The role of endoscopy in the patient with lower GI bleeding

Is Colonoscopy Indicated in Young Patients with Hematochezia

Background/Aims

While colonoscopy is indicated in patients >50 years old presenting with hematochezia, its role in those ≤50 remains debatable. This study aims to evaluate the role of colonoscopy in patients presenting with hematochezia who are ≤50 years old.

Methods

A retrospective review of all patients aged ≤50 years who underwent colonoscopy for hematochezia in 2012 was conducted. Patient demographics, endoscopic details, and histological results were analyzed. Patients were stratified by age to compare differences in outcome.

Results

A total of 361 patients with a median age of 44 (range, 18-50) years were reviewed. Hemorrhoid (n = 183, 69.6%) was the most common etiology. Seventy-two neoplastic polyps were identified in 48 (13.3%) patients. There was a significantly larger proportion of patients aged 41-50 years who had neoplastic polyps compared to those aged ≤40 (18.8 vs. 3.8%, p ≤ 0.001); 43.8% (n = 28) of the neoplastic polyps found in those aged 41-50 were proximal to the splenic flexure. The only 2 (0.5%) patients with malignancy were aged 41-50 years.

Conclusion

Performing colonoscopy in patients presenting with hematochezia should be strongly considered for those aged 41-50 years in view of the significant likelihood of underlying neoplastic polyps compared to those aged ≤40 years.

Colorectal Cancer in the Young

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Colorectal cancer incidence has been rapidly rising in those under the age of 50 over the last 20 years. This paper will review the epidemiology, clinicopathologic, molecular features, proposed risk factors, and prevention/treatment approach for early onset CRC (EOCRC) patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

EOCRC appears to have a different spectrum of clinical, pathologic, and molecular presentation compared to CRC diagnosed in older individuals. EOCRCs are disproportionately located in the distal colon; these patients tend to present with symptoms, and there is a longer interval between symptoms and diagnosis. There may be a distinct molecular signature, including progression through the microsatellite and chromosomal stable (MACS) pathway and LINE-1 hypomethylation for a subset of EOCRCs. The majority of EOCRCs are sporadic without clear risk factors that would have made the patient eligible for earlier screening. There is an acute need for educational efforts aimed at both providers and patients to raise awareness about CRC in the young. Improving adherence to screening in young patients eligible for screening and emphasizing early evaluation of symptoms are important steps to decreasing the burden of CRC in younger patients. Modeling and empiric data are needed to determine whether our current screening approach should be modified and whether causation and treatment options may be different in a molecular subset EOCRCs.

Coloproctology procedure clinic: a novel service developed to reduce suffering of patients with bleeding per rectum

AIMS

Evaluation of the role and impact of introducing a dedicated coloproctology procedure clinic in tertiary referral colorectal unit.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 126 consecutive patients managed in the coloproctology clinic between March2015 and September 2016 was carried out. All patients were preselected for attendance based on symptom-based protocol.

RESULTS

Based on the information available in GP referrals, 126 patients with bleeding per rectum with low risk of cancer were re-triaged from the general outpatient to dedicated coloproctology procedure clinic. Those patients accounted for 14% of waiting list. The average waiting time to attend clinic was 27 months from referral to undergoing definitive procedure. A proctoscopy or/and rigid sigmoidoscopy was performed in patients. Seventy-nine (89.7%) patients were completely managed and discharged after attending their first visit. Sixty-seven (76%) patients had 2nd- or 3rd-degree haemorrhoids and were treated with rubber band ligation (RBL) or phenol injection in outpatient setting. Two patients had an anal fissure and were managed conservatively with medication. After clinic, follow-up was through telephone clinic. This avoids attendance physically in the hospital. Symptoms persisted in nine patients and were subsequently scheduled for colonoscopy, three had benign polyps. With the introduction of the procedure clinic, the waiting time from referral to treatment was reduced from 27 to 6 months (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Establishing a dedicated "Coloproctology procedure clinic" is an effective strategy in reducing number of hospital visits per patient and hospital waiting list. This innovative clinic reduces utilisation of precious endoscopy unit resources. This ultimately will improve endoscopy efficiency.

