort Study in Japan

INTRODUCTION

Weekend admissions showed increased mortality in several medical conditions. This study aimed to examine the weekend effect on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) and its mortality and other outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study (CODE BLUE-J Study) was conducted at 49 Japanese hospitals between January 2010 and December 2019. In total, 8,120 outpatients with acute hematochezia were enrolled and divided into weekend admissions and weekday admissions groups. Multiple imputation (MI) was used to handle missing values, followed by propensity score matching (PSM) to compare outcomes. The primary outcome was mortality; the secondary outcomes were rebleeding, length of stay (LOS), blood transfusion, thromboembolism, endoscopic treatment, the need for interventional radiology, and the need for surgery. Colonoscopy and computed tomography (CT) management were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Before PSM, there was no significant difference in mortality (1.3% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.133) between weekend and weekday admissions. After PSM with MI, 1,976 cases were matched for each admission. Mortality was not significantly different for weekend admissions compared with weekday admissions (odds ratio [OR] 1.437, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.785-2.630; p = 0.340). No significant difference was found with other secondary outcomes in weekend admissions except for blood transfusion (OR 1.239, 95% CI 1.084-1.417; p = 0.006). Weekend admission had a negative effect on early colonoscopy (OR 0.536, 95% CI 0.471-0.609; p < 0.001). Meanwhile, urgent CT remained significantly higher in weekend admissions (OR 1.466, 95% CI 1.295-1.660; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Weekend admissions decrease early colonoscopy and increase urgent CT but do not affect mortality or other outcomes except transfusion.

Hemostatic Powder vs Standard Endoscopic Treatment for Gastrointestinal Tumor Bleeding: A Multicenter Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Current guidelines vary as to their recommendations addressing the role of hemostatic powders when managing patients with malignant gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding because these are based on very-low- to low-quality evidence, in large part due to a paucity of randomized trial data.

METHODS

This was a patient- and outcome assessor-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Patients presenting with active bleeding from an upper or lower GI lesion suspected to be malignant at index endoscopy between June 2019 and January 2022 were randomly allocated to receive either TC-325 alone or standard endoscopic treatment (SET). The primary outcome was 30-day rebleeding, and secondary objectives included immediate hemostasis and other clinically relevant endpoints.

RESULTS

Overall, 106 patients made up the study population (55 TC-325 and 51 SET, after 1 exclusion in the TC-325 group and 5 in the SET group). Baseline characteristics and endoscopic findings did not differ between the groups. Thirty-day rebleeding was significantly lower in the TC-325 (2.1% TC-325 vs 21.3% SET; odds ratio, 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.80; P = .003). Immediate hemostasis rates were 100% in the TC-325 group vs 68.6% in the SET group (odds ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.93-2.29; P < .001). Other secondary outcomes did not differ between the 2 groups. Independent predictors of 6-month survival included the Charlson comorbidity index (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32; P = .007) and receiving an additional nonendoscopic hemostatic or oncologic treatment during 30 days after the index endoscopy (hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.43; P < .001) after adjustment for functional status, Glasgow-Blatchford score, and an upper GI source of bleeding.

CONCLUSION

The TC-325 hemostatic powder results in greater immediate hemostasis rates followed by lower 30-day rebleeding rates when compared to contemporary SET. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03855904).

Clinical Outcomes of Older Patients with Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Taking Anti-Thrombotic or Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Agents

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a well-established complication of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and anti-thrombotics. Both medication groups are frequently used by older populations and increase the incidence of non-var- iceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding; however, their impact on etiology and outcomes of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding has not been well defined. We aimed to compare the etiology and outcomes of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in older patients who use anti-thrombotics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or do not use either of them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-center prospective study of patients older than 65 years with non-variceal upper gastrointesti- nal bleeding. Endoscopic findings, laboratory values, blood transfusion, endoscopic treatment, re-bleeding, and 30-day mortality rates were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 257 patients (median age 77.7 ± 8.2, 59% male) were included. Re-bleeding occurred in 25 (10%) and the 30-day mortality rate was 40 (16%). There was no statistically significant difference between patients using anti-thrombotics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or non-users for blood transfusion (P = .46), endoscopic hemostasis (P = .39), re-bleeding (P = .09), and 30-day mortality (P = .45). Peptic ulcer was the most common etiology in all groups (124, 48%). Although the incidence of peptic ulcer was similar between drug users and anti-thrombotic users (P = .75), the incidence of peptic ulcer was significantly higher in patients using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs than in patients who did not use drugs (P = .05). When the patients were analyzed as using anti- thrombotic drugs or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or neither, no statistically significant difference was found between ulcer location, ulcer number, and ulcer size.

