Prokinetics in acute upper GI bleeding: a meta-analysis

The Efficacy of Metoclopramide for Gastric Visualization by Endoscopy in Patients With Active Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

The 2021 American College of Gastroenterology Guidelines suggested using of intravenous erythromycin before endoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) to enhance endoscopic view and reduce the need for repeat endoscopy. Evidence on intravenous metoclopramide, which is more accessible, is scant, especially in patients with active UGIB. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of metoclopramide for gastric visualization in patients with active UGIB.

METHODS

Between April 10, 2021, and October 8, 2022, this double-blind, double-center randomized controlled trial enrolled patients with active UGIB (hematemesis or presence of fresh blood in the nasogastric tube). The eligible patients were randomly assigned in a concealed 1:1 allocation to metoclopramide or placebo. The primary outcome was adequate visualization by objective endoscopic visualized gastroduodenal scores (EVS). Secondary outcomes included mean difference in EVS, duration of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), immediate hemostasis, need for a second look EGD, units of blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, and 30-day rebleeding rate.

RESULTS

Of the 68 eligible patients, 3 of each group were excluded by protocol violation. Finally, 62 patients (31 metoclopramide and 31 placebo) were analyzed. The percentage of patients with adequate visualization in metoclopramide and placebo group was 77.4% and 61.6% (odds ratio [OR] 2.16 [0.71-6.58], P = 0.16). The need for a second look EGD in the 72 hours was lower in the metoclopramide group (3.2% vs 22.6%, OR 0.11 [0.01-0.99], P = 0.02), whereas the other secondary outcomes were not different. However, in gastric lesions subgroup analysis, metoclopramide improved the adequate visualization rate (92.9% vs 50%, OR 13 [1.32-128.10], P = 0.03) and mean EVS at fundus (1.79 ± 0.42 vs 1.29 ± 0.72; P = 0.03).

DISCUSSION

Metoclopramide did not improve endoscopic visualization but decreased the need for second look EGD in patients with overall active UGIB. It improved gastric visualization in those with UGIB due to gastric lesions, primarily by improving visualization in the fundus ( ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04771481).

The Use of Pre-Endoscopic Metoclopramide Does Not Prevent the Need for Repeat Endoscopy: A U.S. Based Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) can cause upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), often needing esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). Second-look endoscopies verify resolution, but cost concerns prompt research on metoclopramide's efficacy compared to erythromycin.

METHODS

We analyzed the Diamond Network of TriNetX Research database, dividing UGIB patients with PUD undergoing EGD into three groups: metoclopramide, erythromycin, and no medication. Using 1:1 propensity score matching, we compared repeat EGD, post-EGD transfusion, and mortality within one month in two study arms.

RESULTS

Out of 97,040 patients, 11.5% received metoclopramide, 3.9% received erythromycin, and 84.6% received no medication. Comparing metoclopramide to no medication showed no significant difference in repeat EGD (10.1% vs. 9.7%, p = 0.34), transfusion (0.78% vs. 0.86%, p = 0.5), or mortality (1.08% vs. 1.08%, p = 0.95). However, metoclopramide had a higher repeat EGD rate compared to erythromycin (9.4% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.003), with no significant difference in transfusion or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The need to repeat EGD was not decreased with pre-EGD use of metoclopramide. If a prokinetic agent is to be used prior to EGD, erythromycin shows superior reduction in the need of repeat EGD as compared to metoclopramide.

Intravenous metoclopramide for increasing endoscopic mucosal visualization in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

Acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) is the most common emergency condition that requires rapid endoscopic treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of pre-endoscopic intravenous metoclopramide on endoscopic mucosal visualization (EMV) in patients with acute UGIH. This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind controlled trial of participants diagnosed with acute UGIH. All participants underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy within 24 h. Participants were assigned to either the metoclopramide or placebo group. Modified Avgerinos scores were evaluated during endoscopy. In total, 284 out of 300 patients completed the per-protocol procedure. The mean age was 62.8 ± 14.3 years, and 67.6% were men. Metoclopramide group achieved a higher total EMV and gastric body EMV score than the other group (7.34 ± 1.1 vs 6.94 ± 1.6; P = 0.017 and 1.80 ± 0.4 vs 1.64 ± 0.6; P = 0.006, respectively). Success in identifying lesions was not different between the groups (96.5% in metoclopramide and 93.6% in placebo group; P = 0.26). In the metoclopramide group, those with active variceal bleeding compared with the control group demonstrated substantial improvements in gastric EMV (1.83 ± 0.4 vs 1.28 ± 0.8, P = 0.004), antral EMV (1.96 ± 0.2 vs 1.56 ± 0.6, P = 0.003), and total EMV score (7.48 ± 1.1 vs 6.2 ± 2.3, P = 0.02). Pre-endoscopic intravenous metoclopramide improved the quality of EMV in variceal etiologies of UGIH, which was especially prominent in those who had signs of active bleeding based on nasogastric tube assessment.Trial Registration: Trial was registered in Clinical Trials: TCTR 20210708004 (08/07/2021).

Use of prokinetic agents in hospitalised adult patients: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Gastrointestinal motility is important for adequate uptake of fluids and nutrition but is often impaired in hospitalised patients. Prokinetic agents enhance gastrointestinal motility and are prescribed for many hospitalised patients. In this scoping review, we aimed to systematically describe the body of evidence on the use of prokinetic agents in hospitalised patients. We hypothesised, that the body of evidence would be limited and derive from heterogeneous populations.