Safety and efficacy of transcatheter embolization with Glubran®2 cyanoacrylate glue for acute arterial bleeding: a single-center experience with 104 patients

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy and the safety of Glubran^®2 n-butyl cyanoacrylate metacryloxysulfolane (NBCA-MS) transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) for acute arterial bleeding from varied anatomic sites and to evaluate the predictive factors associated with clinical success and 30-day mortality.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent emergent NBCA-MS Glubran^®2 TAE between July 2014 and August 2016 was conducted. Variables including age, sex, underlying malignancy, cardiovascular comorbidities, coagulation data, systolic blood pressure, and number of red blood cells units (RBC) transfused before TAE were collected. Clinical success, 30-day mortality, and complication rates were evaluated. Prognostic factors were evaluated by uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses for clinical success, and by uni- and bivariate analyses after adjustment by bleeding sites for 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

104 patients underwent technically successful embolization with bleeding located in muscles (n = 34, 32.7%), digestive tract (n = 28, 26.9%), and viscera (n = 42, 40.4%). Clinical success rate was 76% (n = 79) and 30-day mortality rate was 21.2% (n = 22). Clinical failure was significantly associated with mortality (p < 0.0001). A number of RBC units transfused greater than or equal to 3 were associated with poorer clinical success (p = 0.025) and higher mortality (p = 0.03). Complications (n = 4, 3.8%) requiring surgery occurred only at puncture site. No ischemic complications requiring further invasive treatment occurred. Mean TAE treatment time was 4.55 min.

CONCLUSIONS

NBCA-MS Glubran^®2 TAE is a fast, effective, and safe treatment for acute arterial bleeding whatever the bleeding site.

A rational approach to the patient with hematochezia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Hematochezia is a common clinical presentation, with significant morbidity and economic burden. These patients often require costly interventions including hospitalization, blood transfusions, and radiologic or endoscopic procedures. The purpose of this review is to give a rational, concise approach to the patient with hematochezia, with special consideration of recent advances in the literature.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies pertaining to hematochezia have evaluated risk stratification, endoscopic intervention, evaluation of small bowel bleeding, and management of anticoagulation.

SUMMARY

A step-wise approach to hematochezia helps determine the cause and provide the appropriate management of these patients. We propose five steps beginning with hemodynamic assessment and risk stratification, then focused history and physical examination, endoscopic intervention when warranted, and consideration of small bowel bleeding in selected instances.

An approach to acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common problem that can be treated via a number of endoscopic, radiological and surgical approaches. Although traditionally managed by the colorectal surgeons, surgery should be considered a last resort given the variety of endoscopic and radiological approaches available. This article provides an overview on the common causes of acute LGIB and the various techniques at our disposal to control it.

Urgent colonoscopy in patients with lower GI bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Lower GI bleeding (LGIB) is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. Colonoscopy is indicated in all hospitalized patients with LGIB, yet the time frame for performing colonoscopy remains unclear. Prior studies of outcomes in urgent versus elective colonoscopy have yielded conflicting results and were often underpowered. Our study objective was to compare several outcomes between urgent and elective colonoscopy in patients hospitalized for LGIB.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis were performed on studies that compared urgent and elective colonoscopy in patients with LGIB. Pooled rates were calculated for specific outcomes, and rate ratios were determined for selected comparison groups.

RESULTS

Twelve studies met inclusion criteria, with a total sample size of 10,172 patients in the urgent colonoscopy arm and 14,224 patients in the elective colonoscopy arm. Urgent colonoscopy was associated with increased use of endoscopic therapeutic intervention (RR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.08-2.67). There were no significant differences in bleeding source localization (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, .92-1.25), adverse event rates (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, .65-1.71), rebleeding rates (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, .74-1.78), transfusion requirement (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, .73-1.41), or mortality (RR, 1.17; 95% CI, .45-3.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent colonoscopy appears to be safe and well tolerated, but there is no clear evidence that it alters important clinical outcomes.

Risk factors and outcomes of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding in intestinal Behçet's disease

BACKGROUND

Intestinal Behçet's disease (BD) can cause acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding, which is sometimes fatal.

AIM

We aimed to identify the risk factors and outcomes of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and factors associated with rebleeding in intestinal BD patients.

METHODS

Of the total of 588 intestinal BD patients, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 66 (11.2%) patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and compared them with those of 132 matched patients without bleeding.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics were comparable between the bleeding group (n = 66) and the non-bleeding group (n = 132). On multivariate analysis, the independent factors significantly associated with lower gastrointestinal bleeding were older age (>52 years) (hazard ratio [HR] 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.058-4.684, p = 0.035) and a nodular ulcer margin (HR 7.1, 95% CI 2.084-24.189, p = 0.002). Rebleeding occurred in 23 patients (34.8%). Female patients (p = 0.044) and those with previous use of corticosteroids or azathioprine (p = 0.034) were more likely to develop rebleeding. On multivariate analysis, only use of steroids or azathioprine was significantly associated with rebleeding (HR 3.2, 95% CI 1.070-9.462, p = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

Age >52 years and the presence of a nodular margin of the ulcer were found to be related to increased risk of bleeding in patients with intestinal BD. Rebleeding is not uncommon and not effectively prevented with currently available medications. Further studies are warranted to identify effective measures to decrease rebleeding in intestinal BD.

