Comparison of scoring systems for the prediction of outcomes in patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a prospective study

Clinical and Biochemical Differences in Patients Having Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding on NSAIDs, Oral Anticoagulants, and Antiplatelet Therapy

Introduction: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is among the most common causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, accounting for major resource allocation and increasing incidence. This study aimed to evaluate the severity of non-variceal bleeding in patients at risk of bleeding through the use of NSAIDs, oral anticoagulants, and antiplatelet therapy. Material and Method: The study included 296 patients admitted in the Gastroenterology Department of the Municipal County Emergency University Hospital, Timisoara, between 01.01.2018 and 01.04.2020, and diagnosed via gastroscopy with non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding. The patients were divided among four groups based on their use of different drugs known to induce UGIB, i.e., aspirin and clopidogrel, NOACs, NSAIDs, and anti-vitamin K drugs, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed based on ANOVA one-way tests for continuous variables and Chi-square tests for categorical variables with pairwise comparisons based on Bonferroni adjusted significance tests. Results: The results showed several parameters having statistical significance among the different groups of patients. Patients on NOACs had statistically significant lower hemoglobin levels, lower hematocrit values, lower erythrocytes, lower RDW and higher fibrinogen levels compared to patients on VKA. Discussion: Surprisingly, the results from our study suggest that the use of NOACs was associated with a higher risk of bleeding when compared to VKA, which differs from the existing literature. Conclusions: One of the important factors causing upper non-variceal bleeding can be iatrogenic, either due to antiplatelet drugs or anticoagulants, to which NSAID treatment is additionally associated for various reasons. In our study, the use of NOACs seemed to have a more severe bleeding spectrum with higher morbidity compared to VKA.

Rebleeding in peptic ulcer bleeding - a nationwide cohort study of 19,537 patients

BACKGROUND

Rebleeding is a frequent complication of peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). The associated prognosis remains rather unclear because previous studies generally also included non-ulcer lesions.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify predictors for rebleeding; clarify the prognostic consequence of rebleeding; and develop a score for predicting rebleeding.

METHODS

Nationwide cohort study of consecutive patients presenting to hospital with PUB in Denmark from 2006-2014. Logistic regression analyses were used to identify predictors for rebleeding, evaluate the association between rebleeding and 30-day mortality, and develop a score to predict rebleeding. Patients with persistent bleeding were excluded.

RESULTS

Among 19,258 patients (mean age 74 years, mean ASA-score 2.4), 10.8% rebled, and 10.2% died. Strongest predictors for rebleeding were endoscopic high-risk stigmata of bleeding (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.12 [95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.91-2.36]), bleeding from duodenal ulcers (OR: 1.87 [95% CI: 1.69-2.08]), and presentation with hemodynamic instability (OR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.38-1.73]). Among patients with all three factors (7.9% of total), 24% rebled, 50% with rebleeding failed endoscopic therapy, and 23% died. Rebleeding was associated with increased mortality (OR: 2.04 [95% CI: 1.78-2.32]). We were unable to develop an accurate score to predict rebleeding.

CONCLUSION

Rebleeding occurs in ∼10% of patients with PUB and is overall associated with a two-fold increase in 30-day mortality. Patients with hemodynamic instability, duodenal ulcers, and high-risk endoscopic stigmata are at highest risk of rebleeding. When rebleeding occurs in such patients, consultation with surgery and/or interventional radiology should be obtained prior to repeat endoscopy.

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding: A comparison between variceal and nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a typical medical emergency, with an incidence of 84 to 160 cases per 100,000 individuals and a mortality rate of approximately 10%. This study aimed to identify all cases of UGIB hospitalized in a tertiary gastroenterology department, to identify possible predictive factors involved in rebleeding and mortality, potential associations between different elements and the severity of bleeding, and the differences between the upper digestive hemorrhage due to nonvariceal and variceal bleeding. This was an observational, retrospective study of patients with UGIB admitted to the tertiary Department of Gastroenterology between January 2013 and December 2020. A total of 1499 patients were enrolled in the study. One thousand four hundred and ninety-nine patients were hospitalized for 7 years with active upper digestive hemorrhage, 504 variceal bleeding, and 995 nonvariceal bleeding. When comparing variceal with nonvariceal bleeding, in nonvariceal bleeding, the mean age was higher, similar sex, higher mortality rate, higher rebleeding rate, and higher hemorrhagic shock rate. Endoscopy treatment was also performed more frequently in variceal bleeding than in nonvariceal bleeding. Severe anemia was found more frequently in patients with variceal bleeding. The mortality rate was 10% in the entire study group, which was not significantly different between the 2 batches. However, the rebleeding rate is higher in patients with variceal gastrointestinal bleeding.

Validation of the new ABC score for predicting 30-day mortality in gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND/AIM

The ABC score is a new pre-endoscopic scoring system that was recently developed to accurately predict one-month mortality in upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). We aim to validate this new score on a cohort of Lebanese patients treated in a tertiary care center and to compare it to currently existing scores.

METHODS

Adult patients admitted to the American University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC) with overt GIB between January 2013 and August 2020 were included. The area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves of the ABC score in predicting 30-day mortality was calculated using the SPSS software. Other optimal existing scores for predicting mortality (the Oakland score for lower GIB, the AIMS-65 and the Rockall scores for upper GIB)s were also assessed and compared to the ABC score.

RESULTS

A total of 310 patients were included in our study. For upper GIB, the ABC score showed good performance in predicting 30-day mortality (AUROC: 0.79), outperforming both the AIMS-65 score (AUROC 0.67, p < 0.001) and the Rockall score (AUROC: 0.62, p < 0.001). For lower GIB, the ABC score also had good performance which was comparable to the Oakland score (AUROC: 0.70 vs 0.56, p = 0.26).

CONCLUSION

In our cohort of patients, the ABC score demonstrated good performance in predicting 30-day mortality for patients with upper and lower GIB compared to other established risk scores, which may help guide management decisions. This simple and novel score provides valuable prognostic information for patients presenting with GIB and appears to be reproducible in different patient populations.

Prediction of in-hospital mortality after acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: cross-validation of several risk scoring systems

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify the clinical, biochemical, and endoscopic features associated with in-hospital mortality after acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB), focusing on cross-validation of the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), full Rockall score (RS), and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center Predictive Index (CSMCPI) scoring systems.

METHODS

Our prospective cross-sectional study included 156 patients with AUGIB. Several statistical approaches were used to assess the predictive accuracy of the scoring systems.