METHODS

We conducted this scoping review in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews statement. We searched Medline, Embase, Epistemonikos and the Cochrane Library for studies assessing the use of prokinetic agents on any indication and outcome in adult hospitalised patients. We used a modified version of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We included 102 studies with a total of 8830 patients. Eighty-six studies were clinical trials (84%), and 52 (60%) of these were conducted in the intensive care unit, with feeding intolerance as the main indication. In the non-intensive care setting the indications were wider; most studies assessed use of prokinetic agents before gastroscopy to improve visualisation. The most studied prokinetic agent was metoclopramide (49% of studies) followed by erythromycin (31%). In total 147 outcomes were assessed with only 67% of the included studies assessing patient-centred outcomes, and with gastric emptying as the most frequently reported outcome. Overall, the data provided no firm evidence on the balance between the desirable and undesirable effects of prokinetic agents.

CONCLUSIONS

In this scoping review, we found that the studies addressing prokinetic agents in hospitalised adults had considerable variations in indications, drugs and outcomes assessed, and that the certainty of evidence was judged to be low to very low.

Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Children: Current Management, Controversies, and Advances

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) in children has many causes, with its prevalence varying by age. Often presenting as hematemesis or melena, the initial treatment is stabilization of the patient, including protection of the airway, fluid resuscitation, and a transfusion hemoglobin threshold of 7 g/L. Endoscopy should be performed with the goal of using combinations of therapies to treat a bleeding lesion, generally involving epinephrine injection along with either cautery, hemoclips, or hemospray. This review discusses the diagnosis and treatment of variceal and non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding in children with a focus on current advances in the treatment of severe UGIB.

Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Upper endoscopy is the definitive treatment for upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage (UGIH). However, up to 13% of people who undergo upper endoscopy will have incomplete visualisation of the gastric mucosa at presentation. Erythromycin acts as a motilin receptor agonist in the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract and increases gastric emptying, which may lead to better quality of visualisation and improved treatment effectiveness. However, there is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of erythromycin in UGIH.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of erythromycin before endoscopy in adults with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, compared with any other treatment or no treatment/placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 15 October 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated erythromycin before endoscopy compared to any other treatment or no treatment/placebo before endoscopy in adults with acute UGIH.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. UGIH-related mortality and 2. serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality, 2. visualisation of gastric mucosa, 3. non-serious adverse events, 4. rebleeding, 5. blood transfusion, and 5. rescue invasive intervention. We used GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 RCTs with 878 participants. The mean age ranged from 53.13 years to 64.5 years, and most participants were men (72.3%). One RCT included only non-variceal haemorrhage, one included only variceal haemorrhage, and eight included both aetiologies. We defined short-term outcomes as those occurring within one week of initial endoscopy. Erythromycin versus placebo Three RCTs (255 participants) compared erythromycin with placebo. There were no UGIH-related deaths. The evidence is very uncertain about the short-term effects of erythromycin compared with placebo on serious adverse events (risk difference (RD) -0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.04 to 0.02; 3 studies, 255 participants; very low certainty), all-cause mortality (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.03; 3 studies, 255 participants; very low certainty), non-serious adverse events (RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.05; 3 studies, 255 participants; very low certainty), and rebleeding (risk ratio (RR) 0.63, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.90; 2 studies, 195 participants; very low certainty). Erythromycin may improve gastric mucosa visualisation (mean difference (MD) 3.63 points on 16-point ordinal scale, 95% CI 2.20 to 5.05; higher MD means better visualisation; 2 studies, 195 participants; low certainty). Erythromycin may also result in a slight reduction in blood transfusion (MD -0.44 standard units of blood, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.01; 3 studies, 255 participants; low certainty). Erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage versus no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage Six RCTs (408 participants) compared erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage with no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage. There were no UGIH-related deaths and no serious adverse events. The evidence is very uncertain about the short-term effects of erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage compared with no intervention/placebo plus nasogastric tube lavage on all-cause mortality (RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.03; 3 studies, 238 participants; very low certainty), visualisation of the gastric mucosa (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.48 points on 10-point ordinal scale, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.85; higher SMD means better visualisation; 3 studies, 170 participants; very low certainty), non-serious adverse events (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.05; 6 studies, 408 participants; very low certainty), rebleeding (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.02; 1 study, 169 participants; very low certainty), and blood transfusion (MD -1.85 standard units of blood, 95% CI -4.34 to 0.64; 3 studies, 180 participants; very low certainty). Erythromycin versus nasogastric tube lavage Four RCTs (287 participants) compared erythromycin with nasogastric tube lavage. There were no UGIH-related deaths and no serious adverse events. The evidence is very uncertain about the short-term effects of erythromycin compared with nasogastric tube lavage on all-cause mortality (RD 0.02, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.08; 3 studies, 213 participants; very low certainty), visualisation of the gastric mucosa (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.79; 2 studies, 198 participants; very low certainty), non-serious adverse events (RD -0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.13; 3 studies, 213 participants; very low certainty), rebleeding (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.49; 1 study, 169 participants; very low certainty), and blood transfusion (median 2 standard units of blood, interquartile range 0 to 4 in both groups; 1 study, 169 participants; very low certainty). Erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage versus metoclopramide plus nasogastric tube lavage One RCT (30 participants) compared erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage with metoclopramide plus nasogastric tube lavage. The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of erythromycin plus nasogastric tube lavage on all the reported outcomes (serious adverse events, visualisation of gastric mucosa, non-serious adverse events, and blood transfusion).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are unsure if erythromycin before endoscopy in people with UGIH has any clinical benefits or harms. However, erythromycin compared with placebo may improve gastric mucosa visualisation and result in a slight reduction in blood transfusion.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; due to viruses, alcohol, and/or nonobese [BMI < 30 kg/m²] nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) and clinically significant portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] > 10 mmHg and/or liver stiffness by transient elastography > 25 kPa) should receive, if no contraindications, nonselective beta blocker (NSBB) therapy (preferably carvedilol) to prevent the development of variceal bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in those patients unable to receive NSBB therapy with a screening upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy that demonstrates high risk esophageal varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the endoscopic prophylactic treatment of choice. EBL should be repeated every 2-4 weeks until variceal eradication is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3-6 months in the first year following eradication.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage (UGIH) and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 70 g/L prompting RBC transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin of 70-90 g/L is desired.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends that patients with ACLD presenting with suspected acute variceal bleeding be risk stratified according to the Child-Pugh score and MELD score, and by documentation of active/inactive bleeding at the time of upper GI endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5 : ESGE recommends the vasoactive agents terlipressin, octreotide, or somatostatin be initiated at the time of presentation in patients with suspected acute variceal bleeding and be continued for a duration of up to 5 days.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends antibiotic prophylaxis using ceftriaxone 1 g/day for up to 7 days for all patients with ACLD presenting with acute variceal hemorrhage, or in accordance with local antibiotic resistance and patient allergies.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends, in the absence of contraindications, intravenous erythromycin 250 mg be given 30-120 minutes prior to upper GI endoscopy in patients with suspected acute variceal hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends that, in patients with suspected variceal hemorrhage, endoscopic evaluation should take place within 12 hours from the time of patient presentation provided the patient has been hemodynamically resuscitated.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9 : ESGE recommends EBL for the treatment of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH).Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends that, in patients at high risk for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding following successful endoscopic hemostasis (Child-Pugh C  ≤ 13 or Child-Pugh B > 7 with active EVH at the time of endoscopy despite vasoactive agents, or HVPG > 20 mmHg), pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) within 72 hours (preferably within 24 hours) must be considered.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 11 : ESGE recommends that, for persistent esophageal variceal bleeding despite vasoactive pharmacological and endoscopic hemostasis therapy, urgent rescue TIPS should be considered (where available).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 12 : ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for acute gastric (cardiofundal) variceal (GOV2, IGV1) hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 13: ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or EBL in patients with GOV1-specific bleeding.Strong recommendations, moderate quality evidence. 14: ESGE suggests urgent rescue TIPS or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for gastric variceal bleeding when there is a failure of endoscopic hemostasis or early recurrent bleeding.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 15: ESGE recommends that patients who have undergone EBL for acute EVH should be scheduled for follow-up EBLs at 1- to 4-weekly intervals to eradicate esophageal varices (secondary prophylaxis).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 16: ESGE recommends the use of NSBBs (propranolol or carvedilol) in combination with endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis in EVH in patients with ACLD.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

