Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy, including direct oral anticoagulants: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines

Post-ERCP Bleeding in the Era of Multiple Antiplatelet Agents

Background/Aims

This study aimed to determine the risk of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (post-ERCP) bleeding among patients taking antiplatelet agents (APAs), particularly in the era of multiple APAs.

Methods

The primary outcomes were the frequency, type, and severity of ERCP-related bleeding according to the use of APAs.

Results

The frequencies of post-ERCP bleeding among the four different groups were 16 of 2,083 (0.8%) in the no drug group, 12 of 256 (4.7%) in the aspirin group, 3 of 48 (6.3%) in the single APA group, and 4 of 48 (8.3%) in the multiple APA group (p＜0.001). In the univariate analysis, post-ERCP bleeding was associated with age, pull-type sphincterotomy, and APA and was inversely associated with balloon dilation of the biliary orifice. In the multivariate analysis, pull-type sphincterotomy (odds ratio [OR], 7.829; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.411 to 43.453; p=0.019) and country (Korea: OR, 0.124; 95% CI, 0.042 to 0.361; p＜0.001) were associated with post-ERCP bleeding.

Conclusions

The frequency of post-ERCP bleeding was statistically higher in patients on any APA within 6 days prior to ERCP. However, in the multivariate analysis, APA use was not associated with post-ERCP bleeding. Until a large, adequately powered study to detect differences is performed, caution is recommended when considering invasive procedures during ERCP in patients on APAs.

Questionnaire-Based Survey on Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Management of Antithrombotic Agents during Endoscopy Among Asian Countries

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines on the management of antithrombotic therapy for endoscopic procedures vary among countries. Differences in the management of antithrombotic agents for endoscopic procedures between Western and Eastern countries have already been reported. However, no study has investigated the differences among Asian countries. The aim of this study was to examine the differences in the etiology of gastrointestinal bleeding and management of antithrombotic agents during endoscopic procedures between Japan and other Asian countries (OAC).

METHODS

Questionnaires regarding gastrointestinal bleeding in clinical practice and management of antithrombotic agents during endoscopy were distributed to members of the International Gastroenterology Consensus Symposium Study Group. We analyzed the questionnaire answers and compared the results between Japan and OAC.

RESULTS

The cause of and treatment methods for gastrointestinal bleeding differed between Japan and OAC. In Japan, the trend was to continue drugs at the time of biopsy and endoscopic therapy. Even in cases of discontinuation, the drug withdrawal period was as short as <3 days. Thrombotic complications caused by the withdrawal of antithrombotic agents were observed more frequently in Japan (34.78%) than in OAC (22.46%; p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Due to differences in guidelines and complications associated with discontinuation of drugs, the antithrombotic withdrawal period in Japan tended to be shorter than that in OAC.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage by cautery-tipped lumen-apposing metal stent: exploring the possible indications

Background

The recently introduced Hot AXIOS™ system for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transenteric drainage has the potential to change interventional endoscopy significantly. The aim of our study was to assess the effectiveness and safety of this new type of lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) with cautery system for pancreatic collection, and gallbladder and biliary tree drainage.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients undergoing EUS-guided drainage by LAMS with cautery system in a tertiary-care academic medical center between March 2014 and March 2017. All patients were included in our prospectively maintained institutional EUS database. The main outcome measures were technical success, clinical effectiveness, and adverse events.

Results

A total of 45 patients (20 men, mean age 69.6 years) underwent LAMS placement. Indications were pancreatic fluid collections (19 patients, 42.2%), acute cholecystitis (10 patients, 22.2%), and biliary drainage (16 patients, 35.5%). Technical success was achieved in all patients except one (97.7%). Clinical success was achieved in 86.4% (38/44) of cases and adverse events occurred in 5 (11.4%) of patients.

Conclusions

In our experience, EUS-guided LAMS placement performed by expert endoscopists was feasible and effective in the endoscopic management of pancreatic fluid collection, and biliary and gallbladder drainage. Optimization of transmural drainage by new dedicated devices could improve efficacy and safety in appropriately selected patients.