RESULTS

All three scoring systems were able to accurately predict in-hospital mortality (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] > 0.9); however, the multiple logistic model separated the presence of hemodynamic instability (state of shock) and the CSMCPI as the only significant predictive risk factors. In compliance with the overall results, the CSMCPI was consistently found to be superior to the other two systems (highest AUC, highest sensitivity and specificity, highest positive and negative predictive values, highest positive likelihood ratio, lowest negative likelihood ratio, and 1-unit increase in CSMCPI associated with 6.3 times higher odds of mortality), outperforming the GBS and full RS.

CONCLUSIONS

We suggest consideration of the CSMCPI as a readily available and reliable tool for accurately predicting in-hospital mortality after AUGIB, thus providing an essential backbone in clinical decision-making.

Risk Factor Analysis And Method Development For Predicting The Recurrence Of Gastroduodenal Ulcer Bleeding

Objective — To clarify clinical, laboratory and endoscopic signs of a high recurrence risk of gastroduodenal ulcer bleeding (GDUB) and to develop a multifactorial method for its prediction. Material and Methods — The research was completed over 2019-2020. The study took place in two stages. At the first stage, 409 patients with GDUB, who were treated at the emergency surgical department of Saratov City Clinical Hospital No. 6 from 1991 to 2000, were included in the study. During that time, endoscopic hemostasis therapy was used in a few cases, while modern antisecretory therapy has not yet been developed and carried out. Two groups of patients were compared: with recurrent bleeding (104 patients) and without recurrent bleeding (305 patients). At the second stage, a retrospective analysis of the outcomes of treating 126 patients with GDUB, cared for at the clinic from 2001 to 2009, was carried out. During this period of time, assistance for this pathology was the most complete and matched all current standards. The analysis included 63 patients with recurrent bleeding and 63 patients without recurrent bleeding. We conducted a comparative analysis of the developed method for predicting bleeding recurrence versus the classifications by J.A. Forrest (1974) and G.P. Giderim (1992) in our original modification. Results — At the first stage of the study, the most significant signs for predicting recurrent bleeding were identified as unstable hemodynamics, severity of blood loss, nature of vomiting, presence of concomitant pathology, state of the ulcer surface sensu J.A. Forrest; and localization, size and depth of the ulcer. We determined their informative value in assessing the risk of recurrent bleeding and developed a novel method of its prediction. Taken alone, each of nine predictive signs has a correlation, comparable in the magnitude with patient allocation into each group (based on the absolute value of gamma, ranging 0.49–0.66); the prediction accuracy is 60–74%, with a positive predictive value of 35-49%. The measure of the gamma relationship for splitting patients among groups by the original method based on nine features in conjunction with each other was -0.79 (p<0.001). Conclusion — Prediction of recurrent bleeding by one or two signs is inferior in informational content (although insignificantly) to the multifactorial method. The developed method for predicting the recurrence of ulcer bleeding from nine signs has an optimal ratio of sensitivity and specificity, which ensures a prediction accuracy of over 70% and a positive predictive value of 68.9%.

Prospective Comparison of the AIMS65 Score, Glasgow-Blatchford Score, and Rockall Score for Predicting Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Variceal and Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Background/Aims

This study aimed to determine the performance of the AIMS65 score (AIMS65), Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), and Rockall score (RS) in predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), and to compare the results between patients with nonvariceal UGIB (NVUGIB) and those with variceal UGIB (VUGIB).

Methods

We conducted a prospective observational study between March 2016 and December 2017. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was performed for all outcomes for comparison. The associations of all three scores with mortality were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

Of the total of 337 patients with UGIB, 267 patients (79.2%) had NVUGIB. AIMS65 was significantly associated (odds ratio [OR], 1.735; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.148–2.620), RS was marginally associated (OR, 1.225; 95% CI, 0.973–1.543), but GBS was not associated (OR, 1.017; 95% CI, 0.890–1.163) with mortality risk in patients with UGIB. However, all three scores accurately predicted all other outcomes (all p<0.05) except rebleeding (p>0.05). Only AIMS65 precisely predicted mortality, the need for blood transfusion and the composite endpoint (all p<0.05) in patients with VUGIB.

Conclusions

AIMS65 is superior to GBS and RS in predicting mortality in patients with UGIB, and also precisely predicts the need for blood transfusion and the composite endpoint in patients with VUGIB. No scoring system could satisfactorily predict rebleeding in all patients with UGIB.

Endoscopist's Judgment Is as Useful as Risk Scores for Predicting Outcome in Peptic Ulcer Bleeding: A Multicenter Study

Background: Guidelines recommend using prognostic scales for risk stratification in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. It remains unclear whether risk scores offer greater accuracy than clinical evaluation. Objective: Compare the diagnostic accuracy of the endoscopist’s judgment against different risk-scoring systems (Rockall, Glasgow–Blatchford, Baylor and the Cedars–Sinai scores) for predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). Methods: Between February 2006 and April 2010 we prospectively recruited 401 patients with peptic ulcer bleeding; 225 received endoscopic treatment. The endoscopist recorded his/her subjective assessment (“endoscopist judgment”) of the risk of rebleeding and death immediately after endoscopy for each patient. Independent evaluators calculated the different scores. Area under the receiver-operating-characteristics (ROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated for rebleeding and mortality. Results: The areas under ROC curve of the endoscopist’s clinical judgment for rebleeding (0.67–0.75) and mortality (0.84–0.9) were similar or even superior to the different risk scores in both the whole group and in patients receiving endoscopic therapy. Conclusions: The accuracy of the currently available risk scores for predicting rebleeding and mortality in PUB patients was moderate and not superior to the endoscopist’s judgment. More precise prognostic scales are needed.

Determinants of empiric transfusion in gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department

INTRODUCTION

Current guidelines for the management of GI bleeding (GIB) recommend restrictive transfusion triggers unless patients have shock or specific comorbidities. However, these studies may not be applicable to Emergency Department (ED) patients. Factors determining transfusion decisions in the ED are poorly understood. We compared baseline characteristics and outcomes between ED patients with GI bleeding transfused at lower or higher empiric hemoglobin levels.

METHODS

Single center, retrospective analysis of hospital records from a large tertiary care center of ED patients diagnosed with GIB who underwent red blood cell transfusion in the ED. A pre-transfusion hemoglobin cutoff of 7 g/dl was used to divide patients into restrictive and empirically transfused groups. Demographics, mortality, hospital length-of-stay, and mortality risk estimates were compared between groups.

RESULTS

175 patients met inclusion criteria, with 120 restrictive patients (68.5%) and 55 liberal patients (31.4%). The sample was 49.7% male, with mean age 67.2 years, similar between groups. Patients in the empiric transfusion group had more acute emergency severity index scores (2.09 vs. 2.3). No difference was found between groups in triage vital signs, pre-endoscopy Rockall scores or mortality estimates, or length of stay. Most common reasons for empiric transfusion from chart review were hypotension and witnessed large hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients that were empirically transfused had similar presentations to patients meeting restrictive guidelines, based on review of triage data. Transfusions above restrictive thresholds occurred frequently in our population. Additional studies are required to clarify appropriate criteria to guide transfusions for GIB in the ED.