Erythromycin Improves the Quality of Esophagogastroduodenoscopy in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND/AIM

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) usually requires esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for diagnostic and-potentially-therapeutic purposes. However, blood within the gastric lumen may hinder the procedure. Administration of prokinetics like erythromycin has shown efficacy. This network meta-analysis investigates the efficacy of this intervention prior to EGD.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of Embase, PubMed/Medline, and other databases through March 8, 2022 to include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prokinetic use in EGD for UGIB. We used the DerSimonian-Laird approach to pool data and compare outcomes including need for repeat endoscopy and blood transfusion. Pooled prevalence of proportional outcomes, 95% confidence interval (CI), and p-values were calculated.

RESULTS

We included eight RCTs with four distinct intervention groups (erythromycin, placebo to erythromycin, nasogastric (NG) lavage and NG lavage + erythromycin) published between 2002 and 2020 with a total of 721 patients (mean age 60.0 ± 3.1 years; 73.2% male). The need for second look endoscopy was significantly lower with erythromycin than placebo (relative risk: 0.42, CI 0.22-0.83, p = 0.01). Using the frequentist approach, the combination of NG lavage and erythromycin (92.2) was rated highest, followed by erythromycin alone (73.1) for higher rates of empty stomach. Erythromycin was rated highest for lower need for packed red blood cell transfusion (72.8) as well as mean endoscopy duration (66.0).

CONCLUSION

Erythromycin improved visualization at EGD, reduced requirements for blood transfusion and repeat EGD, and shortened hospital stay. The combination of erythromycin and NG lavage showed reduced mortality.

ACG Clinical Guideline: Upper Gastrointestinal and Ulcer Bleeding

We performed systematic reviews addressing predefined clinical questions to develop recommendations with the GRADE approach regarding management of patients with overt upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We suggest risk assessment in the emergency department to identify very-low-risk patients (e.g., Glasgow-Blatchford score = 0-1) who may be discharged with outpatient follow-up. For patients hospitalized with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, we suggest red blood cell transfusion at a threshold of 7 g/dL. Erythromycin infusion is suggested before endoscopy, and endoscopy is suggested within 24 hours after presentation. Endoscopic therapy is recommended for ulcers with active spurting or oozing and for nonbleeding visible vessels. Endoscopic therapy with bipolar electrocoagulation, heater probe, and absolute ethanol injection is recommended, and low- to very-low-quality evidence also supports clips, argon plasma coagulation, and soft monopolar electrocoagulation; hemostatic powder spray TC-325 is suggested for actively bleeding ulcers and over-the-scope clips for recurrent ulcer bleeding after previous successful hemostasis. After endoscopic hemostasis, high-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy is recommended continuously or intermittently for 3 days, followed by twice-daily oral proton pump inhibitor for the first 2 weeks of therapy after endoscopy. Repeat endoscopy is suggested for recurrent bleeding, and if endoscopic therapy fails, transcatheter embolization is suggested.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (NVUGIH): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2021