UK guidelines on oesophageal dilatation in clinical practice

These are updated guidelines which supersede the original version published in 2004. This work has been endorsed by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) under the auspices of the oesophageal section of the BSG. The original guidelines have undergone extensive revision by the 16 members of the Guideline Development Group with representation from individuals across all relevant disciplines, including the Heartburn Cancer UK charity, a nursing representative and a patient representative. The methodological rigour and transparency of the guideline development processes were appraised using the revised Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) tool.Dilatation of the oesophagus is a relatively high-risk intervention, and is required by an increasing range of disease states. Moreover, there is scarcity of evidence in the literature to guide clinicians on how to safely perform this procedure. These guidelines deal specifically with the dilatation procedure using balloon or bougie devices as a primary treatment strategy for non-malignant narrowing of the oesophagus. The use of stents is outside the remit of this paper; however, for cases of dilatation failure, alternative techniques-including stents-will be listed. The guideline is divided into the following subheadings: (1) patient preparation; (2) the dilatation procedure; (3) aftercare and (4) disease-specific considerations. A systematic literature search was performed. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Develop-ment and Evaluation (GRADE) tool was used to evaluate the quality of evidence and decide on the strength of recommendations made.

[Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients of advanced age]

The dramatic increase in life expectancy is leading to a significant increase in the use of gastrointestinal endoscopy in the elderly. Taking into account these demographic changes, the use of gastrointestinal endoscopy in this age group is of great importance. Although these procedures are generally safe and well tolerated even in very elderly patients, the onset of physiological changes associated with aging and the increased prevalence of cardiovascular and pulmonary comorbidities raise the risk of sedation related complications in these patients. Age alone is not a contraindication for performing any endoscopic procedure. However, elderly patients have their own peculiarities that require a detailed review of the characteristics, risks and benefits of endoscopic procedures in this specific context.

Management of patients on antithrombotic agents undergoing emergency and elective endoscopy: joint Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) and Asian Pacific Society for Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE) practice guidelines

This Guideline is a joint official statement of the Asian Pacific Association of Gastroenterology (APAGE) and the Asian Pacific Society for Digestive Endoscopy (APSDE). It was developed in response to the increasing use of antithrombotic agents (antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants) in patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy in Asia. After reviewing current practice guidelines in Europe and the USA, the joint committee identified unmet needs, noticed inconsistencies, raised doubts about certain recommendations and recognised significant discrepancies in clinical practice between different regions. We developed this joint official statement based on a systematic review of the literature, critical appraisal of existing guidelines and expert consensus using a two-stage modified Delphi process. This joint APAGE-APSDE Practice Guideline is intended to be an educational tool that assists clinicians in improving care for patients on antithrombotics who require emergency or elective GI endoscopy in the Asian Pacific region.

Postoperative bleeding risk after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection during antithrombotic drug therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The safety of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in the antithrombotic drug users remains controversial.

METHODS

Patients who underwent gastric ESD at Okayama University Hospital between March 2006 and February 2016 were enrolled. This study investigated the risk of post-ESD bleeding according to the management of the antithrombotic drugs.

RESULTS

One thousand twenty lesions (872 patients) were enrolled. In a multivariate analysis, heparin replacement (odds ratio [OR] 5.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-14), multiple antithrombotic drug use (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1-6.9), a resected specimen of ≥ 33 mm in diameter (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.5-5.4), Helicobacter pylori negativity (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.3-3.7), and tumors located in the lower third of the stomach (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.0-2.9) were significant risk factors for post-ESD bleeding, while the continuation of aspirin or cilostazol was not (OR 2.6, 95% CI 0.72-7.8). The bleeding rate of the continuation group was comparable with that of the all cessation group among single antithrombotic drug users (4.5% vs 4.4%, P = 1.0); however, the rate of the continuation group was significantly higher than that of the all cessation group among multiple antithrombotic drug users (67% vs 15%, P = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of post-ESD bleeding differed according to the management of the antithrombotic drugs. The gastric ESD under the cessation or continuation of aspirin or cilostazol monotherapy was acceptable. However, multiple antithrombotic drug use or heparin replacement was associated with a higher risk of post-ESD bleeding.

Use of anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents is not related to epistaxis in patients undergoing transnasal endoscopy

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Unsedated transnasal endoscopy (uTNE) has become accepted as a safe and tolerable method for upper gastrointestinal tact examinations. Epistaxis is 1 of the major complications of TNE, though its risk factors have not been elucidated. Generally, patients administered an anticoagulant or antiplatelet drug are considered to have an increased risk of epistaxis during TNE. Here, we investigated risk factors of epistaxis in patients undergoing uTNE, with focus on those who received antithrombotic agents.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We enrolled 6860 patients (average age 55.6 ± 12.97 years; 3405 males, 3455 females) who underwent uTNE and received the same preparations for the procedure. Epistaxis was evaluated using endoscopic images obtained while withdrawing the scope through the nostril. We also noted current use of medications including anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents prior to the endoscopic examination.