Early Versus Delayed Colonoscopy in Hospitalized Patients With Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Early colonoscopy is recommended for patients with severe lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). There is limited data as to whether this is associated with improved outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing early (<24 h) versus delayed colonoscopy (>24 h). PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for manuscripts using colonoscopy as a diagnostic/treatment modality for patients hospitalized with LGIB. Studies were included if data were available on outcomes comparing early and delayed colonoscopy. Articles were reviewed for time to colonoscopy, rebleeding, mortality, length of stay (LOS), surgery, interventions, localization of LGIB, and number of packed red blood cells. Pooled measures were reported using the Mantel-Haenszel method.

RESULTS

A total of 8491 studies were assessed of which 6 were included. There were 422 patients in the early arm and 479 in the delayed arm. There were no differences in age (64.2 vs. 65.7, P=0.85), admission hemoglobin (10.3 vs. 10.3 g/dL, P=0.96), LOS (5.21 vs. 6.09, P=0.52), and packed red blood cells transfusion (2.37 vs. 2.35, P=0.92) between the groups. In hospital mortality [odds ratio (OR), 1.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.51-5.32], rebleeding (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.85-2.23) and need for surgery (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42-1.89) were not different in delayed versus early colonoscopy. Early colonoscopy was associated with a higher detection of bleeding source (OR, 2.97; 95% CI, 2.11-4.19) and endoscopic intervention (OR, 3.99; 95% CI, 2.59-6.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Early colonoscopy is not associated with reduced rebleeding, LOS, or surgery but is associated with a higher rate of source localization and endoscopic intervention.

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding-Computed Tomographic Angiography, Colonoscopy or both?

Background

Lower endoscopy (LE) is the standard diagnostic modality for lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Conversely, computed tomographic angiography (CTA) offers an immediate non-invasive diagnosis visualizing the entire gastrointestinal tract. The aim of this study was to compare these 2 modalities with regards to diagnostic value and bleeding control.

Methods

Tertiary center retrospective analysis of consecutive patients admitted for LGIB between 2006 and 2012. Comparison of patients with LE vs. CTA as first exam, respectively, with emphasis on diagnostic accuracy and bleeding control.

Results

Final analysis included 183 patients; 122 (66.7%) had LE first, while 32 (17.5%) had CTA; 29 (15.8%) had neither of both exams. Median time to CTA was shorter compared to LE (3 (IQR = 8.2) vs. 22 (IQR = 36.9) hours, P < 0.001). Active bleeding was identified in 31% with CTA vs. 15% with LE (P = 0.031); a non-actively bleeding source was found by CTA and LE in 22 vs. 31%, respectively (P = 0.305). Bleeding control required endoscopy in 19%, surgery in 14% and embolization in 1.6%, while 66% were treated conservatively. Post-interventional bleeding was mostly controlled by endoscopic therapy (57%). 80% of patients with active bleeding on CTA required surgery.

Conclusions

Post-interventional LGIB was effectively addressed by LE. For other causes of LGIB, CTA was efficient, and more available than colonoscopy. Treatment was conservative for most patients. In case of active bleeding, CTA could localize the bleeding source and predict the need for surgery.

Colonic diverticular bleeding. Have we identified the risk factors for massive bleeding yet?

As we know, the frequency of diverticular disease (DD) increases according to age, being less than 5% in patients under 40 years of age and up to 60% after 80 years of age. The most common distribution of diverticula is in the left colon, except for the Asian population, where diverticular disease of the right colon is more frequent.

Current state of practice for colonic diverticular bleeding in 37 hospitals in Japan: A multicenter questionnaire study

AIM

To clarify the current state of practice for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) in Japan.

METHODS

We conducted multicenter questionnaire surveys of the practice for CDB including clinical settings (8 questions), diagnoses (8 questions), treatments (7 questions), and outcomes (4 questions) in 37 hospitals across Japan. The answers were compared between hospitals with high and low number of inpatient beds to investigate which factor influenced the answers.

RESULTS

Endoscopists at all 37 hospitals answered the questions, and the mean number of endoscopists at these hospitals was 12.7. Of all the hospitals, computed tomography was performed before colonoscopy in 67% of the hospitals. The rate of bowel preparation was 46.0%. Early colonoscopy was performed within 24 h in 43.2% of the hospitals. Of the hospitals, 83.8% performed clipping as first-line endoscopic therapy. More than half of the hospitals experienced less than 20% rebleeding events after endoscopic hemostasis. No significant difference was observed in the annual number of patients hospitalized for CDB between high- (≥ 700 beds) and low-volume hospitals. More emergency visits (P = 0.012) and endoscopists (P = 0.015), and less frequent participation of nursing staff in early colonoscopy (P = 0.045) were observed in the high-volume hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Some practices unique to Japan were found, such as performing computed tomography before colonoscopy, no bowel preparation, and clipping as first-line therapy. Although, the number of staff differed, the practices for CDB were common irrespective of hospital size.