Predictors of rebleeding and in-hospital mortality in patients with nonvariceal upper digestive bleeding

BACKGROUND

Nonvariceal upper digestive bleeding (NVUDB) represents a severe emergency condition and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Despite a decrease in the incidence due to the widespread use of potent therapy with proton pump inhibitors as well as the implementation of modern endoscopic techniques, the mortality rate associated with NVUDB is still high.

AIM

To identify the clinical, biological, and endoscopic parameters associated with a poor outcome in patients with NVUDB to allow the stratification of risk, which will lead to the implementation of the most accurate management.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study including patients who were admitted to the Gastroenterology Department of Clinical Emergency County Hospital Timisoara, Romania, with a diagnosis of NVUDB between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2016. All the data were collected from the patient’s records, including demographic data, medication history, hemodynamic status, paraclinical tests, and endoscopic features as well as the methods of hemostasis, rate of rebleeding, need for surgery and death; we also assessed the Rockall score of the patients, length of hospitalization and associated comorbidities. All these parameters were evaluated as potential risk factors associated with rebleeding and death in patients with NVUDB.

RESULTS

We included a batch of 1581 patients with NVUDB, including 523 (33%) females and 1058 (67%) males with a median age of 66 years. The main cause of NVUDB was peptic ulcer (73% of patients). More than one-third of the patients needed endoscopic treatment. Rebleeding rate was 7.72%; surgery due to failure of endoscopic hemostasis was needed in 3.22% of cases; the in-hospital mortality rate was 8.09%, and the bleeding-episode-related mortality rate was 2.97%. Although our predictive models for rebleeding and death had a low sensitivity, the specificity was very high, suggesting a better discriminative capacity for identifying patients with better outcomes. Our results showed that the Rockall score was associated with both rebleeding and death; comorbidities such as respiratory conditions, liver cirrhosis and sepsis increased significantly the risk of in-hospital mortality (OR of 3.29, 2.91 and 8.03).

CONCLUSION

Our study revealed that the Rockall score, need for endoscopic therapy, necessity of transfusion and sepsis were risk factors for rebleeding. Moreover, an increased Rockall score and the presence of comorbidities were predictive factors for in-hospital mortality.

Critical Care Utilization in Patients with Diabetic Ketoacidosis, Stroke, and Gastrointestinal Bleed: Two Hospitals Experience

Introduction: Intensive Care Units (ICUs) are among the most expensive components of hospital care. Experts believe that ICUs are overused; however, hospitals vary in their ICU admission rate. Our hypothesis is based on clinical observations that many patients with diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), stroke, and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding admitted to the ICU don’t really need it and could be managed safely in a non-ICU level of care. Reducing inappropriate admissions would reduce healthcare costs and improve outcomes. Our primary objective was to determine the frequency of inappropriate ICU admissions. Secondary objectives were to evaluate which diagnoses were more unnecessarily admitted to the ICU, evaluate different variables and comorbidities, and determine the mortality rates during ICU admissions.

Methods: Patients admitted to the ICU, from the Emergency Department (ED) or transferred from the floor, during a one-year period were evaluated in this retrospective study. Patients 18-years old and above who had an admitting diagnosis of DKA, GI bleed, ischemic stroke, or hemorrhagic stroke were included. Patients in a comatose state, intubated, on vasopressors, hemodynamically unstable or had an unstable comorbid disease, subarachnoid hemorrhage, surgery during hospitalization prior to the ICU admission were excluded. Patients were categorized as having an appropriate or inappropriate ICU admission based on our institutional ICU admission criteria and data from available literature and guidelines.

Results: A total of 95 patients were included in our cohort. Seventy-two out of 95 (76%) were considered as inappropriate ICU admissions. When comparing each of the four admitting diagnoses, a significantly higher proportion of DKA patients were considered inappropriate ICU admissions when compared to the other diagnoses (P = 0.001). The overall mortality rate of ICU admissions was 16%, 15 patients out of 95 study population. When comparing each of the four admitting diagnoses, there was a significant difference in mortality rate with DKA having the lowest mortality (3%) and GI bleed having the highest mortality (43%). Out of the 15 patients who died, only 1 patient was categorized as an inappropriate ICU admission.

Conclusions: More than three-quarters of our study population was admitted to the ICU inappropriately. Incorporating severity scores in ICU admission criteria could improve the appropriateness of ICU admission and financial feasibility.

This article is based on a poster: Alsamman S, Alsamman MA, Castro M, Koselka H, Steinbrunner J: ICU admission patterns in patients with DKA, stroke and GI bleed: do they all need ICU? J Hosp Med. March 2015.

Comparison of various prognostic scores in variceal and non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Various prognostic scores like Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (GBS), modified Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (mGBS), full Rockall score (FRS) including endoscopic findings, clinical Rockall score (CRS), and albumin, international normalized ratio (INR), mental status, systolic blood pressure, age >65 (AIMS65) are used for risk stratification in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The utility of these scores in variceal UGIB (VUGIB) is not well defined. In this prospective study, we aimed to assess the performance of these scores in patients with non-variceal (NVUGIB) and VUGIB.

METHODS

We included 1011 patients (during March 2017 and August 2018) including 439 with NVUGIB and 572 VUGIB. Performance of GBS, mGBS, FRS, CRS, and AIMS65 for various outcome measures was analyzed using the area under receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC).

RESULTS

The accuracy of prognostic scores in predicting the composite outcome including the need of hospital-based intervention and 42-day mortality was higher in NVUGIB as compared with VUGIB, AUROC: CRS: 0.641 vs. 0.537; FRS: 0.669 vs. 0.625; GBS: 0.719 vs. 0.587; mGBS: 0.711 vs. 0.594; AIMS65: 0.567 vs. 0.548. GBS and mGBS at a cut-off score of 1 had the highest negative predictive value, 91.7% and 91.3%, respectively, for predicting composite outcome in NVUGIB. Similarly, these scores had better accuracy for predicting 42-day rebleeding in NVUGIB as compared to VUGIB, AUROC: CRS: 0.680 vs. 0.537; FRS: 0.698 vs. 0.565; GBS: 0.661 vs. 0.543; mGBS: 0.627 vs. 0.540; AIMS65: 0.695 vs. 0.606.

CONCLUSION

The prognostic scores such as CRS, FRS, GBS, mGBS, and AIMS65 predict the need for hospital-based management, rebleeding, and mortality better among patients with NVUGIB than VUGIB.