RESULTS

Epistaxis occurred in 3.6 % of the enrolled patients (245/6860), and that rate was significantly higher in younger patients (average age 49.31 ± 11.8 years for epistaxis group vs. 55.83 ± 13.0 years for no epistaxis group, P  < 0.01) as well as females (4.78 % vs. 2.35 %, P  < 0.01). The odds ratio for occurrence of epistaxis was 2.31 (95 %CI: 1.746 - 3.167) in the younger patients and 2.02 (95 % CI: 1.542 - 2.659) in females. In contrast, there was no significant difference for rate of epistaxis between patients with and without treatment with an antithrombotic agent (3.0 % vs. 3.6 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of epistaxis was higher in younger and female patients. Importantly, that rate was not significantly increased in patients who were administered an antithrombotic agent.

Effects of antithrombotic therapy on bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Bleeding is the most common adverse event after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). Although several studies have reported on the use of antithrombotic agents and post-ESD bleeding, many issues remain controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis and systematic review to evaluate the effects of antithrombotic therapy on post-ESD bleeding.

METHODS

The published literature was searched on online databases, and all studies were included up to January 2017. Standard forms were used to extract data by 2 independent reviewers. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score was used to assess the quality of studies. The pooled odds ratio (OR) was computed for the effect of antithrombotic agents. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plots. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran Q test and I² statistic.

RESULTS

Sixteen retrospective articles were included. Regardless of discontinuation (OR, 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15-2.39; P = .007) or continuation (OR, 8.39; 95% CI, 4.64-15.17; P < .00001), antithrombotic therapy was significantly associated with post-ESD bleeding, particularly for delayed bleeding (OR, 2.66; 95% CI, 1.42-4.98; P = .002). The bleeding rate was higher in the discontinued multiple antithrombotics group (OR, 5.17; 95% CI, 3.13-8.54; P < .00001) than in the discontinued a single antithrombotic group (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.29-3.85; P = .004) and single antiplatelet group (OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 0.93-4.63; P = .07). In the subgroup analysis, resuming antithrombotics within 1 week (OR, 2.46; 95% CI, 1.54-3.93; P = .0002) and using heparin replacement (OR, 4.20; 95% CI, 1.94-9.09; P= .0003) significantly increased post-ESD bleeding risk. Continued use of low-dose aspirin (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.17-8.61; P = .84) did not significantly increase the bleeding risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Antithrombotic therapy is a risk factor for post-ESD bleeding, especially for delayed bleeding. Using multiple antithrombotic drugs, resuming antithrombotics within 1 week, and heparin replacement were significantly associated with post-ESD bleeding; but continuous low-dose aspirin was not. However, much larger prospective studies are required.

Impact of INR monitoring, reversal agent use, heparin bridging, and anticoagulant interruption on rebleeding and thromboembolism in acute gastrointestinal bleeding

Background

Anticoagulant management of acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) during the pre-endoscopic period has not been fully addressed in American, European, or Asian guidelines. This study sought to evaluate the risks of rebleeding and thromboembolism in anticoagulated patients with acute GIB.

Methods

Baseline, endoscopy, and outcome data were reviewed for 314 patients with acute GIB: 157 anticoagulant users and 157 age-, sex-, and important risk-matched non-users. Data were also compared between direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin users.

Results

Between anticoagulant users and non-users, of whom 70% underwent early endoscopy, no endoscopy-related adverse events or significant differences were found in the rate of endoscopic therapy need, transfusion need, rebleeding, or thromboembolism. Rebleeding was associated with shock, comorbidities, low platelet count and albumin level, and low-dose aspirin use but not HAS-BLED score, any endoscopic results, heparin bridge, or international normalized ratio (INR) ≥ 2.5. Risks for thromboembolism were INR ≥ 2.5, difference in onset and pre-endoscopic INR, reversal agent use, and anticoagulant interruption but not CHA2DS2-VASc score, any endoscopic results, or heparin bridge. In patients without reversal agent use, heparin bridge, or anticoagulant interruption, there was only one rebleeding event and no thromboembolic events. Warfarin users had a significantly higher transfusion need than DOACs users.