Does Urgent Colonoscopy Improve Outcomes in the Management of Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding?

Colonoscopy continues to be an essential diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Studies that have evaluated the role of urgent colonoscopy for treating LGIB have reached conflicting conclusions. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the role of urgent colonoscopy in several outcomes in patients with LGIB. We searched Medline, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane databases from inception to July 10, 2016 for comparative studies evaluating the role of urgent versus elective colonoscopy in the management of LGIB. We evaluated mortality, rate of rebleeding, length of stay in hospital, identification of bleeding source, stigmata of recent hemorrhage and need for surgery. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated for dichotomous variables whereas standard mean differences were calculated for continuous variables. We assessed quality using the Cochrane tool and Newcastle Ottawa Scale for randomized controlled trials and observational studies, respectively. We used the GRADE framework to interpret our findings. A total of 6 studies (2 randomized controlled trials and 4 observational studies) with 23,419 patients (9,498 urgent colonoscopy and 13,921 elective colonoscopy) were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled ORs with 95% CI for mortality, rebleeding and identification of bleeding source were 0.84 (0.46-1.53), 1.18 (0.64-2.16) and 1.49 (0.86-2.59), respectively. Stigmata of recent hemorrhage were more readily identified with urgent colonoscopy OR 2.85 (1.90-4.28). There were no differences in requirement for surgery, length of hospital stay or rate of endoscopic intervention. However, these effect sizes were limited by considerable heterogeneity, which was probably due to studies being conducted in different countries having different criteria for discharge and on variations in the type of endoscopic therapy for stigmata of recent hemorrhage. In conclusion, among patients with acute LGIB, there is no evidence that urgent colonoscopy reduces mortality, rebleeding or requirement for surgery or that it improves the rate of identification of the bleeding source. However, urgent colonoscopy does increase the rate of detection of stigmata of recent hemorrhage.

First-line endoscopic treatment with over-the-scope clips significantly improves the primary failure and rebleeding rates in high-risk gastrointestinal bleeding: A single-center experience with 100 cases

AIM

To evaluate rebleeding, primary failure (PF) and mortality of patients in whom over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) were used as first-line and second-line endoscopic treatment (FLET, SLET) of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB, LGIB).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database identified all patients with UGIB and LGIB in a tertiary endoscopic referral center of the University of Freiburg, Germany, from 04-2012 to 05-2016 (n = 93) who underwent FLET and SLET with OTSCs. The complete Rockall risk scores were calculated from patients with UGIB. The scores were categorized as < or ≥ 7 and were compared with the original Rockall data. Differences between FLET and SLET were calculated. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to evaluate the factors that influenced rebleeding after OTSC placement.

RESULTS

Primary hemostasis and clinical success of bleeding lesions (without rebleeding) was achieved in 88/100 (88%) and 78/100 (78%), respectively. PF was significantly lower when OTSCs were applied as FLET compared to SLET (4.9% vs 23%, P = 0.008). In multivariate analysis, patients who had OTSC placement as SLET had a significantly higher rebleeding risk compared to those who had FLET (OR 5.3; P = 0.008). Patients with Rockall risk scores ≥ 7 had a significantly higher in-hospital mortality compared to those with scores < 7 (35% vs 10%, P = 0.034). No significant differences were observed in patients with scores < or ≥ 7 in rebleeding and rebleeding-associated mortality.

CONCLUSION

Our data show for the first time that FLET with OTSC might be the best predictor to successfully prevent rebleeding of gastrointestinal bleeding compared to SLET. The type of treatment determines the success of primary hemostasis or primary failure.

Complications of therapeutic gastroscopy/colonoscopy other than resection

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is profoundly utilized for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. The therapeutic potential of GI endoscopy has amplified many folds with the evolution of novel techniques as well as equipments. However, with the augmentation of therapeutic endoscopy, the extent, likelihood and severity of adverse events have increased as well. The attendant risks and adverse events with therapeutic endoscopy are many folds that of diagnostic endoscopy. Besides endoscopic resection, therapeutic endoscopy is widely utilized for hemostasis in GI bleeds, dilatation of stenosis, enteral stenting, foreign body removal, ablation of Barrett's esophagus etc. Major adverse events associated with interventional endoscopic procedures include bleeding and perforation. Adverse events of endoscopic interventions are diverse and related to the underlying disease, therapeutic modality used and operator's experience. Many of these adverse events can be prevented. Early recognition of an unavoidable adverse event is important to minimize the associated morbidity and mortality.