1: ESGE recommends in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) the use of the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS) for pre-endoscopy risk stratification. Patients with GBS ≤ 1 are at very low risk of rebleeding, mortality within 30 days, or needing hospital-based intervention and can be safely managed as outpatients with outpatient endoscopy.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in patients with acute UGIH who are taking low-dose aspirin as monotherapy for secondary cardiovascular prophylaxis, aspirin should not be interrupted. If for any reason it is interrupted, aspirin should be re-started as soon as possible, preferably within 3-5 days.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends that following hemodynamic resuscitation, early (≤ 24 hours) upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy should be performed. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 4: ESGE does not recommend urgent (≤ 12 hours) upper GI endoscopy since as compared to early endoscopy, patient outcomes are not improved. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends for patients with actively bleeding ulcers (FIa, FIb), combination therapy using epinephrine injection plus a second hemostasis modality (contact thermal or mechanical therapy). Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6: ESGE recommends for patients with an ulcer with a nonbleeding visible vessel (FIIa), contact or noncontact thermal therapy, mechanical therapy, or injection of a sclerosing agent, each as monotherapy or in combination with epinephrine injection. Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE suggests that in patients with persistent bleeding refractory to standard hemostasis modalities, the use of a topical hemostatic spray/powder or cap-mounted clip should be considered. Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 8: ESGE recommends that for patients with clinical evidence of recurrent peptic ulcer hemorrhage, use of a cap-mounted clip should be considered. In the case of failure of this second attempt at endoscopic hemostasis, transcatheter angiographic embolization (TAE) should be considered. Surgery is indicated when TAE is not locally available or after failed TAE. Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9: ESGE recommends high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy for patients who receive endoscopic hemostasis and for patients with FIIb ulcer stigmata (adherent clot) not treated endoscopically. (A): PPI therapy should be administered as an intravenous bolus followed by continuous infusion (e. g., 80 mg then 8 mg/hour) for 72 hours post endoscopy. (B): High dose PPI therapies given as intravenous bolus dosing (twice-daily) or in oral formulation (twice-daily) can be considered as alternative regimens.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10: ESGE recommends that in patients who require ongoing anticoagulation therapy following acute NVUGIH (e. g., peptic ulcer hemorrhage), anticoagulation should be resumed as soon as the bleeding has been controlled, preferably within or soon after 7 days of the bleeding event, based on thromboembolic risk. The rapid onset of action of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACS), as compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs), must be considered in this context.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Immature Granulocyte Count and Percentage as New Predictors of Mortality in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Aims

Early identification of patients at risk of adverse outcomes may increase the survival rates in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), but this can be difficult to predict in emergencies. The aim of the study is to evaluate immature granulocyte (IG), which can be obtained from simple hemogram tests in patients with UGIB, in terms of clinical use and as a mortality marker.

Materials and methods

The patients diagnosed with UGIB between March 1, 2019, and September 30, 2019, were evaluated retrospectively. Demographic characteristics, causes of hemorrhage, clinical presentations, hemogram, and biochemistry values at ED admission and 30-day mortality status of the patients were examined. We divided the patients into groups according to their mortality status, and the groups were compared among themselves in terms of parameters.

Results

A total of 213 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the study. Of these patients, 139 (65.3%) were male and the mean age was 65.05 ± 16.7 years. Fifteen (7%) of them were in the nonsurvival group, while 198 (93%) were in the survival group. The efficacy of both the IG count (IGC) and IG% in predicting mortality was statistically significant (p = 0.002, p = 0.008, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity for the IGC were found as 60% and 84.4; for the IG%, they were found as 66.7% and 75.7%, respectively.

Conclusion

IGC and IG% are independent risk factors for the 30-day mortality status. These measurements are obtained from simple hemogram tests and may be useful for the evaluation of mortality in patients with UGIB.

How to cite this article

Bedel C, Korkut M, Avcı A, Uzun A. Immature Granulocyte Count and Percentage as New Predictors of Mortality in Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding. Indian J Crit Care Med 2020;24(9):794-798.

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.

Metoclopramide Reduces Fluoroscopy and Procedure Time during Gastrojejunostomy Tube Placement: A Placebo-Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

To determine whether a single 10-mg intravenous dose of the promotility agent metoclopramide reduces the fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and procedure time required for gastrojejunostomy (GJ) tube placement.

METHODS

This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled consecutive patients who underwent primary GJ tube placement at a single institution from April 10, 2018, to October 3, 2019. Exclusion criteria included age less than 18 years, inability to obtain consent, metoclopramide allergy or contraindication, and altered pyloric anatomy. Average fluoroscopy times, radiation doses, and procedure times were compared using t-tests. The full study protocol can be found at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03331965).

RESULTS

Of 110 participants randomized 1:1, 45 received metoclopramide and 51 received placebo and underwent GJ tube placement (38 females and 58 males; mean age, 55 ± 18 years). Demographics of the metoclopramide and placebo groups were similar. The fluoroscopy time required to advance a guide wire through the pylorus averaged 1.6 minutes (range, 0.3-10.1 minutes) in the metoclopramide group versus 4.1 minutes (range, 0.2-27.3 minutes) in the placebo group (P = .002). Total procedure fluoroscopy time averaged 5.8 minutes (range, 1.5-16.2 minutes) for the metoclopramide group versus 8.8 minutes (range, 2.8-29.7 minutes) for the placebo group (P = .002). Air kerma averaged 91 mGy (range, 13-354 mGy) for the metoclopramide group versus 130 mGy (range, 24-525 mGy) for the placebo group (P = .04). Total procedure time averaged 16.4 minutes (range, 8-51 minutes) for the metoclopramide group versus 19.9 minutes (range, 6-53 minutes) for the placebo group (P = .04). There were no drug-related adverse events and no significant differences in procedure-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of metoclopramide reduced fluoroscopy time by 34%, radiation dose by 30%, and procedure time by 17% during GJ tube placement.

