Endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers: an evidence-based approach based on meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

Endoscopic management and outcomes of pregnant women hospitalized for nonvariceal upper GI bleeding: a nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Upper GI endoscopy has an important diagnostic and therapeutic role in the management of nonvariceal upper GI bleeding (NVUGB).

OBJECTIVE

To characterize nationwide patterns of utilization of upper GI endoscopy in pregnant women with NVUGB and to assess health outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Participating hospitals from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 1998-2007.

PATIENTS

Pregnant and age-matched nonpregnant women admitted for NVUGB.

INTERVENTION

The study population was classified as pregnant women with NVUGB (n = 1210) and nonpregnant women with NVUGB (n = 6050).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Rate of upper GI endoscopy, maternal mortality, fetal death/complications, and premature delivery.

RESULTS

Pregnant women were less likely than nonpregnant women to undergo upper GI endoscopy (26% vs 69%; P < .0001) even after adjustment for comorbidities, transfusion requirement, and the presence of hypovolemic shock (adjusted odds ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.22). Among those who underwent endoscopy, pregnant women were less likely to undergo the procedure within 24 hours of admission (50% vs 57%; P = .02). Mortality was lower among pregnant women compared with nonpregnant women (0% vs 0.6%; P = .006). In comparing outcomes between those who did and did not undergo endoscopy, there was no difference in fetal loss (0.2% vs 0.6%), fetal distress/complications (2.7% vs 2.6%), or premature delivery (7.3% vs 6.4%).

LIMITATIONS

The study was based on administrative data.

CONCLUSION

A conservative nonendoscopic approach is common in the management of pregnant women with NVUGB and is not associated with worse maternal or fetal outcomes. Upper GI endoscopy is, however, safe when judiciously implemented in the actively bleeding patient.

Intensive care management of children with acute liver failure

Acute liver failure is an uncommon condition associated with multi organ involvement, high morbidity and mortality. Etiology of acute liver failure varies with age and geographical location. Most cases of acute liver failure in India are due to infectious causes predominantly viral hepatitis. A significant group with indeterminate causation remains, despite careful investigation. The etiology of acute liver failure in infants is largely metabolic. The mainstay of management is supportive care in an intensive care unit. Monitoring of clinical and biochemical parameters is done frequently until the patient becomes stable. Mortality is predominantly due to raised intracranial pressure, infections and multi-organ failure. Liver transplant is an important life saving procedure for children with acute liver failure.

The pharmacological therapy of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

The modern management of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding includes, in selected patients, the performance of timely multimodal endoscopic hemostasis followed by profound acid suppression. This article discusses the available data on the use of antisecretory regimens in the management of patients with bleeding peptic ulcers, which are a major cause of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, and briefly addresses other medications used in this acute setting. The most important clinically relevant data are presented, favoring fully published articles.

Acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review recent literature (2009-2010) on acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is a decreasing trend in the incidence and hospitalization for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage worldwide, with significant improvement in rebleeding and mortality. One study showed that Glasgow-Blatchford score was superior to Rockall score in predicting the need of intervention or death. None of those categorized as low risk required any intervention. Another database research from United States demonstrated that those managed as outpatients upon clinician decision had 6.3% mortality. Recent meta-analysis demonstrated that epinephrine injection should be used in combination with one other modality for hemostasis in bleeding ulcers, whereas thermal, sclerosant, clips and thrombin/fibrin glue appeared to be effective alone. Despite meta-analysis showing that second look endoscopy with thermal therapy reduced rebleeding, international consensus from experts recommended proton pump inhibitor infusion as the preferred strategy to prevent ulcer rebleeding.

SUMMARY

Epidemiological studies worldwide confirmed reduction in the incidence and improvement in clinical outcomes for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients categorized as low risk may be managed as outpatients. Endoscopic therapy remained the mainstay of ulcer hemostasis and high dose proton pump inhibitor infusion should be employed to prevent rebleeding.