Conclusion

Endoscopy appears to be safe for anticoagulant users with acute GIB compared with non-users. Patient background factors were associated with rebleeding, whereas anticoagulant management factors (e.g. INR correction, reversal agent use, and drug interruption) were associated with thromboembolism. Early intervention without reversal agent use, heparin bridge, or anticoagulant interruption may be warranted for acute GIB.

Optimal Bowel Cleansing for Colonoscopy in the Elderly Patient

Colonoscopy is an important diagnostic and screening tool for colorectal cancer detection and prevention, and adequate bowel preparation is critical for successful colonoscopy. Complications related to colonoscopy, either directly or indirectly related to the procedure, are increased in elderly patients, and the risks and benefits of colonoscopy procedures need to be carefully considered in these patients. Recent studies have shown that 4 L polyethylene glycol with a split preparation is safe and effective for elderly patients, and is the preferred preparation for patients with medical comorbidities. Preparations containing sodium phosphate are generally not recommended for the elderly because of increased renal complications. In addition, a low-residue diet may aid in tolerance and willingness to undergo the procedure compared with a clear liquid diet, with comparable bowel preparation adequacy. Risk factors for inadequate bowel preparations include poor adherence to split preparation instructions or volume of solution ingested, and certain patient-related medications and comorbidities, such as diabetes, elevated body mass index, and antidepressant or narcotic use. Methods for achieving safe and adequate bowel preparations in the elderly include clear instructions, reminder calls, and case management for potential confounding patient-related factors.

Self-expandable metal stents for the extraction of common bile duct stones in patients receiving dual antiplatelet agents: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic sphincterotomy or endoscopic papillary balloon dilatation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are associated with a high risk of bleeding in patients receiving dual antiplatelet agents (APAs). However, the discontinuation of antiplatelet agents increases the risk of thromboembolic events in these patients. To date, the placement of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) in patients receiving dual APAs has not been well investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of SEMS placement for the removal of common bile duct (CBD) stones in patients in whom APAs were not discontinued.

METHODS

Ten consecutive patients who were suspected of having CBD stones and who were receiving dual APAs were prospectively enrolled and underwent temporary SEMS placement, followed by stone extraction and SEMS removal. The patients continued taking dual APAs at the time of undergoing the procedure.

RESULTS

SEMS placement was successful in all ten patients. Complete duct clearance with the SEMSs was achieved in a single session in all patients with CBD stones (9/9, 100%). One patient had cholangitis, but ERCP did not reveal biliary stones. There were no cases of bleeding during or after the procedure, even though all patients continued to take dual APAs. There were no new thromboembolic events.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMSs can be used for the extraction of CBD stones in patients on dual APAs, and does not lead to hemorrhagic or thromboembolic events.

Management of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing interventional pulmonary procedures

There has been great progress in antithrombotic therapy over the past several years. Its use has increased with the advent of novel anticoagulants, as these medications do not require frequent blood tests for monitoring. Antithrombotic therapy is aimed at reducing the risk of thromboembolic events in patients with atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, deep vein thrombosis, valvular heart disease and pulmonary embolism. These patients are often critically ill and frequently undergo urgent interventions requiring discontinuation of anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy which can increase the risk of thrombosis; however, continuing these agents can lead to increased risk of haemorrhage.

The purpose of this article is to summarise the literature surrounding the safety of using antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies in patients undergoing interventional pulmonary procedures.

Available studies suggest some antithrombotic agents may be used in interventional pulmonary procedureshttp://ow.ly/vSF030bRqjt

