National audit of the use of surgery and radiological embolization after failed endoscopic haemostasis for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

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

BACKGROUND

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common gastroenterological emergency associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is currently recommended as the gold standard modality for both diagnosis and treatment. As historically played a limited role in the diagnosis of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, multidetector-row computed tomography angiography is emerging as a promising tool in the diagnosis of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, especially for severe cases. However, to date, evidence concerning the role of multidetector-row computed tomography angiography in the non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding diagnosis is still lacking.

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Surgical Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

The use of surgery in managing upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding has rapidly diminished secondary to advances in our understanding of the pathologies that underlie upper GI bleeding, pharmaceutical treatments for peptic ulcer disease, and endoscopic procedures used to gain hemostasis. A surgeon must work collaboratively with gastroenterologist and interventional radiologist to determine when, and what kind of, surgery is appropriate for the patient with upper GI bleeding.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Unusual case of retroperitoneal hematoma and duodenal ulcerative bleeding after nephrectomy: Case report

RATIONALE

Retroperitoneal hematomas are relatively common in patients undergoing nephrectomy. Herein, we report an unusual case involving a giant retroperitoneal hematoma and subsequent duodenal ulcerative bleeding following a radical nephrectomy.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 77-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital for lower back pain, and she had severe right hydronephrosis and a urinary tract infection.

DIAGNOSES

The patient was diagnosed and confirmed as high-grade urothelial carcinoma.

INTERVENTIONS

After ineffective conservative treatments, a right radical nephrectomy and ureteral stump resection were performed. The patient received proton pump inhibitors to prevent stress ulcer formation and bleeding. On the first day post-surgery, she had normal gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy findings. On the second day post-surgery, abdominal computed tomography revealed a retroperitoneal hematoma. Notably, 14 days post-surgery, massive GI bleeding occurred, and GI endoscopy identified an almost perforated ulcer in the bulbar and descending duodenum.

OUTCOMES

The patient died on day 15 after surgery.

LESSONS

Duodenal ulceration and bleeding might occur following a retroperitoneal hematoma in patients treated with nephrectomy. Timely intervention may prevent duodenal ulcers and complications, and thus could be a promising life-saving intercession.

Preclinical study of a novel ingestible bleeding sensor for upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a life-threatening condition that necessitates early identification and intervention and is associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and socioeconomic burden. However, several diagnostic challenges remain regarding risk stratification and the optimal timing of endoscopy. The PillSense System is a noninvasive device developed to detect blood in patients with UGIB in real time. This study aimed to assess the safety and performance characteristics of PillSense using a simulated bleeding model.

METHODS

A preclinical study was performed using an in vivo porcine model (14 animals). Fourteen PillSense capsules were endoscopically placed in the stomach and blood was injected into the stomach to simulate bleeding. The safety and sensitivity of blood detection and pill excretion were also investigated.

RESULTS

All the sensors successfully detected the presence or absence of blood. The minimum threshold was 9% blood concentration, with additional detection of increasing concentrations of up to 22.5% blood. All the sensors passed naturally through the gastrointestinal tract.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the ability of the PillSense System sensor to detect UGIB across a wide range of blood concentrations. This ingestible device detects UGIB in real time and has the potential to be an effective tool to supplement the current standard of care. These favorable results will be further investigated in future clinical studies.

Challenges of Anticoagulant Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation-Focus on Gastrointestinal Bleeding

The rising prevalence and the complexity of atrial fibrillation (AF) pose major clinical challenges. Stroke prevention is accompanied by non-negligible risks, making anticoagulant treatment an ongoing challenge for the clinician. Current guidelines recommend direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) over warfarin for stroke prevention in most AF patients, mainly due to the ease of their use. However, assessing the bleeding risk in patients receiving oral anticoagulants remains-particularly in the case of DOACs-highly challenging. Using dose-adjusted warfarin increases threefold the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Although the overall bleeding risk appears to be lower, the use of DOACs has been associated with an increased risk of GIB compared to warfarin. Accurate bleeding (including GIB-specific) risk scores specific for DOACs remain to be developed. Until then, the assessment of bleeding risk factors remains the only available tool, although the extent to which each of these factors contributes to the risk of bleeding is unknown. In this paper, we aim to provide a comprehensive review of the bleeding risk associated with oral anticoagulant therapy in AF patients, with a highlight on the latest insights into GIB associated with oral anticoagulation; we emphasize questions that remain to be answered; and we identify hotspots for future research.

Peri-Ulcerative Mucosal Inflammation Appearance is an Independent Risk Factor for 30-Day Rebleeding in Patients with Gastric Ulcer Bleeding: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Aim

The aim of this study was to identify clinical endoscopic indicators related to peri-ulcerative mucosal inflammation and to analyze whether the degree of peri-ulcerative mucosal inflammation appearance is an independent risk factor for gastric ulcer rebleeding.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study that included patients with gastric ulcer bleeding who were hospitalized at three medical centers in China from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2019. Ulcer rebleeding that occurred within 30 days of successful initial hemostasis was analyzed to determine whether this event was related to the degree of peri-ulcerative mucosal inflammation appearance or other mucosal inflammation-related factors.