There Is No Excuse for Mortality Due to Lack of Competency and Training of Paediatric Endoscopists in Gastrointestinal Bleeding Therapy in 2018

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in children is possibly the last medical emergency which continues to lead to the death of a child due to the lack of competency/clinical judgement of the doctor, as opposed to the disease itself, leading to mortality despite optimum medical intervention. This is unacceptable in any circumstances in 2018. It occurs due to a number of conspiring factors including lack of appreciation of the clinical presentation requiring urgent endoscopic intervention; misapprehension of the urgency of timing required of such an intervention predicated on the severity of the gastrointestinal (GI) bleed; lack of application of a paediatric-specific validated score predicting for such endoscopic intervention; lack of skill in endo-haemostatic intervention techniques by paediatric endoscopists; poor training in such techniques among paediatric endoscopists; paucity of cases with lack of exposure of the paediatric endoscopist regularly to enable skills to be maintained, once acquired; reluctance of adult endoscopists in many centres to support paediatric GI bleeding services. In essence then the paediatric GI community urgently needs to identify centres of excellence to whom these children should be transferred. Transfer is safe in all but the most critical cases once stabilised with transfusion, octreotide/terlipressin and iv proton pump inhibitors. The resources are country-dependent but this is really no excuse. We must not let this parlous state of affairs continue. Solutions are explored in this article and please let this serve as a call to action for all those involved in this continuing debacle in order to save "save-able" lives.

Comparison of four scoring systems for risk stratification of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Objective:

This study aimed to compare the performances of the Glasgow–Blatchford Bleeding Score (GBS), pre-endoscopic Rockall score (PRS), complete Rockall score (CRS), and Cedars–Sinai Medical Center Predictive Index (CSMCPI) in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB).

Methods:

Patients who were admitted to the emergency department because of UGIB and underwent endoscopy within the first 24 hour were included in this study. The GBS, PRS, CRS, and CSMCPI were propectively calculated. The performances of these scores were assessed using a receiver operating characteristic curve.

Results:

A total of 153 patients were included in this study. For the prediction of high-risk patients, area under the curve (AUC) was obtained for GBS (0.912), PRS (0.968), CRS (0.991), and CSMCPI (0.918). For the prediction of rebleeding, AUC was obtained for GBS (0.656), PRS (0.625), CRS (0.701), and CSMCPI (0.612). For the prediction of 30-day mortality, AUC was obtained for GBS (0.658), PRS (0.757), CRS (0.823), and CSMCPI (0.745).

Conclusion:

These results suggest that effectiveness of CRS is higher than that of other scores in predicting high-risk patients, rebleeding and 30-day mortality in patients with UGIB.

Use of over-the-scope-clip (OTSC) improves outcomes of high-risk adverse outcome (HR-AO) non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB)

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Endoscopic treatment of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) with high-risk adverse outcome (HR-AO) features has a high risk of failure. We studied the safety and efficacy of over-the-scope clips (OTSC) to treat these lesions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We included patients who were treated using OTSC for NVUGIB from January 2015 to October 2017. We studied rebleeding and mortality rates and used the Rockall data and our institution's prior data for comparison. We used descriptive and chi-square statistics.

RESULTS

We studied 18 patients with 19 bleeding lesions: 9 (47 %) duodenal ulcers, 4 (21 %) Dieulafoy's lesion, 3 (16 %) gastric ulcer, and 3 (16 %) bleeding after gastric biopsy, gastric polypectomy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of peri-gastric mass. We applied OTSC as the first-line treatment in 10 (53 %) and as the second-line treatment in 9 (47 %) bleeding lesions. Continued bleeding after OTSC occurred in six patients, but we treated it successfully and achieved complete hemostasis in all patients. We found OTSC use significantly decreased (0 % vs. 53 %, P  < 0.01) and reduced (0 % vs. 24 %, P  = 0.08) the rebleeding rate in our high-risk (RS ≥ 8) and intermediate-risk (RS = 4 - 7) Rockall score patients as compared to the rates reported by the Rockall study, respectively. When compared to our institution's prior study, we found a decrease in the rebleeding rate with OTSC (0 % vs. 21 %, P  = 0.06) in our intermediate-to-high risk Rockall score patients (RS ≥ 4). There was no difference in mortality rates as compared to both control studies.

CONCLUSION

Use of OTSC is safe, efficacious and appears superior to standard treatment for HR-AO NVUGIB. OTSC should be considered as first-line treatment for HR-AO bleeding.

Optimizing the Risk Assessment in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Comparison of 5 Scores Predicting 7 Outcomes

Introduction

Although different scores have been suggested to predict outcomes in the setting of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), few comparative studies between simplified versions of older scores and recent scores have been published. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of pre- (PreRS) and postendoscopic Rockall scores (PostRS), the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) and its simplified version (sGBS), as well as the AIMS65 score in predicting different clinical outcomes.

Methods

In this retrospective study, PreRS, PostRS, GBS, sGBS, and AIMS65 score were calculated, and then, areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve were used to evaluate the performance of each score to predict blood transfusion, endoscopic therapy, surgery, admission to intensive/intermediate care unit, length of hospital stay, as well as 30-day rebleeding or mortality.

Results

PreRS, PostRS, GBS, and sGBS were calculated for all the 433 included patients, but AIMS65 calculation was only possible for 315 patients. Only the PreRS and PostRS were able to fairly predict 30-day mortality. The GBS and sGBS were good in predicting blood transfusion and reasonable in predicting surgery. None of the studied scores were good in predicting the need for endoscopic therapy, admission to intensive/intermediate care unit, length of hospital stay, and 30-day rebleeding.

Conclusions

Owing to the identified limitations, none of the 5 studied scores could be singly used to predict all the clinically relevant outcomes in the setting of UGIB. The sGBS was as precise as the GBS in predicting blood transfusion and surgery. The PreRS and PostRS were the only scores that could predict 30-day mortality. An algorithm using the PreRS and the sGBS as an initial approach to patients with UGIB is presented and suggested.

Scoring systems for peptic ulcer bleeding: Which one to use?

AIM

To compare the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), Rockall score (RS) and Baylor bleeding score (BBS) in predicting clinical outcomes and need for interventions in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.

METHODS

Between January 2008 and December 2013, 1012 consecutive patients admitted with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) were prospectively followed. The pre-endoscopic RS, BBS and GBS, as well as the post-endoscopic diagnostic scores (RS and BBS) were calculated for all patients according to their urgent upper endoscopy findings. Area under the receiver-operating characteristics (AUROC) curves were calculated for the prediction of lethal outcome, rebleeding, needs for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention, and the optimal cutoff values were evaluated.