Management of Anticoagulants and Antiplatelet Agents During Colonoscopy

Colonoscopy frequently is performed for patients who are taking aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiplatelet agents, and other anticoagulants. These colonoscopies often involve polypectomy, which can be complicated by bleeding. The risks of precipitating thromboembolic complications if anticoagulants are stopped must be weighed against the risk of postpolypectomy bleeding if these agents are continued. This article systematically reviews the management of anticoagulation during elective and emergency colonoscopy. For patients undergoing colonoscopic polypectomy, the overall risk of postpolypectomy bleeding is <0.5%. Risk factors for postpolypectomy bleeding include large polyp size and anticoagulant use, especially warfarin and thienopyridines. For patients who do not stop aspirin or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs prior to colonoscopy, the rate of postpolypectomy bleeding is not significantly different from that for patients who do not take those medications. For patients who continue thienopyridines and undergo polypectomy, the risk of delayed postpolypectomy bleeding is approximately 2.4%. Even for patients who interrupt warfarin, the risk of postpolypectomy bleeding is increased. The direct oral anticoagulants (direct thrombin inhibitors and factor Xa inhibitors) have a rapid onset and offset of action, and periprocedural bridging generally is not necessary. For the thienopyridines, warfarin, and the direct oral anticoagulants, the decision to interrupt or continue these agents for endoscopy will involve considerable exercise of clinical judgment.

Clinical endoscopic management and outcome of post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding

Post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding is a common complication of biliary sphincterotomy, and the incidence varies from 1% to 48%. It can be challenging to localize the bleeder or to administer various interventions through a side-viewing endoscope. This study aimed to evaluate the risk factors of post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding and the outcome of endoscopic intervention therapies. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 513 patients who underwent biliary sphincterotomy in Mackay Memorial Hospital between 2011 and 2016. The blood biochemistry, comorbidities, indication for sphincterotomy, severity of bleeding, endoscopic features of bleeder, and type of endoscopic therapy were analyzed. Post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding occurred in 65 (12.6%) patients. Forty-five patients had immediate bleeding and 20 patients had delayed bleeding. The multivariate analysis of risk factors associated with post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding were liver cirrhosis (P = 0.029), end-stage renal disease (P = 0.038), previous antiplatelet drug use (P<0.001), and duodenal ulcer (P = 0.023). The complications of pancreatitis and cholangitis were higher in the bleeding group, with statistical significance. Delayed bleeding occurred within 1 to 7 days (mean, 2.5 days), and 60% (12/20) of the patients received endoscopic evaluation. In the delayed bleeding group, the successful hemostasis rate was 71.4% (5/7), and 65% (13/20) of the patients had ceased bleeding without endoscopic hemostasis therapy. Comparison of different therapeutic modalities showed that cholangitis was higher in patients who received epinephrine spray (P = 0.042) and pancreatitis was higher in patients who received epinephrine injection and electrocoagulation (P = 0.041 and P = 0.039 respectively). Clinically, post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding and further endoscopic hemostasis therapy increase the complication rate of pancreatitis and cholangitis. Realizing the effectiveness of each therapeutic modalities and appropriate management of different levels bleeding are important.

Risk of gastrointestinal bleeding during anticoagulant treatment

INTRODUCTION

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a major problem in patients on oral anticoagulation therapy. This issue has become even more pressing since the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in 2009. Areas covered: Here we review current evidence related to GIB associated with oral anticoagulants, focusing on randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and post-marketing observational studies. Dabigatran 150 mg twice daily and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily increase the risk of GIB compared to warfarin. The risk increase with edoxaban is dose-dependent, while apixaban shows apparently, no increased risk. We summarize what is known about GIB risk factors for individual anticoagulants, the location of GIB in patients taking these compounds, and prevention strategies that lower the risk of GIB. Expert opinion: Recently there has been an important shift in the clinical presentation of GIB. Specifically, upper GIB has decreased with the decreased incidence of peptic ulcers due to the broad use of proton pump inhibitors and the decreased prevalence of H. pylori infections. In contrast, the incidence of lower GIB has increased, due in part to colonic diverticular bleeding and angiodysplasia in the elderly. In this population, the addition of oral anticoagulation therapy, especially DOACs, seems to increase the risk of lower GIB.

Updated guideline on the management of common bile duct stones (CBDS)

Common bile duct stones (CBDS) are estimated to be present in 10-20% of individuals with symptomatic gallstones. They can result in a number of health problems, including pain, jaundice, infection and acute pancreatitis. A variety of imaging modalities can be employed to identify the condition, while management of confirmed cases of CBDS may involve endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, surgery and radiological methods of stone extraction. Clinicians are therefore confronted with a number of potentially valid options to diagnose and treat individuals with suspected CBDS. The British Society of Gastroenterology first published a guideline on the management of CBDS in 2008. Since then a number of developments in management have occurred along with further systematic reviews of the available evidence. The following recommendations reflect these changes and provide updated guidance to healthcare professionals who are involved in the care of adult patients with suspected or proven CBDS. It is not a protocol and the recommendations contained within should not replace individual clinical judgement.