Diagnosis and Management of Non-Variceal Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage: A Review of Current Guidelines and Future Perspectives

Non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a significant cause of mortality and morbidity worldwide which is encountered in the ambulatory and hospital settings. Hemorrhage form the gastrointestinal (GI) tract is categorized as upper GIB, small bowel bleeding (also formerly referred to as obscure GIB) or lower GIB. Although the etiologies of GIB are variable, a strong, consistent risk factor is use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Advances in the endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of GIB have led to improved outcomes. We present an updated review of the current practices regarding the diagnosis and management of non-variceal GIB, and possible future directions.

Perforated and bleeding peptic ulcer: WSES guidelines

Background

Peptic ulcer disease is common with a lifetime prevalence in the general population of 5-10% and an incidence of 0.1-0.3% per year. Despite a sharp reduction in incidence and rates of hospital admission and mortality over the past 30 years, complications are still encountered in 10-20% of these patients. Peptic ulcer disease remains a significant healthcare problem, which can consume considerable financial resources. Management may involve various subspecialties including surgeons, gastroenterologists, and radiologists. Successful management of patients with complicated peptic ulcer (CPU) involves prompt recognition, resuscitation when required, appropriate antibiotic therapy, and timely surgical/radiological treatment.

Methods

The present guidelines have been developed according to the GRADE methodology. To create these guidelines, a panel of experts was designed and charged by the board of the WSES to perform a systematic review of the available literature and to provide evidence-based statements with immediate practical application. All the statements were presented and discussed during the 5th WSES Congress, and for each statement, a consensus among the WSES panel of experts was reached.

Conclusions

The population considered in these guidelines is adult patients with suspected complicated peptic ulcer disease. These guidelines present evidence-based international consensus statements on the management of complicated peptic ulcer from a collaboration of a panel of experts and are intended to improve the knowledge and the awareness of physicians around the world on this specific topic. We divided our work into the two main topics, bleeding and perforated peptic ulcer, and structured it into six main topics that cover the entire management process of patients with complicated peptic ulcer, from diagnosis at ED arrival to post-discharge antimicrobial therapy, to provide an up-to-date, easy-to-use tool that can help physicians and surgeons during the decision-making process.

Cirrhosis and Portal Hypertension in the Pediatric Population

Cirrhosis is a complex process in which the architecture of the liver is replaced by structurally abnormal nodules due to cirrhosis. Cirrhosis frequently leads to the development of portal hypertension. In children, portal hypertension may be caused by a wide range of etiologies, including extrahepatic portal vein obstruction, biliary atresia, alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency, and autoimmune hepatitis. Gastroesophageal varices and ascites are two of the complications of portal hypertension likely to cause morbidity and mortality. This review also discusses extrahepatic manifestations of portal hypertension and treatment options.

What Is the Best Endoscopic Strategy in Acute Non-variceal Gastrointestinal Bleeding?

OPINION STATEMENT

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Upper non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (UNVGIB) remains an important clinical challenge for endoscopists, requiring skill and expertise for correct management. In this paper, we suggest the best strategy for an effective treatment of this complex category of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Early endoscopic examination, the increasingly widespread use of endoscopic hemostasis methods, and the most powerful antisecretory agents that induce clot stabilization have radically modified the clinical scenario for treating this pathology. While hospitalization for digestive hemorrhage is decreasing, the incidence of bleeding seems to be increasing, especially in the elderly for whom a greater use of gastrolesive drugs and the presence of comorbidities are more common. A multidisciplinary approach for initial patient evaluation and hemodynamic resuscitation prior to endoscopic treatment is crucial for correct management, prevention of rebleeding, and reduction of morbidity and mortality rates and hospital stays. Appropriate operator technical expertise, together with the availability of a wide range of endoscopes and devices, is mandatory. Newer endoscopic techniques may improve patient outcomes for difficult-to-treat lesions. Today, endoscopic hemostasis can be achieved in over 95% of patients.

New Developments in Managing Variceal Bleeding

Liver cirrhosis is the end stage of chronic liver disease, independent of etiology, and is characterized by accumulation of fibrotic tissue and conversion of the normal liver parenchyma into abnormal regenerative nodules. Complications include portal hypertension (PH) with gastroesophageal varices, ascites, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatic encephalopathy, bacteremia, and hypersplenism. The most life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis is acute variceal bleeding (AVB) which is associated with increased mortality that, despite recent progress in management, is still around 20% at 6 weeks. Combined treatment with vasoactive drugs, prophylactic antibiotics, and endoscopic techniques is the recommended standard of care for patients with acute variceal bleeding. There are many promising new modalities including the combination of coil and glue injection for management of bleeding or non-bleeding gastric varices and hemostatic powder application, that requires minimal expertise, when performed early after admission of a cirrhotic patient with AVB and overt hematemesis acting as a bridge therapy till definitive endoscopic therapy can be performed in hemodynamically stable conditions and without acute bleeding.