Results

We enrolled 1111 patients and determined that GBS-Rebleeding-ROC (P<0.001), age (P=0.01), use of NSAIDs (P=0.001), bile reflux (P<0.001), and Helicobacter pylori (P<0.001) are all risk factors for peri-ulcerative mucosal inflammation appearance. Through multivariate analysis, we determined that severe peri-ulcerative mucosal inflammation appearance (P=0.002) was an independent risk factor for ulcer rebleeding within 30 days. Finally, we developed a risk assessment model using factors associated with mucosal inflammation that may be useful for early prediction of rebleeding.

Conclusion

The risk factors for peri-ulcerative mucosal inflammation appearance were identified. Severe peri-ulcerative mucosal inflammation appearance is an independent risk factor for ulcer rebleeding.

Over-the-scope-clips versus standard treatment in high-risk patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a randomised controlled trial (STING-2)

OBJECTIVE

Acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is managed by standard endoscopic combination therapy, but a few cases remain difficult and carry a high risk of persistent or recurrent bleeding. The aim of our study was to compare first-line over-the-scope-clips (OTSC) therapy with standard endoscopic treatment in these selected patients.

DESIGN

We conducted a prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre study (NCT03331224). Patients with endoscopic evidence of acute NVUGIB and high risk of rebleeding (defined as complete Rockall Score ≥7) were included. Primary endpoint was clinical success defined as successful endoscopic haemostasis without evidence of recurrent bleeding.

RESULTS

246 patients were screened and 100 patients were finally randomised (mean of 5 cases/centre and year; 70% male, 30% female, mean age 78 years; OTSC group n=48, standard group n=52). All but one case in the standard group were treated with conventional clips. Clinical success was 91.7% (n=44) in the OTSC group compared with 73.1% (n=38) in the ST group (p=0.019), with persistent bleeding occurring in 0 vs 6 in the OTSC versus standard group (p=0.027), all of the latter being successfully managed by rescue therapy with OTSC. Recurrent bleeding was observed in four patients (8.3%) in the OTSC group and in eight patients (15.4%) in the standard group (p=0.362).

CONCLUSION

OTSC therapy appears to be superior to standard treatment with clips when used by trained physicians for selected cases of primary therapy of NVUGIB with high risk of rebleeding. Further studies are necessary with regards to patient selection to identify subgroups benefiting most from OTSC haemostasis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03331224.

Prophylactic transcatheter angiographic embolization reduces Forrest IIa ulcer rebleeding: A retrospective study

The application of transcatheter angiographic embolization (TAE) is controversial in the treatment of ulcer bleeding. This study aims to determine rebleeding risk factors and evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic TAE (p-TAE) following endoscopic hemostasis in rebleeding prevention of Forrest lla ulcers.The medical records of Forrest lla ulcer patients who underwent endoscopic hemostasis (E group) and endoscopic hemostasis plus p-TAE (E + p-TAE group) in West China Hospital from May 2009 to May 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Baseline characteristics, clinical efficacy, and rebleeding risk factors were analyzed.As a result, a total of 102 patients were included, with 75 and 27 patients in E and E + p-TAE group, respectively. Most of the baseline data in E and E + p-TAE group were similar except for the proportion of protruded non-bleeding visible vessel (NBVV) (E group vs E + p-TAE group, 50.7% vs 74.1%, P = .035). The rebleeding rate of E + p-TAE group (3.7%) was significantly lower than E group (24.0%) (P = .02). The protruded NBVV (OR: 6.896, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.532-30.642, P = .01) and employment of p-TAE (OR: 0.038, 95% CI: 0.003-0.448, P = .009) were identified as independent risk factors for Forrest IIa ulcer rebleeding. Additionally, log-rank test indicated the rebleeding occurrence was greatly reduced by p-TAE in patients with protruded NBVVs (P = .006).In conclusion, the protruded NBVV and employment of p-TAE were the independent risk factors tightly associated with rebleeding of Forrest IIa ulcer. P-TAE following endoscopic hemostasis could effectively prevent Forrest IIa ulcer from rebleeding.

Bleeding Duodenal Ulcer: Strategies in High-Risk Ulcers

BACKGROUND

Acute peptic ulcer bleeding is still a major reason for hospital admission. Especially the management of bleeding duodenal ulcers needs a structured therapeutic approach due to the higher morbidity and mortality compared to gastric ulcers. Patient with these bleeding ulcers are often in a high-risk situation, which requires multidisciplinary treatment.

SUMMARY

This review provides a structured approach to modern management of bleeding duodenal ulcers and elucidates therapeutic practice in high-risk situations. Initial management including pharmacologic therapy, risk stratification, endoscopy, surgery, and transcatheter arterial embolization are reviewed and their role in the management of bleeding duodenal ulcers is critically discussed. Additionally, a future perspective regarding prophylactic therapeutic approaches is outlined.

KEY MESSAGES

Beside pharmacotherapeutic and endoscopic advances, bleeding management of high-risk duodenal ulcers is still a challenge. When bleeding persists or rebleeding occurs and the gold standard endoscopy fails, surgical and radiological procedures are indicated to manage ulcer bleeding. Surgical procedures are performed to control hemorrhage, but they are still associated with a higher morbidity and a longer hospital stay. In the meantime, transcatheter arterial embolization is recommended as an alternative to surgery and more often replaces surgery in the management of failed endoscopic hemostasis. Future studies are needed to improve risk stratification and therefore enable a better selection of high-risk ulcers and optimal treatment. Additionally, the promising approach of prophylactic embolization in high-risk duodenal ulcers has to be further investigated to reduce rebleeding and improve outcomes in these patients.