The Clinical Outcomes of Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding Are Not Better than Those of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

The incidence of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is increasing; however, predictors of outcomes for patients with LGIB are not as well defined as those for patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The aim of this study was to identify the clinical outcomes and the predictors of poor outcomes for patients with LGIB, compared to outcomes for patients with UGIB. We identified patients with LGIB or UGIB who underwent endoscopic procedures between July 2006 and February 2013. Propensity score matching was used to improve comparability between LGIB and UGIB groups. The clinical outcomes and predictors of 30-day rebleeding and mortality rate were analyzed between the two groups. In total, 601 patients with UGIB (n = 500) or LGIB (n = 101) were included in the study, and 202 patients with UGIB and 101 patients with LGIB were analyzed after 2:1 propensity score matching. The 30-day rebleeding and mortality rates were 9.9% and 4.5% for the UGIB group, and 16.8% and 5.0% for LGIB group, respectively. After logistic regression analysis, the Rockall score (P = 0.013) and C-reactive protein (CRP; P = 0.047) levels were significant predictors of 30-day mortality in patients with LGIB; however, we could not identify any predictors of rebleeding in patients with LGIB. The clinical outcomes for patients with LGIB are not better than clinical outcomes for patients with UGIB. The clinical Rockall score and serum CRP levels may be used to predict 30-day mortality in patients with LGIB.

Length of endoscopic workup in gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The number of procedures utilized in the general management of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) has not been investigated previously. We used the National Endoscopic Database of the Clinical Outcomes Research Initiative for an observational study to analyze the average length of workup in GIB.

METHODS

The electronic database was queried for all patients aged 18 years and older who underwent an endoscopic evaluation for any bleeding indication between 2000 and 2014. Data were stratified by indication, type, and number of endoscopies per patient, and length of workup.

RESULTS

A total of 603 807 endoscopic procedures among 451 470 individual patients were used in the workup of GIB, with 152 337 procedures among 113 030 patients (25%) being performed as a secondary procedure. The average length was 2.4±0.9 procedures per workup in procedural sequences involving multiple endoscopies. The length of workup was independent of the initial type of GIB. An esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD), followed by a colonoscopy or a colonoscopy, followed by an EGD were the most frequent combinations. In another substantial fraction of two consecutive procedures, the first and the second procedure were identical. This pattern applied not only to EGD and colonoscopy but also to flexible sigmoidoscopy, enteroscopy, and video capsule endoscopy.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients with GIB require only one type of endoscopy to manage their bleeding. However, in a quarter of patients, on average, 2.4 procedures are needed. Previous trials assessing the outcomes of individual types of endoscopy may have exaggerated their overall success rates in diagnosing and treating GIB.

The role of endoscopy in pediatric gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Gastrointestinal bleeding in children and adolescents accounts for up to 20 % of referrals to gastroenterologists. Detailed management guidelines exist for gastrointestinal bleeding in adults, but they do not encompass children and adolescents. The aim of this study was to assess gastrointestinal bleeding in pediatric patients and to determine an investigative management algorithm accounting for the specifics of children and adolescents.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pediatric patients with gastrointestinal bleeding admitted to our endoscopy unit from 2001 to 2009 (n = 154) were identified. Retrospective statistical and neural network analysis was used to assess outcome and to determine an investigative management algorithm.

RESULTS

The source of bleeding could be identified in 81 % (n = 124/154). Gastrointestinal bleeding was predominantly lower gastrointestinal bleeding (66 %, n = 101); upper gastrointestinal bleeding was much less common (14 %, n = 21). Hematochezia was observed in 94 % of the patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 95 of 101). Hematemesis (67 %, n = 14 of 21) and melena (48 %, n = 10 of 21) were associated with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The sensitivity and specificity of a neural network to predict lower gastrointestinal bleeding were 98 % and 63.6 %, respectively and to predict upper gastrointestinal bleeding were 75 % and 96 % respectively. The sensitivity and specifity of hematochezia alone to predict lower gastrointestinal bleeding were 94.2 % and 85.7 %, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for hematemesis and melena to predict upper gastrointestinal bleeding were 82.6 % and 94 %, respectively. We then developed an investigative management algorithm based on the presence of hematochezia and hematemesis or melena.

CONCLUSIONS

Hematochezia should prompt colonoscopy and hematemesis or melena should prompt esophagogastroduodenoscopy. If no source of bleeding is found, additional procedures are often non-diagnostic.

Clinical study of anesthetization by dezocine combined with propofol for indolent colonoscopy

AIM: To assess the use of dezocine combined with propofol for the anesthetization of patients undergoing indolent colonoscopy.

METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of patients undergoing indolent colonoscopy in the Xinjiang People’s Hospital was conducted from April 1 to April 30, 2015. The survey collected patient general information and anesthesia data, including overall medical experience and pain management. Thirty minutes after colonoscopy surgery, samples of venous blood were collected and the biochemical indicators of gastrointestinal function were analyzed.