Evaluation and management of Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding continues to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality. The most common causes include peptic ulcer disease, Mallory-Weiss syndrome, erosive gastritis, duodenitis, esophagitis, malignancy, angiodysplasias and Dieulafoy's lesion. Initial assessment and early aggressive resuscitation significantly improves outcomes. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy continues to be the gold standard for diagnosis and treatment. We present a comprehensive review of literature for the evaluation and management of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

New insights on an old medical emergency: non-portal hypertension related upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a potentially life-threatening condition and is the most common medical emergency managed by gastroenterologists. Despite being one of the most antique medical problems, recent studies have been slowly changing the management of these patients, which should nowadays include not only initial resuscitation, but also risk stratification, pre-endoscopic therapy, endoscopy treatment, and post-procedure care. The aim of this paper is to review the extended approach to the patient with non-portal hypertension related UGIB.

Peptic ulcer disease

The rapidly declining prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection and widespread use of potent anti-secretory drugs means peptic ulcer disease has become substantially less prevalent than it was two decades ago. Management has, however, become more challenging than ever because of the threat of increasing antimicrobial resistance worldwide and widespread use of complex anti-thrombotic therapy in the ageing population. Peptic ulcers not associated with H pylori infection or the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are now also imposing substantial diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. This Seminar aims to provide a balanced overview of the latest advances in the pathogenetic mechanisms of peptic ulcers, guidelines on therapies targeting H pylori infection, approaches to treatment of peptic ulcer complications associated with anti-inflammatory analgesics and anti-thrombotic agents, and the unmet needs in terms of our knowledge and management of this increasingly challenging condition.

[Neoadjuvant therapy for tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract : Complication management]

Recent studies could demonstrate that neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiochemotherapy for esophageal and gastric cancer do not significantly increase the risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality as compared to surgery alone. With respect to patient safety and effectiveness of neoadjuvant concepts, quality assured performance of each treatment modality and close interdisciplinary cooperation play an important role. The majority of potential side effects and complications, which might occur during neoadjuvant therapy can be adequately controlled by correct prophylaxis and professional medical complication management. Complications before, during and after neoadjuvant therapy of upper gastrointestinal tract tumors can also be caused by the tumor itself or by medicinal therapy. These comprise bleeding, fistulas, perforations and stenoses. Modern endoscopic techniques are the therapy of choice in these situations. Preoperative conditioning during the period of neoadjuvant therapy opens the possibility of reduced postoperative complications to patients with tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Pre-endoscopic erythromycin administration in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an updated meta-analysis and systematic review

Background

In patients suffering from upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB), adequate visualization is essential during endoscopy. Prior to endoscopy, erythromycin administration has been shown to enhance visualization in these patients; however, guidelines have not fully adopted this practice. Thus, we performed a comprehensive, up-to-date meta-analysis on the issue of erythromycin administration in this patient population.

Methods

After searching multiple databases (November 2015), randomized controlled trials on adult subjects comparing administration of erythromycin before endoscopy in UGIB patients to no erythromycin or placebo were included. Pooled estimates of adequacy of gastric mucosa visualized, need for second endoscopy, duration of procedure, length of hospital stay, units of blood transfused, and need for emergent surgery using odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) were calculated. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed.

Results

Eight studies (n=598) were found to meet the inclusion criteria. Erythromycin administration showed statistically significant improvement in adequate gastric mucosa visualization (OR 4.14; 95% CI: 2.01-8.53, P<0.01) while reduced the need for a second-look endoscopy (OR 0.51; 95% CI: 0.34-0.77, P<0.01) and length of hospital stay (MD -1.75; 95% CI: -2.43 to -1.06, P<0.01). Duration of procedure (P=0.2), units of blood transfused (P=0.08), and need for emergent surgery (P=0.88) showed no significant differences.

Conclusion

Pre-endoscopic erythromycin administration in UGIB patients significantly improves gastric mucosa visualization while reducing length of hospital stay and the need for second-look endoscopy.

Factors that affect visibility during endoscopic hemostasis for upper GI bleeding: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Adequate visibility is an important factor for achieving successful endoscopic hemostasis for the treatment of upper GI bleeding (UGIB). The independent factors that affect visibility during endoscopic procedures have yet to be determined.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the factors that affect endoscopic visibility and to create a model that can predict in which patients unacceptable visibility is suspected before emergent endoscopic procedures for UGIB.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study.

SETTING

University-affiliated tertiary care hospital in South Korea.

PATIENTS

A total of 121 patients admitted because of UGIB.

INTERVENTION

Analysis of the visibility score of the emergency endoscopies for UGIB.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Factors affecting the visibility score of endoscopy and a classification and regression tree (CART) model for predicting of visibility.

RESULTS

The EGD time and the appearance of the nasogastric (NG) tube aspirate were independent factors that were significantly associated with visibility (EGD time, P<.001; red blood appearance in NG tube aspirate, P<.001; coffee grounds appearance of NG tube aspirate, P=.006). Based on these results, a CART model was developed by using 70 patients who had been allocated to the training set. The CART generated algorithms that proposed the use of the appearance of the NG tube aspirate and the EGD time (8.5 hours) to predict visibility. The sensitivity and specificity for predicting poor visibility were 71.4% and 86.4%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The use of the CART model enables the prediction of which patients will have poor visibility during emergent endoscopy.

Acute, nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Acute, nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency encountered worldwide. Despite medical and technological advances, it remains associated with significant morbidity and mortality.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rapid patient assessment and management are paramount. When indicated, upper endoscopy in patients presenting with acute UGIB is effective for both diagnosis of the bleeding site and provision of endoscopic hemostasis. Endoscopic hemostasis significantly reduces rebleeding rates, blood transfusion requirements, length of hospital stay, surgery, and mortality. Furthermore, early upper endoscopy, defined as being performed within 24 h of patient presentation, improves patient outcomes.