[Classification and management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding]

The upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains the most frequent emergency in gastroenterology. Due to the different therapeutic approach a distinction between the variceal and the non-variceal bleeding has been established. A risk assessment for the individual patient is crucial for timing of the endoscopic procedure as well as for the estimation of prognosis. This review gives an overview on modern therapeutic techniques for both, variceal and non-variceal bleeding highlighting on success rates but also on potential complications of the different therapeutic interventions.

Improved characterization of visible vessels in bleeding ulcers by using magnification endoscopy: results of a pilot study

BACKGROUND

Not all exposed vessels carry the same risk of recurrent bleeding, and sometimes endoscopic therapy may not be warranted in the setting of profound acid inhibition therapy.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the role of magnification endoscopy (ME) in improving the characterization of exposed vessels in ulcer hemorrhage.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

Single-center teaching hospital.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Diagnostic accuracy and safety of ME in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients were studied. Exposed vessels were initially categorized as high risk (protuberant, translucent, or pale) in 25 and low risk (nonprotruding through the ulcer floor, pigmented, or dark red) in 18 cases. ME was subsequently performed, and the operator was asked to reclassify the vessel into 1 of these 2 categories. A magnified view provided a clear image of the vessel and allowed visualization of the artery, the site of rupture, and the presence of a clot plugging the hole. In 6 cases previously categorized as low risk, ME clearly showed the 2 ends of the vessel, the longitudinal tear in the vessel wall, and a protuberant aspect that was not seen with standard view. The lesion was then reclassified as high risk (diagnostic gain 33%). The mean procedure time for ME inspection was 7 +/- 4 minutes. No complications occurred.

LIMITATIONS

Absence of controls.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with peptic ulcer bleeding and exposed vessels, ME allows clear visualization of the vessel wall and provides detailed clues to further characterize the lesion.

Current status of endoscopic management for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Endoscopic hemostasis is widely performed for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding. As the aged Japanese population rapidly increases, the number of patients experiencing complications increases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the recent results of endoscopic hemostasis for nonvariceal UGI bleeding. A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent endoscopic procedures for nonvariceal UGI bleeding was performed. We performed 223 endoscopic procedures on 217 patients between January 1995 and July 2000, and 238 endoscopic procedures on 236 patients between January 2006 and September 2009 at the Kyoto Second Red Cross Hospital. We divided the patients into the 1995-2000 group and the 2006-2009 group. Patient characteristics, hemostasis methods chosen, rates of temporary hemostasis and rebleeding, and mortality were analyzed. There were many serious and actively bleeding cases in the 2006-2009 group (P < 0.001). The endoclip method and intravenous proton pump inhibitor were mainly used in the 2006-2009 group compared with the drug-injection method and intravenous H2 receptor antagonist in the 1995-2000 group (P < 0.001). Through these treatments, the two groups were able to obtain similar treatment outcomes. Through the progress of endoscopic management we obtained similar satisfactory results in the 2006-2009 group, which had multiple complicated cases, compared to the 1995-2000 group.

Methodology for randomized trials of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: recommendations from an international consensus conference

The aim of this document is to provide a methodological framework for the design, performance, analysis, interpretation, and communication of randomized trials that assess management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Literature searches were performed and an iterative process with electronic and face-to-face meetings was used to achieve consensus among panel members as part of an International Consensus Conference on Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding. Recommendations of the panel include the following. Randomized trials must explicitly state their primary hypothesis. A nonmanipulable randomization schedule with concealed allocation should be used. Stratification (e.g., for age and stigmata of hemorrhage) may be considered, especially in smaller studies. The patient and personnel providing care or recording information should be blinded. Inclusion criteria should be overt bleeding with endoscopy performed within 24 h or less. One type of lesion (e.g., ulcer) should be studied with stigmata to be included predefined. Use of placebo/no therapy vs. active controls depends on current standard practice. Standardizing study and key non-study interventions should ensure uniform provision of interventions. Criteria for repeat endoscopy and subsequent interventions should be predefined. The primary end point should be further bleeding (persistent and recurrent bleeding) with primary assessment at 7 days; mortality, with primary assessment at 30 days, would be appropriate in very large trials. Sample size calculation based on assumptions regarding primary end point results with regard to study intervention and control must be provided, and all patients enrolled must be accounted for. In general, the primary population for analysis is all patients randomized, although a per-protocol population may be used if this is the more conservative approach (e.g., equivalence study).