RESULTS: There were 98 female and 62 male respondents. Indolent colonoscopy was found to be more suitable for mid to older-aged patients. The necessary conditions for the diagnosis of digestive diseases were required in 65 of the 73 inpatients. Adverse reactions to the intraoperative process included two cases of body movement and two cases of respiratory depression. Gastrin and vasoactive intestinal peptide levels were slightly increased. However, somatostatin and endothelin levels were slightly decreased.

CONCLUSION: This study revealed that dezocine combined with propofol can be successfully used for the anesthetization of indolent colonoscopy patients without pain and should be widely used.

Colonoscopy Identifies Increased Prevalence of Large Polyps or Tumors in Patients 40-49 Years Old With Hematochezia vs Other Gastrointestinal Indications

BACKGROUND & AIMS

There is an unclear role for colonoscopy in the evaluation of symptomatic individuals younger than 50 years old. We aimed to determine the prevalence of large polyps (>9 mm) or tumors in individuals 40 to 49 years old who underwent colonoscopy for various signs and symptoms, and compare the results with those from average-risk individuals ages 50 to 54 years who underwent screening colonoscopy.

METHODS

We collected data from a national endoscopy database, from 2000 through 2012, and identified patients 40 to 49 years old who underwent colonoscopy for bleeding and nonbleeding indications. The prevalence of large polyps (>9 mm) or tumors was compared with the prevalence in a reference group (n = 99,713 average-risk individuals ages 50-54 undergoing screening colonoscopy).

RESULTS

A total of 65,892 patients ages 40 to 49 years underwent colonoscopy for a variety of indications. Significantly larger proportions of male and female patients with hematochezia without anemia or iron-deficiency anemia (IDA) had large polyps or tumors (7.2%) compared with the reference group (men, 7.2% vs 6.2%; P = .0001; and women, 5.5% vs 4.1%; P < .0001). Patients with weight loss, anemia or IDA, or hematochezia with anemia or IDA did not have a significantly higher prevalence of large polyps or tumors than the reference group. Significantly lower proportions of patients with general gastrointestinal symptoms (pain, bloating, or change in bowel habits) had advanced neoplasia compared with the reference group (men, 3.9% vs 6.2%; P < .0001; and women, 2.7% vs 4.1%; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

An analysis of a national endoscopy database supports the role of colonoscopy to evaluate hematochezia in patients 40 to 49 years old. A lower proportion of patients with anemia, weight loss, and general abdominal symptoms had large polyps or tumors compared with average-risk patients 50 to 54 years old. A significantly lower proportion of patients younger than 50 years with general gastrointestinal symptoms had large polyps-these patients are therefore less likely to benefit from colonoscopy.

Safety and Effectiveness of Early Colonoscopy in Management of Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding on the Basis of Propensity Score Matching Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We investigated the safety and effectiveness of early colonoscopy (performed within 24 hours of hospital admission) for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) vs elective colonoscopy (performed 24 hours after admission).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study by using a database of endoscopies performed at the National Center for Global Health and Medicine in Tokyo, Japan from January 2009 through December 2014. We analyzed data from 538 patients emergently hospitalized for acute LGIB. We used propensity score matching to adjust for differences between patients who underwent early colonoscopy vs elective colonoscopy. Outcomes included rates of adverse events during bowel preparation and colonoscopy procedures, stigmata of recent hemorrhage, endoscopic therapy, blood transfusion requirement, 30-day rebleeding and mortality, and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

We selected 163 pairs of patients for analysis on the basis of propensity matching. We observed no significant differences between the early and elective colonoscopy groups in bowel preparation-related rates of adverse events (1.8% vs 1.2%, P = .652), colonoscopy-related rates of adverse events (none in either group), blood transfusion requirement (27.6% vs 27.6%, P = 1.000), or mortality (1.2% vs 0, P = .156). The early colonoscopy group had higher rates than the elective group for stigmata of recent hemorrhage (26.4% vs 9.2%, P < .001) and endoscopic therapy (25.8% vs 8.6%, P < .001), including clipping (17.8% vs 4.9%, P < .001), band ligation (6.1% vs 1.8%, P = .048), and rebleeding (13.5% vs 7.4%, P = .070). Patients in the early colonoscopy group stayed in the hospital for a shorter mean time (10 days) than patients in the elective colonoscopy group (13 days) (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Early colonoscopy for patients with acute LGIB is safe, allows for endoscopic therapy because it identifies the bleeding source, and reduces hospital stay. However, compared with elective colonoscopy, early colonoscopy does not reduce mortality and may increase the risk for rebleeding.