Pre-endoscopic intravenous proton pump inhibitors therapy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective, multicentre study

BACKGROUND/AIM

The indiscriminate use of high-dose, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) infusion in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) patients to reduce the rate of peptic ulcers with high-risk stigmata (HRS) has been questioned. We evaluated the prevalence of HRS on peptic ulcer and non-ulcer lesions in patients receiving or not receiving pre-endoscopic PPI therapy.

METHODS

Data of consecutive UGIB patients observed in 50 Italian centres were analysed. The prevalence of both HRS on peptic ulcers and active bleeding on non-ulcer lesions between patients treated or not treated with PPI were compared. Multivariate analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1,792 (69.8%) out of 2,566 patients received PPI therapy. Prevalence of HRS on ulcers was 51.8% and 53.4% (P = 0.58) in treated and not treated patients, respectively, and the rate of endoscopic therapy did not differ between groups. Prevalence of non-ulcer bleeding lesions was higher in patients treated than in those not treated with PPI (18.7% vs 10.6%; P = 0.023). At multivariate analysis, PPI therapy (OR: 1.16, 95% CI = 0.82-1.64; P = 0.4) was not an independent factor affecting HRS prevalence, which was inversely correlated with timing to endoscopy (OR: 0.85, 95% CI = 0.76-0.95; P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data failed to detect a significant role of pre-endoscopic PPI therapy in decreasing prevalence of HRS and need for endoscopic treatment in bleeding patients with either peptic ulcer or non-ulcer lesions.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Endoscopic Therapies for Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Update is to review the available evidence and best practice advice statements regarding the use of endoscopic therapies in treating patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

METHODS

This expert review was commissioned and approved by the AGA Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. This review is framed around the 10 best practice advice points agreed upon by the authors, which reflect landmark and recent published articles in this field. This expert review also reflects the experiences of the authors who are gastroenterologists with extensive experience in managing and teaching others to treat patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Endoscopic therapy should achieve hemostasis in the majority of patients with NVUGIB. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Initial management of the patient with NVUGIB should focus on resuscitation, triage, and preparation for upper endoscopy. After stabilization, patients with NVUGIB should undergo endoscopy with endoscopic treatment of sites with active bleeding or high-risk stigmata for rebleeding. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Endoscopists should be familiar with the indications, efficacy, and limitations of currently available tools and techniques for endoscopic hemostasis, and be comfortable applying conventional thermal therapy and placing hemoclips. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Monopolar hemostatic forceps with low-voltage coagulation can be an effective alternative to other mechanical and thermal treatments for NVUGIB, particularly for ulcers in difficult locations or those with a rigid and fibrotic base. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Hemostasis using an over-the-scope clip should be considered in select patients with NVUGIB, in whom conventional electrosurgical coagulation and hemostatic clips are unsuccessful or predicted to be ineffective. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Hemostatic powders are a noncontact endoscopic option that may be considered in cases of massive bleeding with poor visualization, for salvage therapy, and for diffuse bleeding from malignancy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Hemostatic powder should be preferentially used as a rescue therapy and not for primary hemostasis, except in cases of malignant bleeding or massive bleeding with inability to perform thermal therapy or hemoclip placement. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Endoscopists should understand the risk of bleeding from therapeutic endoscopic interventions (eg, endoluminal resection and endoscopic sphincterotomy) and be familiar with the endoscopic tools and techniques to treat intraprocedural bleeding and minimize the risk of delayed bleeding. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: In patients with endoscopically refractory NVUGIB, the etiology of bleeding (peptic ulcer disease, unknown source, post surgical); patient factors (hemodynamic instability, coagulopathy, multi-organ failure, surgical history); risk of rebleeding; and potential adverse events should be taken into consideration when deciding on a case-by-case basis between transcatheter arterial embolization and surgery. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Prophylactic transcatheter arterial embolization of high-risk ulcers after successful endoscopic therapy is not encouraged.

Management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an update for the general physician

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleed (AUGIB) is one of the most common medical emergencies in the UK, with roughly one presentation every 6 min. Despite advances in therapeutics and endoscopy provision, mortality following AUGIB over the last two decades has remained high, with over 9,000 deaths annually in the UK; consequently, several national bodies have published UK-relevant guidelines. Despite this, the 2015 UK National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death in AUGIB highlighted variations in practice, raised concerns regarding suboptimal patient care and released a series of recommendations. This review paper incorporates the latest available evidence and UK-relevant guidelines to summarise the optimal pre-endoscopic, endoscopic, and post-endoscopic approach to and management of non-variceal and variceal AUGIB that will be of practical value to both general physicians and gastroenterologists.

Is there still a role for the surgeon in the management of gastrointestinal bleeding ?

Modern investigation of gastrointestinal bleeds allows for reliable source identification in most cases. Current treatment algorithms utilise therapeutic endoscopy or interventional radiology and surgery now plays a limited role in the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeds. Approximately 2-4% of patients admitted with GI bleeds, however, require surgery to control their haemorrhage.