The role of endoscopic intervention in the management of inflammatory pancreatic fluid collections

Pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) are a frequent complication of pancreatitis, or less commonly, pancreatic trauma or surgery. The revised Atlanta Classification categorizes PFCs as acute or chronic, with further subclassification of acute collections into acute peripancreatic collections and acute necrotic collections and of chronic fluid collections into pseudocysts and walled-off pancreatic necrosis. Acute PFCs are generally only subjected to an intervention when they are infected and not responding to antibiotics and are not managed endoscopically. Chronic PFCs, both pseudocysts and walled-off pancreatic necrosis, require intervention only when symptomatic or enlarging over time. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage has become the mainstay of management for chronic PFCs that require intervention. Developments in medical devices over the past few years have significantly simplified and shortened the duration of the procedure itself, but the optimum choice of stent in different clinical scenarios remains to be defined, as does the place of endoscopic necrosectomy. To optimize outcomes, these patients should undergo a careful preprocedure workup and discussion in a multidisciplinary environment and procedures should be carried out in high-volume pancreatic units.

Reintroduction of anti-thrombotic therapy after a gastrointestinal haemorrhage: if and when?

Gastrointestinal haemorrhage is a common clinical scenario and, in those using antithrombotic agents, the risk is significantly increased. Management of these patients, in terms of initial resuscitation is well established and numerous guidelines exist in this area. However, few studies have addressed the subsequent dilemma of if and when antithrombotic agents should be reintroduced. Consequently, practice is variable and not necessarily evidenced-based. Overall, for patients that are either anticoagulated or using antiplatelet drugs for secondary prophylaxis, there is a clear benefit to restarting these agents. However, there is limited data to guide when this should occur. For individuals at low risk of re-bleeding, current guidelines suggest single agent aspirin can be continued without interruption, assuming haemostatic control has been confirmed endoscopically. For those at higher bleeding risk, aspirin should be withheld, but reintroduced early (within 3 days of index endoscopy). However, randomised evidence is lacking, as are studies including more modern agents or combined anticoagulant/ antiplatelet regimens. As such, guidance statements are limited and management suggestions must be extrapolated from clinical trials, retrospective studies and data relating specifically to warfarin and aspirin. The intention of this review is to summarise what evidence is available and, where this is lacking, suggest pragmatic management options based on a risk-benefit assessment of thromboembolism and recurrent bleeding.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients on anticoagulant therapy and antiplatelet agents

Periprocedural management of antithrombotics for gastrointestinal endoscopy is a common clinical issue, given the widespread use of these drugs for primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention. For diagnostic procedures, with or without biopsy, no adjustments in antithrombotics are usually needed. For operative procedures, balancing the risk of periprocedural hemorrhage with the continuation of antithrombotics against the chance of recurrent thromboembolic events with their discontinuation may be challenging. Oral anticoagulants need to be temporarily withheld, and consideration must be given to whether a periendoscopic "bridge" therapy, typically a low-molecular-weight heparin, should be used in order to minimize the risk of thromboembolic events. Although some emerging evidence has shown that patients receiving heparin bridging appear to be at increased risk of overall and major bleeding and at similar risk of thromboembolic events compared to controls, bridging therapy is still recommended for patients on vitamin K antagonists who are at high thrombotic risk. Conversely, bridging therapy is usually not needed for patients taking new oral agents, which are characterized by shorter half-lives, and a rapid offset and onset of action. Management of antiplatelet therapy requires special care in patients on secondary prevention, especially those with coronary stents. This review is intended to summarize the recommendations of updated International Guidelines designed to help the decision-making process in such an intricate field.

Complications of ERCP

Even though considered safe, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is among the endoscopic procedures associated with the highest rate of complications. Post ERCP pancreatitis (PEP) is the most common complication of ERCP. Several independent risk factors have been associated with PEP. Prophylactic PD stenting has been shown to be highly effective in preventing PEP. More recent studies have suggested that NSAIDs, especially rectal indomethacin, could by itself be effective in preventing PEP. However, head to head RCTs comparing PD stents with NSAIDs would be required to confirm this. Other complications include ERCP induced bleeding, perforation, and cholangitis. Bleeding is related to morphological, procedural, and patient related factors. Early identification and correction of the risk factors are of paramount importance in preventing bleeding. Risk of infection is particularly high during ERCP. It is important to ensure complete drainage of obstructed biliary system in order to reduce the risk of post-ERCP cholangitis.