Acute Middle Gastrointestinal Bleeding Risk Associated with NSAIDs, Antithrombotic Drugs, and PPIs: A Multicenter Case-Control Study

Background

Middle gastrointestinal bleeding (MGIB) risk has not been fully investigated due to its extremely rare occurrence and the need for multiple endoscopies to exclude upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. This study investigated whether MGIB is associated with the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), low-dose aspirin (LDA), thienopyridines, anticoagulants, and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs), and whether PPI use affects the interactions between MGIB and antithrombotic drugs.

Methods

In this multicenter, hospital-based, case-control study, 400 patients underwent upper and lower endoscopy, 80 had acute overt MGIB and 320 had no bleeding and were matched for age and sex as controls (1:4). MGIB was additionally evaluated by capsule and/or double-balloon endoscopy, after excluding upper and lower GI bleeding. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) for MGIB risk were calculated using conditional logistic regression. To estimate the propensity score, we employed a logistic regression model for PPI use.

Results

In patients with MGIB, mean hemoglobin level was 9.4 g/dL, and 28 patients (35%) received blood transfusions. Factors significantly associated with MGIB were chronic kidney disease (p<0.001), liver cirrhosis (p = 0.034), NSAIDs (p<0.001), thienopyridines (p<0.001), anticoagulants (p = 0.002), and PPIs (p<0.001). After adjusting for these factors, NSAIDs (AOR, 2.5; p = 0.018), thienopyridines (AOR, 3.2; p = 0.015), anticoagulants (AOR, 4.3; p = 0.028), and PPIs (AOR; 2.0; p = 0.021) were independently associated with MGIB. After adjusting for propensity score, the use of PPIs remained an independent risk factors for MGIB (AOR, 1.94; p = 0.034). No significant interactions were observed between PPIs and NSAIDs (AOR, 0.7; p = 0.637), LDA (AOR, 0.3; p = 0.112), thienopyridine (AOR, 0.7, p = 0.671), or anticoagulants (AOR, 0.5; p = 0.545).

Conclusions

One-third of patients with acute small intestinal bleeding required blood transfusion. NSAIDs, thienopyridines, anticoagulants, and PPIs increased the risk of acute small intestinal bleeding. However, there were no significant interactions found between antithrombotic drugs and PPI use for bleeding risk.

New advances in lower gastrointestinal bleeding management with embolotherapy

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Embolization is currently proposed as the first step in the treatment of acute, life-threatening LGIB, when endoscopic approach is not possible or is unsuccessful. Like most procedures performed in emergency setting, time represents a significant factor influencing outcome. Modern tools permit identifying and reaching the bleeding site faster than two-dimensional angiography. Non-selective cone-beam CT arteriography can identify a damaged vessel. Moreover, sophisticated software able to detect the vessel may facilitate direct placement of a microcatheter into the culprit vessel without the need for sequential angiography. A further important aspect is the use of an appropriate technique of embolization and a safe and effective embolic agent. Current evidence shows the use of detachable coils (with or without a triaxial system) and liquid embolics has proven advantages compared with other embolic agents. The present article analyses these modern tools, making embolization of acute LGIB safer and more effective.

Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Children

This article provides an overview of the evaluation and management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) in children. The common etiologies at different ages are reviewed. Conditions with endoscopic importance for diagnosis or therapy include solitary rectal ulcer syndrome, polyps, vascular lesions, and colonic inflammation and ulceration. Diagnostic modalities for identifying causes of LGIB in children include endoscopy and colonoscopy, cross-sectional and nuclear medicine imaging, video capsule endoscopy, and enteroscopy. Pre-endoscopic preparation and decision-making unique to pediatrics is highlighted. The authors conclude with a summary of current and emerging therapeutic hemostatic techniques that can be used in pediatric patients.

Role of urgent contrast-enhanced multidetector computed tomography for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding in patients undergoing early colonoscopy

BACKGROUND

The clinical significance of performing computed tomography (CT) for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the role of urgent CT in acute LGIB settings.

METHODS

The cohort comprised 223 patients emergently hospitalized for LGIB who underwent early colonoscopy within 24 h of arriving at the hospital, including 126 who underwent CT within 3 h of arrival. We compared the bleeding source rate between two strategies: early colonoscopy following urgent CT or early colonoscopy alone.

RESULTS

No significant differences in age, sex, comorbidities, vital signs, or laboratory data were observed between the strategies. The detection rate was higher with colonoscopy following CT for vascular lesions (35.7 vs. 20.6%, p = 0.01), leading to more endoscopic therapies (34.9 vs. 13.4%, p < 0.01). Of the 126 who underwent colonoscopy following CT, 26 (20.6%) had extravasation and 34 (27.0%) had nonvascular findings. The sensitivity and specificity of CT extravasation and nonvascular findings for predicting vascular lesions and inflammation or tumors were 37.8 and 88.9 and 81.3 and 80.9%, respectively. A high κ agreement (0.83, p < 0.01) for active bleeding locations was found between CT and subsequent colonoscopy. There were no cases of contrast-induced nephropathy after 1 week of CT.