Embolization of Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Complicated by Bowel Ischemia

Over the past three decades, transcatheter arterial embolization has become the first-line therapy for the management of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding refractory to endoscopic hemostasis. Overall, transcatheter arterial interventions have high technical and clinical success rates. This review will focus on patient presentation and technical considerations as predictors of complications from transcatheter arterial embolization in the management of acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

Endoscopic management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Endoscopic therapy is the mainstay of treatment for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). Injection plus mechanical or thermal therapy continues to be the most widely used option. New endoscopic devices such as the use of an inert powder or a new class of over-the-scope clip system have demonstrated encouraging results as a rescue therapy for difficult hemostasis. Emerging data suggest that Doppler ultrasound-guided endoscopic therapy may improve the outcome of peptic ulcer bleeding. This review sumarizes the recent advances in the management of NVUGIB. With increasing use of anti-platelet agents and anti-coagulants, the management of NVUGIB in patients on anti-thrombotic therapy is also discussed.

Comparative outcomes in patients with ulcer- vs non-ulcer-related acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the United Kingdom: a nationwide cohort of 4474 patients

BACKGROUND

Outcomes after Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) have historically focused on ulcer-related causes. Little is known regarding non-ulcer bleeding, the most common cause of NVUGIB.

AIM

To compare outcomes between ulcer- and non-ulcer-related NVUGIB and explore whether these could be explained by differences in baseline characteristics, bleeding severity or processes of care.

METHODS

Analysis of 4474 patients with NVUGIB from 212 United Kingdom hospitals as part of a nationwide audit. Logistic regression models were used to adjust for baseline characteristics, bleeding severity and processes of care.

RESULTS

1682 patients had ulcer-related and 2792 patients had non-ulcer-related bleeding. Those with ulcer-related bleeding were older (median age 73 vs 69, P < 0.001), less likely to have been taking a PPI (18% vs 32%, P < 0.001), more likely to have been taking aspirin (40% vs 27%, P < 0.001) and present with shock (43% vs 32%, P < 0.001). Furthermore, those with ulcer-related bleeding were more likely to receive blood transfusion (66% vs 39%, P < 0.001), PPI infusion (27% vs 5%, P < 0.001) and endoscopic therapy (37% vs 8%, P < 0.001). Overall, ulcer-related bleeding had higher odds of in-hospital mortality (OR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.21-1.96, P < 0.0001), rebleeding (OR: 2.08; 95% CI: 1.73-2.51, P < 0.0001) and need for surgical/radiologic intervention (OR: 2.64; 95% CI: 1.85-3.77, P < 0.0001). The associations disappeared after adjustment for bleeding severity, whereas adjustment for patient characteristics or process of care factors had no impact.

CONCLUSION

Patients with ulcer-related NVUGIB bleeding have worse outcomes than those with non-ulcer-related NVUGIB bleeding, which is due to more severe bleeding.

Transcatheter arterial embolization versus surgery for refractory non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a meta-analysis

Background

Nowadays, very few patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding fail endoscopic hemostasis (refractory NVUGIB). This subset of patients poses a clinical dilemma: should they be operated on or referred to transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE)?

Objectives

To carry out a systematic review of the literature and to perform a meta-analysis of studies that directly compare TAE and surgery in patients with refractory NVUGIB.

Materials and methods

We searched PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase. A combination of the MeSH terms “gastrointestinal bleeding”; “gastrointestinal hemorrhage”; “embolization”; “embolization, therapeutic”; and “surgery” were used ((“gastrointestinal bleeding” or “gastrointestinal hemorrhage”) and (“embolization” or “embolization, therapeutic”) and “surgery”)). The search was performed in June 2018. Studies were retrieved and relevant studies were identified after reading the study title and abstract. Bibliographies of the selected studies were also examined. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan software. Outcomes considered were all-cause mortality, rebleeding rate, complication rate, and the need for further intervention.

Results

Eight hundred fifty-six abstracts were found. Only 13 studies were included for a total of 1077 patients (TAE group 427, surgery group 650). All selected papers were non-randomized studies: ten were single-center and two were double-center retrospective comparative studies, while only one was a multicenter prospective cohort study. No comparative randomized clinical trial is reported in the literature.

Mortality. Pooled data (1077 patients) showed a tendency toward improved mortality rates after TAE, but this trend was not statistically significant (OD = 0.77; 95% CI 0.50, 1.18; P = 0.05; I² = 43% [random effects]). Significant heterogeneity was found among the studies.

Rebleeding rate. Pooled data (865 patients, 211 events) showed that the incidence of rebleeding was significantly higher for patients undergoing TAE (OD = 2.44; 95% CI 1.77, 3.36; P = 0.41; I² = 4% [fixed effects]).

Complication rate. Pooling of the data (487 patients, 206 events) showed a sharp reduction of complications after TAE when compared with surgery (OD = 0.45; 95% CI 0.30, 0.47; P = 0.24; I² = 26% [fixed effects]).

Need for further intervention. Pooled data (698 patients, 165 events) revealed a significant reduction of further intervention in the surgery group (OD = 2.13; 95% CI 1.21, 3.77; P = 0.02; I² = 56% [random effects]). A great degree of heterogeneity was found among the studies.

Conclusions

The present study shows that TAE is a safe and effective procedure; when compared to surgery, TAE exhibits a higher rebleeding rate, but this tendency does not affect the clinical outcome as shown by the comparison of mortality rates (slight drift toward lower mortality for patients undergoing TAE). The present study suggests that TAE could be a viable option for the first-line therapy of refractory NVUGIB and sets the foundation for the design of future randomized clinical trials.