Blood thinners and gastrointestinal endoscopy

As the number of diagnostic and therapeutic gastrointestinal endoscopies is increasing, and there is an increase in number of patients taking blood thinners, we are seeing more and more patients on blood thinners prior to endoscopic procedures. Gastrointestinal bleeding or thromboembolism can occur in this category of patients in the periendoscopic period. To better manage these patients, endoscopists should have a clear concept about the various blood thinners in the market. Patients' risk of thromboembolism off anticoagulation, and the risk of bleeding from endoscopic procedures should be assessed prior to endoscopy. The endoscopic procedure should be done when it is safe to do it.

Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection of large colonic polyps

Almost all large and complex colorectal polyps can now be resected endoscopically. Piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection (PEMR) is an established technique with fairly low complication risk and good short-term and medium-term outcomes. Several modifications to the basic injection and snare technique have been developed contributing to safer and more complete resections. Delayed bleeding requiring reintervention is the most troublesome complication in 2-7% of patients, particularly in those with comorbidities and large, right-sided polyps. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become popular in Japan and has theoretical advantages over PEMR in providing a complete, en bloc excision for accurate histological staging and reduced local recurrence. These advantages come at the cost of a more complex, expensive and time-consuming procedure with a higher risk of perforation, particularly early in the procedure learning curve. These factors have contributed to the slow adoption of ESD in the West and the challenge to develop new devices and endoscopic platforms that will make ESD easier and safer. Currently, ESD indications are limited to large rectal lesions, in which procedural complications are easily managed, and for colorectal polyps with a high risk of containing tiny foci of early submucosally invasive cancer, whereby ESD may be curative compared with PEMR.

Routine pre-procedural rectal indometacin versus selective post-procedural rectal indometacin to prevent pancreatitis in patients undergoing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rectal indometacin decreases the occurrence of pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). However, the population most at risk and the optimal timing of administration require further investigation. We aimed to assess whether pre-procedural administration of rectal indometacin in all patients is more effective than post-procedural use in only high-risk patients to prevent post-ERCP pancreatitis.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, single-blinded, randomised controlled trial at six centres in China. Eligible patients with native papilla undergoing ERCP were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio (with a computer-generated list) to universal pre-procedural indometacin or post-procedural indometacin in only high-risk patients, with stratification by trial centres and block size of ten. In the universal indometacin group, all patients received a single dose (100 mg) of rectal indometacin within 30 min before ERCP. In the risk-stratified, post-procedural indometacin group, only patients at predicted high risk received rectal indometacin, immediately after ERCP. Investigators, but not patients, were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was overall ocurrence of post-ERCP pancreatitis. The analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02002650.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 15, 2013, and Sept 21, 2015, 2600 patients were randomly assigned to universal, pre-procedural indometacin (n=1297) or risk-stratified, post-procedural indometacin (n=1303). Overall, post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 47 (4%) of 1297 patients assigned to universal indometacin and 100 (8%) of 1303 patients assigned to risk-stratified indometacin (relative risk 0·47; 95% CI 0·34-0·66; p<0·0001). Post-ERCP pancreatitis occurred in 18 (6%) of 305 high-risk patients in the universal group and 35 (12%) of 281 high-risk patients in the risk-stratified group (p=0·0057). Post-ERCP pancreatitis was also less frequent in average-risk patients in the universal group (3% [29/992]), in which they received indometacin, than in the risk-stratified group (6% [65/1022]), in which they did not receive the drug (p=0·0003). Other than pancreatitis, adverse events occurred in 41 (3%; two severe) patients in the universal indometacin group and 48 (4%; one severe) patients in the risk-stratified group. The most common adverse events were biliary infection (22 [2%] patients vs 33 [3%] patients) and gastrointestinal bleeding (13 [1%] vs ten [1%]).

INTERPRETATION

Compared with a risk-stratified, post-procedural strategy, pre-procedural administration of rectal indometacin in unselected patients reduced the overall occurrence of post-ERCP pancreatitis without increasing risk of bleeding. Our results favour the routine use of rectal indometacin in patients without contraindications before ERCP.

FUNDING

National Key Technology R&D Program, National Natural Science Foundation of China.