RESULTS

PUB accounted for 41.9% of all upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding, 5.2% patients died and 5.4% patients underwent surgery. By comparing the AUROC curves of the aforementioned pre-endoscopic scores, the RS best predicted lethal outcome (AUROC 0.82 vs 0.67 vs 0.63, respectively), but the GBS best predicted need for hospital-based intervention or 30-d mortality (AUROC 0.84 vs 0.57 vs 0.64), rebleeding (AUROC 0.75 vs 0.61 vs 0.53), need for blood transfusion (AUROC 0.83 vs 0.63 vs 0.58) and surgical intervention (0.82 vs 0.63 vs 0.52) The post-endoscopic RS was also better than the post-endoscopic BBS in predicting lethal outcome (AUROC 0.82 vs 0.69, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The RS is the best predictor of mortality and the GBS is the best predictor of rebleeding, need for blood transfusion and/or surgical intervention in patients with PUB. There is no one 'perfect score' and we suggest that these two tests be used concomitantly.

Comparison of three scoring systems in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the performances of the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), modified GBS (mGBS) and AIMS65 in predicting clinical outcomes in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB).

METHODS

This study enrolled 320 consecutive patients with AUGIB. Patients at high and low risks of developing adverse clinical outcomes (rebleeding, the need of clinical intervention and death) were categorized according to the GBS, mGBS and AIMS65 scoring systems. The outcome of the patients were the occurrences of adverse clinical outcomes. The areas under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) of three scoring systems were compared.

RESULTS

Irrespective of the systems used, the high-risk groups showed higher rates of rebleeding, intervention and death compared with the low-risk groups (P < 0.05). For the prediction of rebleeding, AIMS65 (AUROC 0.735, 95% CI 0.667-0.802) performed significantly better than GBS (AUROC 0.672, 95% CI 0.597-0.747; P < 0.01) and mGBS (AUROC 0.677, 95% CI 0.602-0.753; P < 0.01). For the prediction of interventions, there was no significant difference among the three systems (GBS: AUROC 0.769, 95% CI 0.668-0.870; mGBS: AUROC 0.745, 95% CI 0.643-0.847; AIMS65: AUROC 0.746, 95% CI 0.640-0.851). For the prediction of in-hospital mortality, there was no significant difference among the three systems (GBS: AUROC 0.796, 95% CI 0.694-0.898; mGBS: AUROC 0.803, 95% CI 0.703-0.904; AIMS65: AUROC 0.786, 95% CI 0.670-0.903).

CONCLUSIONS

The three scoring systems are reliable and accurate in predicting the rates of rebleeding, surgery and mortality in AUGIB. However, AIMS65 outperforms GBS and mGBS in predicting rebleeding.

Association between ulcer site and outcome in complicated peptic ulcer disease: a Danish nationwide cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Mortality rates in complicated peptic ulcer disease are high. This study aimed to examine the prognostic importance of ulcer site in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) and perforated peptic ulcer (PPU).

DESIGN

a nationwide cohort study with prospective and consecutive data collection.

POPULATION

all patients treated for PUB and PPU at Danish hospitals between 2003 and 2014.

DATA

demographic and clinical data reported to the Danish Clinical Registry of Emergency Surgery.

OUTCOME MEASURES

90- and 30-d mortality and re-intervention.

STATISTICS

the crude and adjusted association between ulcer site (gastric and duodenal) and the outcome measures of interest were assessed by binary logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Some 20,059 patients with PUB and 4273 patients with PPU were included; 90-d mortality was 15.3% for PUB and 29.8% for PPU; 30-d mortality was 10.2% and 24.7%, respectively. Duodenal bleeding ulcer, as compared to gastric ulcer (GU), was associated with a significantly increased risk of all-cause mortality within 90 and 30 d, and with re-intervention: adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.47 (95% confidence interval 1.30-1.67); p < 0.001, OR 1.60 (1.43-1.77); p < 0.001, and OR 1.86 (1.68-2.06); p < 0.001, respectively. There was no difference in outcomes between gastric and duodenal ulcers (DUs) in PPU patients: adjusted OR 0.99 (0.84-1.16); p = 0.698, OR 0.93 (0.78 to 1.10); p = 0.409, and OR 0.97 (0.80-1.19); p = 0.799, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

DU site is a significant predictor of death and re-intervention in patients with PUB, as compared to GU site. This does not seem to be the case for patients with PPU.

Simple risk factors to predict urgent endoscopy in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding pre-endoscopically

The goal of this study is to evaluate how to predict high-risk nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) pre-endoscopically. A total of 569 NVUGIB patients between Match 2011 and January 2015 were retrospectively studied. The clinical characteristics and laboratory data were statistically analyzed. The severity of NVUGIB was based on high-risk NVUGIB (Forrest I-IIb), and low-risk NVUGIB (Forrest IIc and III). By logistic regression and receiver-operating characteristic curve, simple risk score systems were derived which predicted patients' risks of potentially needing endoscopic intervention to control bleeding. Risk score systems combined of patients' serum hemoglobin (Hb) ≤75 g/L, red hematemesis, red stool, shock, and blood urine nitrogen ≥8.5 mmol/L within 24 hours after admission were derived. As for each one of these clinical signs, the relatively high specificity was 97.9% for shock, 96.4% for red stool, 85.5% for red hematemesis, 76.7% for Hb ≤75 g/L, and the sensitivity was 50.8% for red hematemesis, 47.5% for Hb ≤75 g/L, 14.2% for red stool, and 10.9% for shock. When these 5 clinical signs were presented as a risk score system, the highest area of receiver-operating characteristic curve was 0.746, with sensitivity 0.675 and specificity 0.733, which discriminated well with high-risk NVUGIB. These simple risk factors identified patients with high-risk NVUGIB of needing treatment to manage their bleeding pre-endoscopically. Further validation in the clinic was required.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding risk scores: Who, when and why?

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains a significant cause of hospital admission. In order to stratify patients according to the risk of the complications, such as rebleeding or death, and to predict the need of clinical intervention, several risk scores have been proposed and their use consistently recommended by international guidelines. The use of risk scoring systems in early assessment of patients suffering from UGIB may be useful to distinguish high-risks patients, who may need clinical intervention and hospitalization, from low risk patients with a lower chance of developing complications, in which management as outpatients can be considered. Although several scores have been published and validated for predicting different outcomes, the most frequently cited ones are the Rockall score and the Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS). While Rockall score, which incorporates clinical and endoscopic variables, has been validated to predict mortality, the GBS, which is based on clinical and laboratorial parameters, has been studied to predict the need of clinical intervention. Despite the advantages previously reported, their use in clinical decisions is still limited. This review describes the different risk scores used in the UGIB setting, highlights the most important research, explains why and when their use may be helpful, reflects on the problems that remain unresolved and guides future research with practical impact.