Limitations

The retrospective nature of the majority of included studies leads to selection bias. Furthermore, the decision of whether to proceed with surgery or refer to TAE was made on a case-by-case basis by each attending surgeon. Thus, external validity is low. Another limitation involves the variability in etiology of the refractory bleeding. TAE techniques and surgical procedure also differ consistently between different studies. Frame time for mortality detection differs between the studies. These limitations do not impair the power of the present study that represents the largest and most recent meta-analysis currently available.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality with mortality rates as high as 14%. This document addresses the indications for imaging UGIB that is nonvariceal and unrelated to portal hypertension. The four variants are derived with respect to upper endoscopy. For the first three, it is presumed that upper endoscopy has been performed, with three potential initial outcomes: endoscopy reveals arterial bleeding source, endoscopy confirms UGIB without a clear source, and negative endoscopy. The fourth variant, "postsurgical and traumatic causes of UGIB; endoscopy contraindicated" is considered separately because upper endoscopy is not performed. When endoscopy identifies the presence and location of bleeding but bleeding cannot be controlled endoscopically, catheter-based arteriography with treatment is an appropriate next study. CT angiography (CTA) is comparable with angiography as a diagnostic next step. If endoscopy demonstrates a bleed but the endoscopist cannot identify the bleeding source, angiography or CTA can be typically performed and both are considered appropriate. In the event of an obscure UGIB, angiography and CTA have been shown to be equivalent in identifying the bleeding source; CT enterography may be an alternative to CTA to find an intermittent bleeding source. In the postoperative or traumatic setting when endoscopy is contraindicated, primary angiography, CTA, and CT with intravenous contrast are considered appropriate. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Bleeding gastric and duodenal ulcers: case-control study comparing angioembolization and surgery

OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety, efficacy and feasibility of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) and surgery in the treatment of bleeding gastric and duodenal ulcers (BGDUs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study group comprised patients receiving TAE or surgery for BGDUs after failed endoscopic hemostasis in Helsinki University Hospital (HUH) during 2000-2015. Hospital medical records provided study data. 30-d mortality and rebleeding rates were the primary outcomes. Postoperative complications, blood transfusion rate, and the durations of intensive care and hospital admissions were the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

During the study period, BGDUs lead to 1583 hospital admissions. TAE or surgery was necessary on 85 (5.4%) patients, 43 receiving surgery and 42 TAE. Out of 42, 16 received prophylactic TAE. Two underwent angiography and TAE to localize the bleeding. The remaining 24 received TAE for active or recurrent bleeding after endoscopy. The comparison of TAE (n = 24) and surgery (n = 43) included only patients with active or recurrent bleeding. Mortality rate was 12.5% after TAE and 25.6% after surgery (p = 0.347). Rebleeding rate was 25% after TAE and 16.3% after surgery (p = 0.641). Postprocedural complications were less frequent after TAE than surgery (37.5 vs. 67.4%, p = 0.018). Other secondary outcomes did not differ. Out of 85 procedures, 14 (16.5%) took place between midnight and 8 a.m., all nighttime interventions being surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality and rebleeding rates did not differ between TAE and surgery. With less postoperative complications, TAE should be the preferred hemostatic method when endoscopy fails.

Transcatheter Arterial Embolization for Gastrointestinal Bleeding Secondary to Gastrointestinal Lymphoma

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) for gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding caused by GI lymphoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical records of 11 patients who underwent TAE for GI bleeding caused by GI lymphoma between 2001 and 2015 were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 20 TAE procedures were performed. On angiography, contrast extravasation, and both contrast extravasation and tumor staining were seen in 95 % (19/20) and 5 % (1/20) of the procedures, respectively. The most frequently embolized arteries were jejunal (n = 13) and ileal (n = 5) branches. Technical and clinical success rates were 100 % (20/20) and 27 % (3/11), respectively. The causes of clinical failure in eight patients were rebleeding at new sites. In four patients who underwent repeat angiography, the bleeding focus was new each time. Three patients underwent small bowel resection due to rebleeding after one (n = 2) or four (n = 1) times of TAEs. Another two patients underwent small bowel resection due to small bowel ischemia/perforation after three or four times of TAEs. The 30-day mortality rate was 18 % due to hypovolemic shock (n = 1) and multiorgan failure (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

Angiogram with TAE shows limited therapeutic efficacy to manage GI lymphoma-related bleeding due to high rebleeding at new sites. Although TAE can be an initial hemostatic measure, surgery should be considered for rebleeding due to possible bowel ischemic complication after repeated TAE procedures.

Old technique revisited with surgical innovation: complicated Mallory-Weiss tear with bleeding gastric ulcer exclusion

Mallory–Weiss tears (MWTs) rarely require surgical intervention. A 60-year-old female presented with massive hematemesis secondary to MWT and gastric ulceration. After failure of endoscopic management, an operative approach was embarked on, with a direct surgical hemostasis of the Mallory–Weiss tear and exclusion of the gastric ulcer. This exclusion strategy may be applicable for other patients with uncontrolled upper gastrointestinal bleeding in whom a simple repair would be difficult.

Upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: an update

Upper gastrointestinal (GI) haemorrhage is a common cause for admission to hospital and is associated with a mortality of around 10%. Prompt assessment and resuscitation are vital, as are risk stratification of the severity of bleeding, early involvement of the multidisciplinary team and timely access to endoscopy, preferably within 24 h. The majority of bleeds are due to peptic ulcers for which Helicobacter pylori and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents are the main risk factors. Although proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used before endoscopy, this is controversial. Pre-endoscopic risk stratification with the Glasgow Blatchford score is recommended as is the use of the Rockall score postendoscopy. Endoscopic therapy, with at least two haemostatic modalities, remains the mainstay of treating high-risk lesions and reduces rebleeding rates and mortality. High-dose PPI therapy after endoscopic haemostasis also reduces rebleeding rates and mortality. Variceal oesophageal haemorrhage is associated with a higher rebleeding rate and risk of death. Antibiotics and vasopressin analogues are advised in suspected variceal bleeding; however, endoscopic variceal band ligation remains the haemostatic treatment of choice. Balloon tamponade remains useful in the presence of torrential variceal haemorrhage or when endoscopy fails to secure haemostasis, and can be a bridge to further endoscopic attempts or placement of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. This review aims to provide an update on the latest evidence-based recommendations for the management of acute upper GI haemorrhage.

Diagnosis and therapy of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is defined as bleeding proximal to the ligament of Treitz in the absence of oesophageal, gastric or duodenal varices. The clinical presentation varies according to the intensity of bleeding from occult bleeding to melena or haematemesis and haemorrhagic shock. Causes of UGIB are peptic ulcers, Mallory-Weiss lesions, erosive gastritis, reflux oesophagitis, Dieulafoy lesions or angiodysplasia. After admission to the hospital a structured approach to the patient with acute UGIB that includes haemodynamic resuscitation and stabilization as well as pre-endoscopic risk stratification has to be done. Endoscopy offers not only the localisation of the bleeding site but also a variety of therapeutic measures like injection therapy, thermocoagulation or endoclips. Endoscopic therapy is facilitated by acid suppression with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. These drugs are highly effective but the best route of application (oral vs intravenous) and the adequate dosage are still subjects of discussion. Patients with ulcer disease are tested for Helicobacter pylori and eradication therapy should be given if it is present. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have to be discontinued if possible. If discontinuation is not possible, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in combination with PPI have the lowest bleeding risk but the incidence of cardiovascular events is increased.

Prophylactic Transcatheter Arterial Embolization After Successful Endoscopic Hemostasis in the Management of Bleeding Duodenal Ulcer

GOALS

The aim of this study was to demonstrate the new strategy of prophylactic transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) of the gastroduodenal artery after endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding duodenal ulcers.

BACKGROUND

TAE is a well-established method for the treatment of recurrent or refractory ulcer bleeding resistant to endoscopic intervention, which increasingly replaces surgical procedures. A new approach for improving outcome and reducing rebleeding episodes is the supplemental and prophylactic TAE after successful endoscopic hemostasis.

STUDY

This retrospective study included all patients (n=117) treated from 2008 to 2012 for duodenal ulcer bleeding. After initial endoscopic hemostasis, patients were assessed regarding their individual rebleeding risk. Patients with a low rebleeding risk (n=47) were conservatively treated, patients with a high risk for rebleeding (n=55) had prophylactic TAE of the gastroduodenal artery, and patients with endoscopically refractory ulcer bleeding received immediate TAE.

RESULTS

The technical success of prophylactic TAE was 98% and the clinical success was 87% of cases. Rebleeding occurred in 11% of patients with prophylactic TAE and was successfully treated with repeated TAE or endoscopy. The major complication rate was 4%. Surgery was necessary in only 1 prophylactic TAE patient (0.9%) during the whole study period. Mortality associated with ulcer bleeding was 4% in patients with prophylactic TAE.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic TAE in patients with duodenal ulcers at high risk for rebleeding was feasible, effective at preventing the need for surgery, and had low major complication rates. Given these promising outcomes, prophylactic TAE should be further evaluated as a preventative therapy in high-risk patients.

Management of anticoagulation in patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding represents the most common adverse event associated with the use of oral anticoagulant therapy. Due to increasing prescription of anticoagulants worldwide, gastroenterologists are more and more called to deal with bleeding patients taking these medications. Their management is challenging because several issues have to be taken into account, such as the severity of bleeding, the intensity of anticoagulation, the patient's thrombotic risk and endoscopy findings. The recent introduction into the marketplace of new direct oral anticoagulants, for whom specific reversal agents are still lacking, further contributes to make the decision-making process even more demanding. Available evidence on this topic is limited and practice guidelines by gastroenterology societies only marginally address key issues for clinicians, including when and how to reverse coagulopathy, the optimal timing of endoscopy and when and how to resume anticoagulation thereafter. The present paper reviews the evidence in the literature and provides practical algorithms to support clinicians in the management of patients on anticoagulants who present with acute gastrointestinal bleeding.

Endoscopic management of refractory gastrointestinal non-variceal bleeding using Histoacryl (N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate) glue

Background: Histoacryl glue (N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate) has well-established utility in the endoscopic management of gastrointestinal variceal bleeding. The role of Histoacryl glue in non-variceal bleeding is less clear, and there are few articles describing its use in this setting.