Endoscopic hemostasis techniques for upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: A review

Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) is an urgent disease that is often encountered in daily medical practice. Endoscopic hemostasis is currently indispensable for the treatment of UGIH. Initially, when UGIH is suspected, a cause of UGIH is presumed from the medical interview and physical findings. After ample primary treatment, urgent endoscopy is performed. Many methods of endoscopic hemostasis are in wide use, including hemoclip, injection and thermo-coagulation methods. Although UGIH develops from a wide variety of diseases, such as esophageal varices and gastric and duodenal ulcer, hemostasis is almost always possible. Identification of the causative diseases, primary treatment and characteristic features of endoscopic hemostasis are needed to allow appropriate treatment.

How evidence-based are current guidelines for managing patients with peptic ulcer bleeding?

Current guidelines for managing ulcer bleeding state that patients with major stigmata should be managed by dual endoscopic therapy (injection with epinephrine plus a thermal or mechanical modality) followed by a high dose intravenous infusion of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). This paper aims to review and critically evaluate evidence supporting the purported superiority of a continuous infusion over less intensive regimens of PPIs administration and the need for adding a second hemostatic endoscopic procedure to epinephrine injection. Systematic searches of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane library were performed. There is strong evidence for an incremental benefit of PPIs over H2-receptor antagonists or placebo for the outcome of patients with peptic ulcer bleeding following endoscopic hemostasis. However, the benefit of PPIs is unrelated to either the dosage (intensive vs standard regimen) or the route of administration (intravenous vs oral). There is significant heterogeneity among the 15 studies that compared epinephrine with epinephrine plus a second modality, which might preclude the validity of reported summary estimates. Studies without second look endoscopy plus re-treatment of re-bleeding lesions showed a significant benefit of adding a second endoscopic modality for hemostasis, while studies with second-look and re-treatment showed equal efficacy between endoscopic mono and dual therapy. Inconclusive experimental evidence supports the current recommendation of the use of dual endoscopic hemostatic means and infusion of high-dose PPIs as standard therapy for patients with bleeding peptic ulcers. Presently, the combination of epinephrine monotherapy with standard doses of PPIs constitutes an appropriate treatment for the majority of patients.

Refractory peptic ulcer disease

Refractory PUD is a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. Optimal management of severe or refractory PUD requires a multidisciplinary team approach, using primary care providers, gastroenterologists, and general surgeons. Medical management has become the cornerstone of therapy. Identification and eradication of H pylori infection combined with acid reduction regimens can heal ulceration and also prevent recurrence. Severe, intractable or recurrent PUD and associated complications mandates a careful and methodical evaluation and management strategy to determine the potential etiologies and necessary treatment (medical or surgical) required.

The role of proton pump inhibitors in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Pre-endoscopic administration of PPIs in patients with nonvariceal upper GI bleeding is still of controversial efficacy. It downstages the severity of the endoscopic signs of recent bleeding and may reduce the requirement for endoscopic hemostatic therapy at index endoscopy. However, there is no evidence of an effect on mortality, rebleeding, or surgical intervention rates. In contrast, the efficacy of PPIs in endoscopically diagnosed peptic ulcer bleeding is supported by high-quality evidence from numerous RCTs and meta-analyses of RCTs. PPIs compared with H2RAs or placebo consistently reduce rebleeding rates regardless of dose, route of administration, application or not of endoscopic hemostatic treatment, and geographic location. Surgical intervention rates and the need for further endoscopic hemostatic treatment are also reduced by PPI treatment, although the results are not as robust as those for rebleeding. There is no evidence of an overall effect of PPI treatment on all-cause mortality. However, all-cause mortality is reduced among patients with high-risk endoscopic signs and among trials that had been conducted in Asia. The optimal dose and route of PPI administration has yet to be determined.