Endoscopic management of acute gastrointestinal bleeding in children: Time for a radical rethink

Currently we are no nearer than 10 or 20years ago providing a safe, adequate, and effective round-the-clock endoscopic services for acute life-threatening gastrointestinal bleeding in children. Preventable deaths are occurring still, and it is a tragedy. This is owing to a number of factors which require urgent attention. Skill-mix and the ability of available endoscopists in the UK are woeful. Manpower is spread too thinly and not concentrated in centers of excellence, which is necessary given the relative rarity of the presentation. Adult gastroenterologists are increasingly reticent regarding their help in increasingly litigious times. Recent work on identification of those children likely to require urgent endoscopic intervention has mirrored scoring systems that have been present in adult circles for many years and may allow appropriate and timely intervention. Recent technical developments such as that of Hemospray® may lower the threshold of competency in dealing with this problem endoscopically, thus allowing lives to be saved. Educational courses, mannequin and animal model training are important but so will be appropriate credentialing of individuals for this skill-set. Assessment of competency will become the norm and guidelines on a national level in each country mandatory if we are to move this problem from the "too difficult" to the "achieved". It is an urgent problem and is one of the last emergencies in pediatrics that is conducted poorly. This cannot and should not be allowed to continue unchallenged.

Comparison of scoring systems for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a multicenter prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) and Rockall score (RS) are widely used to assess risk in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). We compared both scoring systems and evaluated their clinical usefulness.

METHODS

Between February 2011 and December 2013, 1584 patients with nonvariceal UGIB were included in the study. A prospective study was conducted to compare the performance of the GBS, pre-RS, and full RS. We compared the performance of these scores using receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

For prediction of the need for hospital-based intervention, the GBS was similar to the full RS (area under the receiver operating characteristic curves [AUROC] 0.705 vs 0.727; P = 0.282) and superior to the pre-RS (AUROC 0.705 vs 0.601; P < 0.0001). In predicting death, the full RS was superior to the GBS (AUROC 0.758 vs 0.644; P = 0.0006) and similar to the pre-RS (AUROC 0.758 vs 0.754; P = 0.869). In predicting rebleeding, the full RS was superior to both GBS (AUROC 0.642 vs 0.585; P = 0.031) and pre-RS (AUROC 0.642 vs 0.593; P = 0.0003). Of 1584 patients, 13 (0.8%) scored 0 on the GBS. Therapeutic intervention was not performed in any of these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The GBS is more useful than the pre-RS for predicting the need for hospital-based intervention. A cutoff value of 0 for low-risk patients who might be suitable for outpatient management is useful. The full RS is helpful in predicting death. None of the systems accurately predict rebleeding with a low AUROC. (

CLINICAL TRIAL

cris.nih.go.kr/KCT0000514).

Blatchford Score Is Superior to AIMS65 Score in Predicting the Need for Clinical Interventions in Elderly Patients with Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleed

Background. Blatchford and AIMS65 scores were developed to risk stratify patients with upper gastrointestinal bleed (UGIB). We sought to assess the performance of Blatchford and AIMS65 scores in predicting outcomes in elderly patients with nonvariceal UGIB. Methods. A retrospective cohort study of elderly patients (over 65 years of age) with nonvariceal UGIB admitted to a tertiary care center. Primary outcome was a combined outcome of in-hospital mortality, need for any therapeutic endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention, rebleeding within 30 days, or blood transfusion. Secondary outcome was a combined outcome of in-hospital mortality or need for an intervention to control the bleed. Results. 164 patients were included. The primary outcome occurred in 119 (72.5%) patients. The secondary outcome occurred in 12 patients (7.2%). Blatchford score was superior to AIMS65 score in predicting the primary outcome (area under the receiver-operator curve (AUROC) 0.84 versus 0.68, resp., p < 0.001). Both scores performed poorly in predicting the secondary outcome (AUROC 0.56 versus 0.52, resp., p = 0.18). Conclusions. Blatchford score could be useful in predicting the need for hospital based interventions in elderly patients with nonvariceal UGIB. Blatchford and AIMS65 scores are poor predictors of the need for a therapeutic intervention to control bleeding.

Second-look endoscopy with prophylactic hemostasis is still effective after endoscopic submucosal dissection for gastric neoplasm

AIM: The clinical value of second-look endoscopy (SLE) after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been doubted continuously. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of SLE based on the risk of delayed bleeding after ESD.

METHODS: A total of 310 lesions of gastric epithelial neoplasms treated by ESD were reviewed. The lesions were divided into two groups based on the risk of post-procedural bleeding estimated by Forrest classification. The high risk of rebleeding group (Forrest Ia, Ib and IIa) required endoscopic treatment, while the low risk of rebleeding group (Forrest IIb, IIc and III) did not. Delayed bleeding after ESD was investigated.

RESULTS: Sixty-six lesions were included in the high risk of rebleeding group and 244 lesions in the low risk of rebleeding group. There were no significant differences in delayed bleeding between the high risk group (1/66) and the low risk group (1/244) (P = 0.38). The high risk of rebleeding group tended to be located more often in the mid-third and had higher appearance of flat or depressed shape than the low risk group (P = 0.004 and P = 0.006, respectively).

CONCLUSION: SLE with pre-emptive prophylactic endoscopic treatment is still effective in preventing delayed bleeding after ESD.

[Validation of the Glasgow-Blatchford Scoring System to predict mortality in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a hospital of Lima, Peru (June 2012-December 2013)]

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a major cause of hospitalization and the most prevalent emergency worldwide, with a mortality rate of up to 14%. In Peru, there have not been any studies on the use of the Glasgow-Blatchford Scoring System to predict mortality in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The aim of this study is to perform an external validation of the Glasgow-Blatchford Scoring System and to establish the best cutoff for predicting mortality in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in a hospital of Lima, Peru.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal, retrospective, analytical validation study, with data from patients with a clinical and endoscopic diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal bleeding treated at the Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Unit of the Hospital Nacional Edgardo Rebagliati Martins between June 2012 and December 2013. We calculated the area under the curve for the receiver operating characteristic of the Glasgow-Blatchford Scoring System to predict mortality with a 95% confidence interval.

RESULTS

A total of 339 records were analyzed. 57.5% were male and the mean age (standard deviation) was 67.0 (15.7) years. The median of the Glasgow-Blatchford Scoring System obtained in the population was 12. The ROC analysis for death gave an area under the curve of 0.59 (95% CI 0.5-0.7). Stratifying by type of upper gastrointestinal bleeding resulted in an area under the curve of 0.66 (95% CI 0.53-0.78) for non-variceal type.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, the Glasgow-Blatchford Scoring System has no diagnostic validity for predicting mortality.