Methods: Six patients with intractable non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding were managed using injection of Histoacryl glue. All patients had previously failed conventional endostasis and/or interventional angioembolization and were not suitable for emergency salvage surgery due to serious comorbidities or unacceptable anaesthetic risk. An endoscopic Lipiodol-Histoacryl-Lipiodol sandwich injection technique was used in these patients. The clinical outcomes and complications were evaluated.

Results: There were four females and two males with a mean age of 55 years. Bleeding lesions included gastric ulcers (n = 2), duodenal ulcers (n = 2), duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) (n = 1) and rectal ulcers (n = 1). All patients had successful Histoacryl endostasis without the requirement for salvage surgery. There was no treatment-related morbidity and no mortality. Two patients had further bleeding after initial Histoacryl endostasis, which was successfully controlled with further endoscopic Histoacryl injection.

Conclusion: Histoacryl endostasis should be included in the treatment algorithm for refractory non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding.

Application of cyanoacrylate in difficult-to-arrest acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency. Although endoscopic treatment is effective in controlling non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, in cases of persistent bleeding radiological or surgical interventions are required. Application of cyanoacrylate for treatment of difficult-to-arrest non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is poorly investigated. We describe patients in whom cyanoacrylate for acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding was used to stop the bleeding after failure of conventional endoscopic treatment. Five patients were treated with cyanoacrylate application (injection and/or spraying) for persistent bleeding (duodenal ulcer in 3, gastric ulcer in 1 and gastric Dieulafoy's lesion in 1) despite conventional endoscopic therapies. Hemostasis was achieved in all patients (100%). One patient (20%) developed recurrent bleeding 4 days after initial treatment. No complications or adverse events attributed to the cyanoacrylate application during the follow-up period of 57 days were observed. Application of cyanoacrylate is a safe and effective method to achieve immediate hemostasis when conventional endoscopic treatment is unsuccessful. This technique is easy to perform and should be considered in cases of patients with difficult-to-arrest acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

[Upper gastrointestinal bleeding and haemorrhagic shock at the end of the holidays: pre-hospital and in-hospital management of a gastrointestinal emergency]

Upon returning from holidays, a 55-year-old patient presenting with melena and haemorrhagic shock was admitted to a University hospital after receiving first emergency medical care in a German InterCity train. In an interdisciplinary effort, haemodynamics were stabilised and the airway and respiratory function were secured. Under emergency care conditions the patient then underwent an emergency upper GI endoscopy where a spurting arterial upper gastrointestinal bleeding (Forrest 1a) was found. While the bleeding could not be controlled with endoscopic techniques, definitive haemostasis was achieved with a surgical laparotomy. While not commonly established for patients with severe GI bleeding, by spontaneous implementation of an interdisciplinary trauma room approach following established trauma algorithms the team was able to achieve stabilisation of vital functions and final control of bleeding in this highly unstable patient. Although the majority of upper gastrointestinal bleedings spontaneously cease, emergency care algorithms should be developed and implemented for patients with severe gastrointestinal bleedings in shock. Following the case vignette, we discuss a potential approach and develop an exemplary protocol for shock room management in this patient subgroup.

The risks and rewards of covariate adjustment in randomized trials: an assessment of 12 outcomes from 8 studies

Background

Adjustment for prognostic covariates can lead to increased power in the analysis of randomized trials. However, adjusted analyses are not often performed in practice.

Methods

We used simulation to examine the impact of covariate adjustment on 12 outcomes from 8 studies across a range of therapeutic areas. We assessed (1) how large an increase in power can be expected in practice; and (2) the impact of adjustment for covariates that are not prognostic.

Results

Adjustment for known prognostic covariates led to large increases in power for most outcomes. When power was set to 80% based on an unadjusted analysis, covariate adjustment led to a median increase in power to 92.6% across the 12 outcomes (range 80.6 to 99.4%). Power was increased to over 85% for 8 of 12 outcomes, and to over 95% for 5 of 12 outcomes. Conversely, the largest decrease in power from adjustment for covariates that were not prognostic was from 80% to 78.5%.

Conclusions

Adjustment for known prognostic covariates can lead to substantial increases in power, and should be routinely incorporated into the analysis of randomized trials. The potential benefits of adjusting for a small number of possibly prognostic covariates in trials with moderate or large sample sizes far outweigh the risks of doing so, and so should also be considered.

A systematic review of transarterial embolization versus emergency surgery in treatment of major nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Background

Emergency surgery or transarterial embolization (TAE) are options for the treatment of recurrent or refractory nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Surgery has the disadvantage of high rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Embolization has become more available and has the advantage of avoiding laparotomy in this often unfit and elderly population.

Objective

To carry out a systematic review and meta-analysis of all studies that have directly compared TAE with emergency surgery in the treatment of major upper gastrointestinal bleeding that has failed therapeutic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Methods

A literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Google Scholar was performed. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and rates of rebleeding. The secondary outcomes were length of stay and postoperative complications.

