Major gastrointestinal bleeding and antithrombotics: Characteristics and management

Development and Validation of a Novel 1-year Mortality Risk Score That Includes the Use of Antithrombotic in Patients With Overt Gastrointestinal Bleeding

GOALS AND BACKGROUND

We aimed to develop a novel 1-year mortality risk-scoring system that includes use of antithrombotic (AT) drugs and to validate it against other scoring systems in patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB).

STUDY

We developed a risk-scoring system from prospectively collected data on patients admitted with GIB between January 2013 and August 2020, who had at least 1- year of follow-up. Independent predictors of 1-year mortality were determined after adjusting for the following confounders: the age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (divided into 4 groups: CCI-0=0, CCI-1=1 to 3, CCI-2=4 to 6, CCI-3 ≥7), need for blood transfusion, GIB severity, need for endoscopic therapy, and type of AT. The risk score was based on independent predictors.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventy-six patients were included and 123 (21%) died at 1-year follow-up. Our risk -score was based on the following: CCI-2 (2 points), CCI-3 (4 points), need for blood transfusion (1 point), and no use of aspirin (1 point), as aspirin use was protective (maximum score=6). Patients with higher risk scores had higher mortality. The model had a better predictive accuracy [AUC=0.82, 95% confidence interval (0.78-0.86), P <0.0001] than the Rockall score for upper GIB (Area Under the Curve (AUC)=0.68, P <<0.0001), the Oakland score for lower GIB (AUC=0.69, p =0.004), or the Shock Index for all (AUC=0.54, P <0.0001).

CONCLUSION

A simple and novel score that includes use of AT upon admission accurately predicts 1-year mortality in patients with GIB. This scoring system may help guide follow-up decisions and inform the prognosis of patients with GIB.

Previous antithrombotic therapy does not have an impact on the in-hospital mortality of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

The association between antithrombotics (ATs) and the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding is well known; however, data regarding the influence of ATs on outcomes are scarce. The goals of this study are: (i) to assess the impact of prior AT therapy on in-hospital and 6-month outcomes and (ii) to determine the re-initiation rate of the ATs after a bleeding event. All patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) who underwent urgent gastroscopy in three centres from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019 were retrospectively analysed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used. Among 333 patients [60% males, mean age 69.2 (±17.3) years], 44% were receiving ATs. In multivariate logistic regression, no association between AT treatment and worse in-hospital outcomes was observed. Development of haemorrhagic shock led to worse survival [odds ratio (OR) 4.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9-10.2, P < 0.001; after PSM: OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.8-15.7, P = 0.003]. During 6-months follow-up, higher age (OR 1.0, 95% CI 1.0-1.1, P = 0.002), higher comorbidity (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.7, P < 0.001), a history of cancer (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.6-8.1, P < 0.001) and a history of liver cirrhosis (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.4, P = 0.029) were associated with higher mortality. After a bleeding episode, ATs were adequately re-initiated in 73.8%. Previous AT therapy does not worsen in-hospital outcomes in after UGB. Development of haemorrhagic shock predicted poor prognosis. Higher 6-month mortality was observed in older patients, patients with more comorbidities, with liver cirrhosis and cancer.

Management of Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Resumption of Oral Anticoagulant Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: A Multidisciplinary Discussion

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are recommended for the prevention of thromboembolism in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), and are now preferred over vitamin K antagonists due to their beneficial efficacy and safety profile. However, all oral anticoagulants carry a risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Although the risk is well documented and acute bleeding well codified, there is limited high-quality evidence and no guidelines to guide physicians on the optimal management of anticoagulation after a GI bleeding event. The aim of this review is to provide a multidisciplinary critical discussion of the optimal management of GI bleeding in patients with AF receiving oral anticoagulants to help physicians provide individualized treatment for each patient and optimize outcomes. It is important to perform endoscopy when a patient presents with bleeding manifestations or hemodynamic instability to determine the bleed location and severity of bleeding and then perform initial resuscitation. Administration of all anticoagulants and antiplatelets should be stopped and bleeding allowed to resolve with time; however, anticoagulant reversal should be considered for patients who have life-threatening bleeding or when the bleeding is not controlled by the initial resuscitation. Anticoagulation needs to be timely resumed considering that bleeding risk outweighs thrombotic risk when anticoagulation is resumed early after the bleeding event. To prevent further bleeding, physicians should prescribe anticoagulant therapy with the lowest risk of GI bleeding, avoid medications with GI toxicity, and consider the effect of concomitant medications on potentiating the bleeding risk.