CONCLUSIONS

Urgent CT before colonoscopy had about 15% additional value for detecting vascular lesion compared to colonoscopy alone and thus enabled subsequent endoscopic therapies. Contrast-enhanced CT in acute LGIB settings was safe and correctly identified the presence and location of active bleeding, as well as severe inflammation or tumor stenosis, facilitating decision making.

Endoscopic management of colonic diverticular bleeding

Colonic diverticular bleeding is the most common cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Colonoscopy can be used for both diagnosis and treatment of colonic diverticular bleeding. Identification of the stigmata of recent hemorrhage allows for various endoscopic hemostasis methods. Clipping, endoscopic band ligation, injection therapy, and thermal contact are available methods for endoscopic hemostasis. However, the optimal technique remains to be determined. Herein, we review the techniques and clinical outcomes of endoscopic hemostasis for colonic diverticular bleeding.

Effect of proton-pump inhibitors on the risk of lower gastrointestinal bleeding associated with NSAIDs, aspirin, clopidogrel, and warfarin

BACKGROUND

We investigated the effects of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) on lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) and of their interactions with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), low-dose aspirin, clopidogrel, and warfarin on LGIB risk.

METHODS

We prospectively studied 355 patients emergently hospitalized for LGIB and 8,221 nonbleeding patients. All patients underwent colonoscopy. Smoking, alcohol drinking, drug exposure, and the Charlson comorbidity index score were assessed before colonoscopy. Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) of LGIB were estimated.

RESULTS

LGIB was significantly associated with older age, higher comorbidity index, and NSAID, aspirin, clopidogrel, or warfarin use. PPI use was significantly associated with older age, male sex, being a current alcohol drinker, higher comorbidity index, and NSAID, aspirin, clopidogrel, warfarin, acetaminophen, or corticosteroid use. Multivariate analysis adjusted by the confounding factors revealed LGIB was not significantly associated with PPI use (AOR 0.87; 95 % confidence interval 0.68-1.13; p = 0.311), or specifically with omeprazole (AOR 1.18; p = 0.408), esomeprazole (AOR 0.76; p = 0.432), lansoprazole (AOR 0.93; p = 0.669), or rabeprazole (AOR 0.63; p = 0.140). In the interaction model, no significant interactions were observed between PPIs and NSAIDs (AOR 1.40; p = 0.293), aspirin (AOR 1.09; p = 0.767), clopidogrel (AOR 0.99, p = 0.985), or warfarin (AOR 1.52; p = 0.398).

CONCLUSIONS

This large case-control study demonstrated that PPI use did not lead to an increased risk of LGIB, regardless of the type of PPI used. Further, LGIB risk was not affected by PPI use, irrespective of concomitant therapy with NSAIDs, low-dose aspirin, clopidogrel, or warfarin.

Adverse Events during Bowel Preparation and Colonoscopy in Patients with Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding Compared with Elective Non-Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

There are limited data on the safety of colonoscopy in patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). We examined the various adverse events associated with colonoscopy in acute LGIB compared with non-GIB patients.

METHODS

Emergency hospitalized LGIB patients (n = 161) and age- and gender-matched non-GIB controls (n = 161) were selected. Primary outcomes were any adverse events during preparation and colonoscopy procedure. Secondary outcomes were five bowel preparation-related adverse events--hypotension, systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg, volume overload, vomiting, aspiration pneumonia and loss of consciousness--and four colonoscopy-related adverse events--including hypotension, perforation, cerebrocardiovascular events and sepsis.

RESULTS

During bowel preparation, 16 (9%) LGIB patients experienced an adverse event. None of the LGIB patients experienced volume overload, aspiration pneumonia or loss of consciousness; however, 12 (7%) had hypotension and 4 (2%) vomited. There were no significant differences in the five bowel preparation-related adverse events between LGIB and non-GIB patients. During colonoscopy, 25 (15%) LGIB patients experienced an adverse event. None LGIB patient had perforation or sepsis; however, 23 (14%) had hypotension and 2 (1%) experienced a cerebrocardiovascular event. There was no significant difference in the four colonoscopy-related adverse events between LGIB and non-GIB patients. In addition, no significant difference in any of the nine adverse events was found among subgroups: patients aged ≥65 years, those with comorbidities, and those with antithrombotic drug use.

CONCLUSIONS

Adverse events in bowel preparation and colonoscopy among acute LGIB patients were low. No significant difference was found in adverse events between LGIB and non-GIB patients. These adverse events were also low in elderly LGIB patients, as well as in those with co-morbidities and antithrombotic drug use, suggesting that colonoscopy performed during acute LGIB did not increase adverse events.