CONCLUSION

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding increasingly occurs in older populations with several comorbidities; non- steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or anti-thrombotics do not seem to change the clinical outcomes among older patients with non- variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Epinephrine injection monotherapy shows similar hemostatic efficacy to epinephrine injection combined therapy in high-risk patients (Forrest Ib) with bleeding ulcers

BACKGROUND

Whether combination therapy has higher hemostatic efficacy than epinephrine injection monotherapy in different Forrest classifications is not clear. This study aimed to compare hemostatic efficacy between epinephrine injection monotherapy (MT) and combination therapy (CT) based on different Forrest classifications.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) patients who underwent endoscopic epinephrine injections or epinephrine injections combined with a second therapy between March 2014 and June 2022 in our center, and the patients were divided into MT group or CT group. Subsequently, a propensity score matching analysis (PSM) was performed and rebleeding rates were calculated according to Forrest classifications via a stratified analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 605 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included, and after PSM, 173 patients in each of the CT and MT groups were included. For PUB patients with nonbleeding visible vessels (FIIa), the rebleeding rates by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 after PSM were 8.8%, 17.5%, 19.3%, and 19.3% in the MT group, respectively, and rates were 0%, 4.1%, 5.5%, and 5.5% in the CT group, respectively, with significant differences observed between the two groups by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.015, P = 0.011, P = 0.014, and P = 0.014, respectively). However, for PUB patients with oozing bleeding (FIb), the rebleeding rates by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 after PSM were 14.9%, 16.2%, 17.6%, and 17.6% in the MT group, respectively, and rates were 13.2%, 14.7%, 14.7%, and 16.2% in the CT group, respectively, with no significant differences observed between the two groups by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.78, P = 0.804, P = 0.644 and P = 0.825).

CONCLUSION

Combined therapy has higher hemostatic efficacy than epinephrine injection monotherapy for PUB patients with visible blood vessel (FIIa) ulcers. However, epinephrine injection monotherapy is equally as effective as combined therapy for PUB patients with oozing blood (FIb) ulcers.

Role of oral iron supplementation for anemia secondary to acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) can lead to anemia, evidence regarding the effects of oral iron supplementation on UGIB-induced anemia following discharge remains lacking. The present study aimed to investigate the effects of oral iron supplementation on hemoglobin response and iron storage in patients with anemia secondary to nonvariceal UGIB.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial included 151 patients with nonvariceal UGIB who had anemia at discharge. Patients were assigned to a 1:1 block in which they were either administered 6 weeks of 600 mg/d oral ferrous fumarate (treatment group, n = 77) or treated without iron supplementation (control group, n = 74). The primary outcome was composite hemoglobin response (hemoglobin elevation greater than 2 g/dL or no anemia at the end of treatment [EOT]).

RESULTS

The proportion of patients achieving composite hemoglobin response was greater in the treatment group than in the control group (72.7% vs 45.9%; adjusted risk ratio [RR], 2.980; P = 0.004). At EOT, the percentage change in the hemoglobin level (34.2 ± 24.8% vs 19.4 ± 19.9%; adjusted coefficient, 11.543; P < 0.001) was significantly higher in the treatment group than in the control group; however, the proportions of patients with a serum ferritin level <30 μg/L and a transferrin saturation <16% were lower in the treatment group (all P < 0.05). No significant differences in treatment-associated adverse effects and adherence rates were observed between the groups.

CONCLUSION

Oral iron supplementation exerts beneficial effects on anemia and iron storage following nonvariceal UGIB without significantly impacting rates of adverse effects or adherence.

Rare causes of acute 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. Gastroenterologists and other involved clinicians are generally assisted by international guidelines in its management. However, NVUGIB due to peptic ulcer disease only is mainly addressed by current guidelines, with upper gastrointestinal endoscopy being recommended as the gold standard modality for both diagnosis and treatment. Conversely, the management of rare and extraordinary rare causes of NVUGIB is not covered by current guidelines. Given they are frequently life-threatening conditions, all the involved clinicians, that is emergency physicians, diagnostic and interventional radiologists, surgeons, in addition obviously to gastroenterologists, should be aware of and familiar with their management. Indeed, they typically require a prompt diagnosis and treatment, engaging a dedicated, patient-tailored, multidisciplinary team approach. The aim of our review was to extensively summarize the current evidence with regard to the management of rare and extraordinary rare causes of NVUGIB.