SUMMARY

A structured approach to the patient with acute UGIB that includes early hemodynamic resuscitation and stabilization, preendoscopic risk stratification using validated instruments, pharmacologic and endoscopic intervention, and postendoscopy therapy is important to optimize patient outcome and assure efficient use of medical resources.

The Dieulafoy's Lesion: An Update on Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Management

Dieulafoy's lesion (DL) is a persistently wide caliber artery that is observed more frequently at the fifth decade of life in the male population with multiple comorbidities. There are a variety of endoscopic therapies that have been used to treat DL; however, there are no clear guidelines on the best treatment modality. This article systematically reviews the diagnosis, the most commonly reported therapies of DL, and offers a suggested algorithm based upon efficacy of treatment such as initial hemostasis, rebleeding rates, and mortality.

Role of Medical Therapy for Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Mortality from UGIB has remained 5-10% over the past decade. This article presents current evidence-based recommendations for the medical management of UGIB. Preendoscopic management includes initial resuscitation, risk stratification, appropriate use of blood products, and consideration of nasogastric tube insertion, erythromycin, and proton pump inhibitor therapy. The use of postendoscopic intravenous proton pump inhibitors is strongly recommended for certain patient populations. Postendoscopic management also includes the diagnosis and treatment of Helicobacter pylori, appropriate use of proton pump inhibitors and iron replacement therapy.

Tips and Tricks on How to Optimally Manage Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Effective endoscopic therapy for upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding has been shown to reduce rebleeding, need for surgery, and mortality. Effective endoscopic management of acute upper GI bleeding can be challenging and worrying. This article provides advice that is complementary to the in-depth reviews that accompany it in this issue. Topics include initial management, resuscitation, when and where to scope, benefits and limitations of devices, device selection based on lesion characteristics, improving visualization to localize the lesion, and tips on how to reduce the endoscopist's trepidation about managing these cases.

Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Timing of Endoscopy and Ways to Improve Endoscopic Visualization

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) endoscopy is the cornerstone of diagnosis and management of patients presenting with acute UGI bleeding. Once hemodynamically resuscitated, early endoscopy (performed within 24 hours of patient presentation) ensures accurate identification of the bleeding source, facilitates risk stratification based on endoscopic stigmata, and allows endotherapy to be delivered where indicated. Moreover, the preendoscopy use of a prokinetic agent (eg, i.v. erythromycin), especially in patients with a suspected high probability of having blood or clots in the stomach before undergoing endoscopy, may result in improved endoscopic visualization, a higher diagnostic yield, and less need for repeat endoscopy.

Injection and Cautery Methods for Nonvariceal Bleeding Control

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains one of the most common challenges faced by gastroenterologists and endoscopists in daily clinical practice. Endoscopic management of nonvariceal bleeding has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, with significant reduction of recurrent bleeding, need for surgery, and mortality. Early upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is recommended in all patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding within 24 hours of presentation, although appropriate resuscitation, stabilization of hemodynamic parameters, and optimization of comorbidity before endoscopy are essential.

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding - a new approach to clinical and endoscopic management

Overt or occult gastrointestinal bleeding is a frequently observed condition in routine gastroenterological practice. Occult gastrointestinal bleeding is usually a purely incidental finding, based on the discovery of iron deficiency anemia in the laboratory or blood in stool (a positive Hemoccult test). However, overt bleeding accompanied by the clinical features of tarry stool, hematemesis, or hematochezia may be a life-threatening condition, calling for immediate emergency management. In contrast to traumatology, algorithms of emergency and intensive medicine are not sufficiently validated yet for acute life-threatening bleeding. The purpose of this review was to present all established and new endoscopic hemostasis techniques and to evaluate their efficacy, as well as to provide the treating endoscopist with practical advice on how he/she could incorporate these procedures into acute medical management. The recommendations are based on inspection of the study results in the recent published literature, as well as emergency medicine algorithms in traumatology.

Endoscopic management of peptic ulcer bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency around the world and the major cause is peptic ulcer bleeding. Endoscopic treatment is fundamental for the management of peptic ulcer bleeding. Despite recent advances in endoscopic treatment, mortality from peptic ulcer bleeding has still remained high. This is because the disease often occurs in elderly patients with frequent comorbidities and are taking ulcerogenic medications. Therefore, the management of peptic ulcer bleeding is still a challenge for clinicians. This article reviews the various endoscopic methods available for management of peptic ulcer bleeding and the techniques in using these methods.

Endoscopic management of tumor bleeding from inoperable gastric cancer

Tumor bleeding is not a rare complication in patients with inoperable gastric cancer. Endoscopy has important roles in the diagnosis and primary treatment of tumor bleeding, similar to its roles in other non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding cases. Although limited studies have been performed, endoscopic therapy has been highly successful in achieving initial hemostasis. One or a combination of endoscopic therapy modalities, such as injection therapy, mechanical therapy, or ablative therapy, can be used for hemostasis in patients with endoscopic stigmata of recent hemorrhage. However, rebleeding after successful hemostasis with endoscopic therapy frequently occurs. Endoscopic therapy may be a treatment option for successfully controlling this rebleeding. Transarterial embolization or palliative surgery should be considered when endoscopic therapy fails. For primary and secondary prevention of tumor bleeding, proton pump inhibitors can be prescribed, although their effectiveness to prevent bleeding remains to be investigated.