Results

A total of nine studies with 711 patients (347 who had embolization and 364 who had surgery) were analyzed. Patients in the TAE group were more likely to have ischemic heart disease (odds ratio [OR] =1.99; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33, 2.98; P=0.0008; I²=67% [random effects model]) and be coagulopathic (pooled OR =2.23; 95% CI: 1.29, 3.87; P=0.004; I²=33% [fixed effects model]). Compared with TAE, surgery was associated with a lower risk of rebleeding (OR =0.41; 95% CI: 0.22, 0.77; P<0.0001; I²=55% [random effects]). There was no difference in mortality (OR =0.70; 95% CI: 0.48, 1.02; P=0.06; I²=44% [fixed effects]) between TAE and surgery.

Conclusion

When compared with surgery, TAE had a significant increased risk of rebleeding rates after TAE; however, there were no differences in mortality rates. These findings are subject to multiple sources of bias due to poor quality studies. These findings support the need for a well-designed clinical trial to ascertain which technique is superior.

Multidisciplinary management strategies for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The modern management of acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is centred on endoscopy, with recourse to interventional radiology and surgery in refractory cases. The appropriate use of intervention to optimize outcomes is reviewed.

METHODS

A literature search was undertaken of PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials between January 1990 and April 2013 using validated search terms (with restrictions) relevant to upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

RESULTS

Appropriate and adequate resuscitation, and risk stratification using validated scores should be initiated at diagnosis. Coagulopathy should be corrected along with blood transfusions, aiming for an international normalized ratio of less than 2·5 to proceed with possible endoscopic haemostasis and a haemoglobin level of 70 g/l (excluding patients with severe bleeding or ischaemia). Prokinetics and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) can be administered while awaiting endoscopy, although they do not affect rebleeding, surgery or mortality rates. Endoscopic haemostasis using thermal or mechanical therapies alone or in combination with injection should be used in all patients with high-risk stigmata (Forrest I-IIb) within 24 h of presentation (possibly within 12 h if there is severe bleeding), followed by a 72-h intravenous infusion of PPI that has been shown to decrease further rebleeding, surgery and mortality. A second attempt at endoscopic haemostasis is generally made in patients with rebleeding. Uncontrolled bleeding should be treated with targeted or empirical transcatheter arterial embolization. Surgical intervention is required in the event of failure of endoscopic and radiological measures. Secondary PPI prophylaxis when indicated and Helicobacter pylori eradication are necessary to decrease recurrent bleeding, keeping in mind the increased false-negative testing rates in the setting of acute bleeding.

CONCLUSION

An evidence-based approach with multidisciplinary collaboration is required to optimize outcomes of patients presenting with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Refractory gastrointestinal bleeding: role of angiographic intervention

Although endoscopic hemostasis remains initial treatment modality for nonvariceal gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, severe bleeding despite endoscopic management occurs in 5% to 10% of the patients, requiring surgery or transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE). TAE is now considered the first-line therapy for massive GI bleeding refractory to endoscopic management. GI endoscopists need to be familiar with indications, principles, outcomes, and complications of TAE, as well as embolic materials available.

Adjusting for multiple prognostic factors in the analysis of randomised trials

Background

When multiple prognostic factors are adjusted for in the analysis of a randomised trial, it is unclear (1) whether it is necessary to account for each of the strata, formed by all combinations of the prognostic factors (stratified analysis), when randomisation has been balanced within each stratum (stratified randomisation), or whether adjusting for the main effects alone will suffice, and (2) the best method of adjustment in terms of type I error rate and power, irrespective of the randomisation method.

Methods

We used simulation to (1) determine if a stratified analysis is necessary after stratified randomisation, and (2) to compare different methods of adjustment in terms of power and type I error rate. We considered the following methods of analysis: adjusting for covariates in a regression model, adjusting for each stratum using either fixed or random effects, and Mantel-Haenszel or a stratified Cox model depending on outcome.

Results

Stratified analysis is required after stratified randomisation to maintain correct type I error rates when (a) there are strong interactions between prognostic factors, and (b) there are approximately equal number of patients in each stratum. However, simulations based on real trial data found that type I error rates were unaffected by the method of analysis (stratified vs unstratified), indicating these conditions were not met in real datasets. Comparison of different analysis methods found that with small sample sizes and a binary or time-to-event outcome, most analysis methods lead to either inflated type I error rates or a reduction in power; the lone exception was a stratified analysis using random effects for strata, which gave nominal type I error rates and adequate power.

Conclusions

It is unlikely that a stratified analysis is necessary after stratified randomisation except in extreme scenarios. Therefore, the method of analysis (accounting for the strata, or adjusting only for the covariates) will not generally need to depend on the method of randomisation used. Most methods of analysis work well with large sample sizes, however treating strata as random effects should be the analysis method of choice with binary or time-to-event outcomes and a small sample size.

Challenges in the management of acute peptic ulcer bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency worldwide, a major cause of which are bleeding peptic ulcers. Endoscopic treatment and acid suppression with proton-pump inhibitors are cornerstones in the management of the disease, and both treatments have been shown to reduce mortality. The role of emergency surgery continues to diminish. In specialised centres, radiological intervention is increasingly used in patients with severe and recurrent bleeding who do not respond to endoscopic treatment. Despite these advances, mortality from the disorder has remained at around 10%. The disease often occurs in elderly patients with frequent comorbidities who use antiplatelet agents, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and anticoagulants. The management of such patients, especially those at high cardiothrombotic risk who are on anticoagulants, is a challenge for clinicians. We summarise the published scientific literature about the management of patients with bleeding peptic ulcers, identify directions for future clinical research, and suggest how mortality can be reduced.