Antithrombotic therapy for secondary prevention of unprovoked venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Extended antithrombotic treatment is recommended for secondary prevention of unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE), however, there is no consensus on which antithrombotic strategy is preferable.

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of different antithrombotic strategies for secondary prevention unprovoked VTE.

METHODS

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and MEDLINE were systematically searched from inception to 22 July 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the efficacy and/or safety of extended antithrombotic strategies including aspirin, warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for secondary prevention of unprovoked VTE. The primary outcome was risk of major bleeding and the secondary outcomes were risks of recurrent VTE and all-cause death. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effect. Possible ranking of extended antithrombotic strategies was plotted using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and mean ranks.

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs met the inclusion criteria, and meta-analysis results showed that warfarin was associated with significantly higher risk of major bleeding than placebo/observation (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.32-5.55) or apixaban (OR 10.65, 95% CI 1.06-107.13). Apixaban and low-apixaban were the top two strategies according to the ranking of major bleeding. Warfarin (OR 0.25, 95%CI 0.13-0.49), rivaroxaban (OR 0.18, 95%CI 0.03-0.90), apixaban (OR 0.18, 95%CI 0.04-0.85) and low-apixaban (OR 0.18, 95%CI 0.04-0.82) were related to significantly lower risk than placebo/observation; edoxaban was non-inferior to warfarin on the risk of recurrent VTE. Furthermore, apixaban was linked with significantly lower risk of all-cause death than placebo/observation (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.09-0.88).

CONCLUSION

Apixaban showed superiority to other antithrombotic strategies on major bleeding and all-cause death for secondary prevention of unprovoked VTE. Further studies are warranted owing to the limited number of studies and positive cases.Key messagesAll antithrombotic strategies including warfarin, DOACs and aspirin were superior to placebo/observation on recurrent VTE for secondary prevention of unprovoked VTE.Apixaban demonstrated lower risk of major bleeding than warfarin, and lower risk of all-cause death than placebo/observation.Further research about the efficacy and safety of antithrombotic treatments for secondary prevention of unprovoked VTE is warranted.

Modified N score is helpful for identifying patients who need endoscopic intervention among those with black stools without hematemesis

OBJECTIVES

Although black stools are one of the signs of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, not all patients without hematemesis need endoscopic intervention. There is no apparent indicator to select who needs treatment thus far. The aim of this study was to establish a novel score that predicts the need for endoscopic intervention in patients with black stools without hematemesis.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 721 consecutive patients with black stools without hematemesis who underwent emergency endoscopy from two facilities. In the development stage (from January 2016 to December 2018), risk factors that predict the need for endoscopic intervention were determined from the data of 422 patients by multivariate logistic regression analysis, and a novel scoring system, named the modified Nagoya University score (modified N score), was developed. In the validation stage (from January 2019 to September 2020), we evaluated the diagnostic value of the modified N score for 299 patients.

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed four predictive factors for endoscopic intervention: syncope, the blood urea nitrogen (BUN) level, and the BUN/creatinine ratio as positive indicators and anticoagulant drug use as a negative indicator. In the validation stage, the area under the curve of the modified N score was 0.731, and the modified N score showed a sensitivity of 82.0% and a specificity of 58.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our modified N score, which consists of only four factors, can identify patients who need endoscopic intervention among those with black stools without hematemesis.

Management of antiplatelet drugs after gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cardiovascular disease

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is one of the common clinical emergencies and is usually caused by the long-term use of antiplatelet drugs. With the increase in the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD), there are a growing number of patients with GIB secondary to antiplatelet drugs. In this setting, the discontinuation and resumption of antiplatelet drugs in patients with GIB who are receiving antiplatelet drugs for CVD has become a hot research topic. This article aims to comprehensively review the management of antiplatelet drugs after GIB in patients with CVD using aspirin or P2Y12 receptor antagonist alone as well as dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to guide clinical practice.