Does Preendoscopy Rockall Score Safely Identify Low Risk Patients following Upper Gastrointestinal Haemorrhage?

Objective. To determine if preendoscopy Rockall score (PERS) enables safe outpatient management of New Zealanders with upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage (UGIH). Methods. Retrospective analysis of adults with UGIH over 59 consecutive months. PERS, diagnosis, demographics, need for endoscopic therapy, transfusion or surgery and 30-day mortality and 14-day rebleeding rate, and sensitivity and specificity of PERS for enabling safe discharge preendoscopy were calculated. Results. 424 admissions with UGIH. Median age was 74.3 years (range 19–93 years), with 55.1% being males. 30-day mortality was 4.6% and 14-day rebleeding rate was 6.0%. Intervention was required in 181 (46.6%): blood transfusion (147 : 37.9%), endoscopic intervention (75 : 19.3%), and surgery (8 : 2.1%). 42 (10.8%) had PERS = 0 with intervention required in 15 (35.7%). Females more frequently required intervention, OR 1.73 (CI: 1.12–2.69). PERS did not predict intervention but did predict 30-day mortality: each point increase equated to an increase in mortality of OR 1.46 (CI: 1.11–1.92). Taking NSAIDs/aspirin reduced 30-day mortality, OR 0.22 (CI: 0.08–0.60). Conclusion. PERS identifies 10.8% of those with UGIH as low risk but 35.7% required intervention or died. It has a limited role in assessing these patients and should not be used to identify those suitable for outpatient endoscopy.

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in childhood: development of the Sheffield scoring system to predict need for endoscopic therapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a rare and potentially life-threatening condition in childhood. In adults with UGIB, validated scoring systems exist, but these are not applicable to children. The aim of this study was to construct a clinical scoring system to accurately predict the need for endoscopic haemostatic intervention.

METHODS

A retrospective data collection occurred during a 3-year period at a tertiary children's hospital. A total of 69 patients who had had endoscopic assessment were divided into group 1 (no intervention required) and group 2 (intervention required). A wide range of clinical parameters were collated including preexisting conditions, melaena, haematemesis and degree, transfusion requirement, parameters of hypovolaemia, presenting haemoglobin (Hb), Hb drop during 24 hours, platelet count, coagulation indices, liver function tests, and urea/electrolytes.

RESULTS

Parameters that reached statistical significance for endoscopic intervention (group 1 vs group 2) were the presence of significant preexisting condition, melaena, large haematemesis, heart rate (HR) >20 mean HR for age, prolonged capillary refill time (CRT), Hb drop of >20 g/L, need for fluid bolus, need for blood transfusion (Hb < 80 g/L), and need for other blood products. Using these parameters, a number of scoring models were tested, and the most predictive resulted in a scoring system constructed with a total of 24 and a cutoff for intervention of 8. According to this design, there were 4 false-negatives in the interventional group with 3 false-positives in the noninterventional group. This resulted in a positive predictive value (PPV) of 91.18% (95% confidence interval [CI] 76.3-98.04), negative predictive value (NPV) of 88.57% (95% CI 73.24-96.73), sensitivity of 88.7% (95% CI 73.24-96.73), and specificity of 91.18% (95% CI 76.3-98.04).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study population, we were able to formulate a scoring system with reasonable PPV and NPV to predict the need for endoscopic intervention in acute UGIB in children. Prospective evaluation is now required.

Rockall score in predicting outcomes of elderly patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

AIM: To validate the clinical Rockall score in predicting outcomes (rebleeding, surgery and mortality) in elderly patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB).

METHODS: A retrospective analysis was undertaken in 341 patients admitted to the emergency room and Intensive Care Unit of Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The Rockall scores were calculated, and the association between clinical Rockall scores and patient outcomes (rebleeding, surgery and mortality) was assessed. Based on the Rockall scores, patients were divided into three risk categories: low risk ≤ 3, moderate risk 3-4, high risk ≥ 4, and the percentages of rebleeding/death/surgery in each risk category were compared. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated to assess the validity of the Rockall system in predicting rebleeding, surgery and mortality of patients with AUGIB.

RESULTS: A positive linear correlation between clinical Rockall scores and patient outcomes in terms of rebleeding, surgery and mortality was observed (r = 0.962, 0.955 and 0.946, respectively, P = 0.001). High clinical Rockall scores > 3 were associated with adverse outcomes (rebleeding, surgery and death). There was a significant correlation between high Rockall scores and the occurrence of rebleeding, surgery and mortality in the entire patient population (χ² = 49.29, 23.10 and 27.64, respectively, P = 0.001). For rebleeding, the area under the ROC curve was 0.788 (95%CI: 0.726-0.849, P = 0.001); For surgery, the area under the ROC curve was 0.752 (95%CI: 0.679-0.825, P = 0.001) and for mortality, the area under the ROC curve was 0.787 (95%CI: 0.716-0.859, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION: The Rockall score is clinically useful, rapid and accurate in predicting rebleeding, surgery and mortality outcomes in elderly patients with AUGIB.

The Glasgow Blatchford score is the most accurate assessment of patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Risk scoring systems are used increasingly to assess patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH). There have been comparative studies to identify the best system, but most have been retrospective and included small sample sizes, few patients with severe bleeding and with low mortality. We aimed to identify the optimal scoring system.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study to compare the accuracy of the Glasgow Blatchford score (GBS), an age-extended GBS (EGBS), the Rockall score, the Baylor bleeding score, and the Cedars-Sinai Medical Center predictive index in predicting patients' (1) need for hospital-based intervention or 30-day mortality, (2) suitability for early discharge, (3) likelihood of rebleeding, and (4) mortality. We analyzed the area under receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for each system. The study included 831 consecutive patients admitted with UGIH during a 2-year period.

RESULTS

The GBS and EGBS better predicted patients' need for hospital-based intervention or 30-day mortality than the other systems (AUROC, 0.93; P < .001) and were also better in identifying low-risk patients (sensitivity values, 0.27-0.38; specificity values, 0.099-1). The EGBS identified a significantly higher proportion of low-risk patients than the GBS (P = .006). None of the systems accurately predicted which patients would have rebleeding or patients' 30-day mortality, on the basis of low AUROC and specificity values.

CONCLUSIONS

The GBS accurately identifies patients with UGIH most likely to need hospital-based intervention and also those best suited for outpatient care. The EGBS seems promising but must be validated externally. No scoring system seems to accurately predict patients' 30-day mortality or rebleeding. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01589250.

Weekend and nighttime effect on the prognosis of peptic ulcer bleeding

AIM: To evaluate whether weekend or nighttime admission affects prognosis of peptic ulcer bleeding despite early endoscopy.

METHODS: Retrospective data collection from four referral centers, all of which had a formal out-of-hours emergency endoscopy service, even at weekends. A total of 388 patients with bleeding peptic ulcers who were admitted via the emergency room between January 2007 and December 2009 were enrolled. Analyzed parameters included time from patients’ arrival until endoscopy, mortality, rebleeding, need for surgery and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS: The weekday and weekend admission groups comprised 326 and 62 patients, respectively. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups, except for younger age in the weekend group. Most patients (97%) had undergone early endoscopy, which resulted in a low mortality rate regardless of point of presentation (1.8% overall vs 1.6% on the weekend). The only outcome that was worse in the weekend group was a higher rate of rebleeding (12% vs 21%, P = 0.030). However, multivariate analysis revealed nighttime admission and a high Rockall score (≥ 6) as significant independent risk factors for rebleeding, rather than weekend admission.

CONCLUSION: Early endoscopy for peptic ulcer bleeding can prevent the weekend effect, and nighttime admission was identified as a novel risk factor for rebleeding, namely the nighttime effect.

Management of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage: Controversies and areas of uncertainty

Upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage (UGIH) remains a common presentation requiring urgent evaluation and treatment. Accurate assessment, appropriate intervention and apt clinical skills are needed for proper management from time of presentation to discharge. The advent of pharmacologic acid suppression, endoscopic hemostatic techniques, and recognition of Helicobacter pylori as an etiologic agent in peptic ulcer disease (PUD) has revolutionized the treatment of UGIH. Despite this, acute UGIH still carries considerable rates of morbidity and mortality. This review aims to discuss current areas of uncertainty and controversy in the management of UGIH. Neoadjuvant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy has become standard empiric treatment for UGIH given that PUD is the leading cause of non-variceal UGIH, and PPIs are extremely effective at promoting ulcer healing. However, neoadjuvant PPI administration has not been shown to affect hard clinical outcomes such as rebleeding or mortality. The optimal timing of upper endoscopy in UGIH is often debated. Upon completion of volume resuscitation and hemodynamic stabilization, upper endoscopy should be performed within 24 h in all patients with evidence of UGIH for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. With rising healthcare cost paramount in today’s medical landscape, the ability to appropriately triage UGIH patients is of increasing value. Upper endoscopy in conjunction with the clinical scenario allows for accurate decision making concerning early discharge home in low-risk lesions or admission for further monitoring and treatment in higher-risk lesions. Concomitant pharmacotherapy with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antiplatelet agents, such as clopidogrel, has a major impact on the etiology, severity, and potential treatment of UGIH. Long-term PPI use in patients taking chronic NSAIDs or clopidogrel is discussed thoroughly in this review.

Management of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage: controversies and areas of uncertainty

Upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage (UGIH) remains a common presentation requiring urgent evaluation and treatment. Accurate assessment, appropriate intervention and apt clinical skills are needed for proper management from time of presentation to discharge. The advent of pharmacologic acid suppression, endoscopic hemostatic techniques, and recognition of Helicobacter pylori as an etiologic agent in peptic ulcer disease (PUD) has revolutionized the treatment of UGIH. Despite this, acute UGIH still carries considerable rates of morbidity and mortality. This review aims to discuss current areas of uncertainty and controversy in the management of UGIH. Neoadjuvant proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy has become standard empiric treatment for UGIH given that PUD is the leading cause of non-variceal UGIH, and PPIs are extremely effective at promoting ulcer healing. However, neoadjuvant PPI administration has not been shown to affect hard clinical outcomes such as rebleeding or mortality. The optimal timing of upper endoscopy in UGIH is often debated. Upon completion of volume resuscitation and hemodynamic stabilization, upper endoscopy should be performed within 24 h in all patients with evidence of UGIH for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. With rising healthcare cost paramount in today's medical landscape, the ability to appropriately triage UGIH patients is of increasing value. Upper endoscopy in conjunction with the clinical scenario allows for accurate decision making concerning early discharge home in low-risk lesions or admission for further monitoring and treatment in higher-risk lesions. Concomitant pharmacotherapy with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and antiplatelet agents, such as clopidogrel, has a major impact on the etiology, severity, and potential treatment of UGIH. Long-term PPI use in patients taking chronic NSAIDs or clopidogrel is discussed thoroughly in this review.

Diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Despite the improvements in the management of this condition in western countries, mortality rates have remained at 5-10% over the past decade. This article presents the main recommendations for the management of UGIB. Pre-endoscopic management (including use of scoring scales, nasogastric tube placement and blood pressure stabilization) is crucial for triage and optimal resuscitation of patients, and should include a multidisciplinary approach at an early stage. Unless the patient has specific comorbidities, transfusion should only be considered if their hemoglobin level is ≤70 g/l. Endoscopic therapy, the cornerstone of therapeutic management of high-risk lesions, should not be delayed for more than 24 h following admission. Several endoscopic techniques, mostly using clips or thermal methods, are available and new approaches are emerging. When endoscopy fails, surgery or arterial embolization should be considered. Although the efficacy of prokinetics and high-dose intravenous PPI prior to endoscopy is controversial, the use of an intravenous PPI following endoscopy is strongly recommended. Antiplatelet therapy should be suspended and resumed in 3-5 days. Finally, all patients should be tested for Helicobacter pylori by serology in the acute setting.

The value of multidetector-row computed tomography for localization of obscure acute gastrointestinal bleeding

PURPOSE

There are no simple guidelines on when to perform multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) for diagnosis of obscure acute gastrointestinal bleeding (AGIB). We used a risk scoring system to evaluate the diagnostic power of MDCT for patients with obscure AGIB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ninety-two patients with obscure AGIB who were referred for an MDCT scan after unsuccessful endoscopic treatment at presentation were studied. We recorded clinical data and calculated Blatchford score for each patient. Patients who required transfusion more than 500mL of blood to maintain the vital signs were classified as high-risk patients. Two radiologists independently reviewed and categorized MDCT signs of obscure AGIB. Discordant findings were resolved by consensus. One-way ANOVA was used to compare clinical data between two groups; kappa statistics were used to estimate agreement on MDCT findings between radiologists.

RESULTS

Of the 92 patients, 62 (67.4%) were classified as high-risk patients. Blatchford scores of high-risk patients were significantly greater than those of low-risk patients. Sensitivity for MDCT diagnosing obscure AGIB was 81% in high-risk patients, as compared with 50% in the low-risk. When used in conjunction with selection of the cut-off value of 13 in Blatchford scoring system, the sensitivity and specificity of MDCT were 70.9% and 73.7%, respectively. Contrast extravasation was the most specific sign of AGIB (k=.87), recognition of which would have improved diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

With the aid of Blatchford scoring system for evaluating the disease severity, MDCT can localize the bleeders of obscure AGIB more efficiently.