Stress-related mucosal disease in the critically ill patient

Bleeding from stress-related mucosal disease in critically ill patients remains an important clinical management issue. Although only a small proportion (1-6%) of patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) will bleed, a substantial proportion exhibit clinical risk factors (mechanical ventilation for >48 h and a coagulopathy) that predict an increased risk of bleeding. Furthermore, upper gastrointestinal mucosal lesions can be found in 75-100% of patients in ICUs. Although uncommon, stress-ulcer bleeding is a severe complication with an estimated mortality of 40-50%, mostly from decompensating an underlying condition or multiorgan failure. Although the vast majority of patients in ICUs receive stress-ulcer prophylaxis, largely with PPIs, some controversy surrounds their efficacy and safety. Indeed, no single trial has shown that stress-ulcer prophylaxis reduces mortality. Some reports suggest that the use of PPIs increases the risk of nosocomial infections. However, several meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness studies suggest PPIs to be more clinically effective and cost-effective than histamine-2 receptor antagonists, without considerable increases in nosocomial pneumonia. To help clinicians use the most appropriate strategy for treatment of patients in the ICU, this Review presents the latest information on all aspects of stress-related mucosal disease.

Postdischarge Nausea and Vomiting Remains Frequent After Le Fort I Osteotomy Despite Implementation of a Multimodal Antiemetic Protocol Effective in Reducing Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting

PURPOSE

To assess the prevalence of postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV) after Le Fort I osteotomy with and without the use of a multimodal antiemetic protocol shown to decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy with or without additional procedures at a single academic institution formed the intervention cohort for an institutional review board-approved prospective clinical trial with a retrospective comparison group. The intervention cohort was managed with a multimodal antiemetic protocol. The comparison group consisted of consecutive patients who underwent similar surgical procedures at the same institution before protocol implementation. All patients were asked to complete a postdischarge diary documenting the occurrence of nausea and vomiting. Those who completed the diaries were included in this analysis. Data were analyzed with the Fisher exact test and the Wilcoxon rank sum test. A P value less than .05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Diaries were completed by 85% of patients in the intervention group (79 of 93) and 75% of patients in the comparison group (103 of 137). Patients in the intervention (n = 79) and comparison (n = 103) groups were similar in the proportion of patients with validated risk factors for PDNV, including female gender, history of PONV, age younger than 50 years, opioid use in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and nausea in the PACU (P = .37). The prevalence of PDNV was unaffected by the antiemetic protocol. After discharge, nausea was reported by 72% of patients in the intervention group and 60% of patients in the comparison group (P = .13) and vomiting was reported by 22% of patients in the intervention group and 29% of patients in the comparison group (P = .40).

CONCLUSION

Modalities that successfully address PONV after Le Fort I osteotomy might fail to affect PDNV, which is prevalent in this population. Future investigation will focus on methods to minimize PDNV.

Ruling in or out a source of gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The search for a source of gastrointestinal bleeding is associated with two distinct approaches of trying to rule in a specific diagnosis or rule out any potential source of bleeding. The study aim was to understand the conceptual differences underlying the two searches.

METHODS

The performance of endoscopy as diagnostic test is analyzed in terms of Bayes' formula.

RESULTS

The performance of gastrointestinal endoscopy to rule in a suspected lesion is mostly influenced by its underlying specificity. Because the specificity of endoscopy is less likely to be affected by procedural exigencies, the demands on pre-procedural prep and general quality can be more relaxed. In contradistinction, the performance of endoscopy to rule out a suspected bleeding site is mostly influenced by its sensitivity, which can easily be compromised by suboptimal procedural conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Paradoxically, the more urgent, focused, and important search (to rule in a bleeding site), carries less stringent criteria for its execution than the more general and aimless search (to rule out a bleeding site) that frequently ends up just empty handed.

Epidemiology and diagnosis of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common gastroenterological emergency. A vast majority of these bleeds have nonvariceal causes, in particular gastroduodenal peptic ulcers. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, low-dose aspirin use, and Helicobacter pylori infection are the main risk factors for UGIB. Current epidemiologic data suggest that patients most affected are older with medical comorbidit. Widespread use of potentially gastroerosive medications underscores the importance of adopting gastroprotective pharamacologic strategies. Endoscopy is the mainstay for diagnosis and treatment of acute UGIB. It should be performed within 24 hours of presentation by skilled operators in adequately equipped settings, using a multidisciplinary team approach.

Endoscopic management of acute peptic ulcer bleeding

This review discusses the indications, technical aspects, and comparative effectiveness of the endoscopic treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding caused by peptic ulcer. Pre-endoscopic considerations, such as the use of prokinetics and timing of endoscopy, are reviewed. In addition, this article examines aspects of postendoscopic care such as the effectiveness, dosing, and duration of postendoscopic proton-pump inhibitors, Helicobacter pylori testing, and benefits of treatment in terms of preventing rebleeding; and the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiplatelet agents, and oral anticoagulants, including direct thrombin and Xa inhibitors, following acute peptic ulcer bleeding.

Diagnosis of gastrointestinal bleeding: A practical guide for clinicians

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a common problem encountered in the emergency department and in the primary care setting. Acute or overt gastrointestinal bleeding is visible in the form of hematemesis, melena or hematochezia. Chronic or occult gastrointestinal bleeding is not apparent to the patient and usually presents as positive fecal occult blood or iron deficiency anemia. Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding is recurrent bleeding when the source remains unidentified after upper endoscopy and colonoscopic evaluation and is usually from the small intestine. Accurate clinical diagnosis is crucial and guides definitive investigations and interventions. This review summarizes the overall diagnostic approach to gastrointestinal bleeding and provides a practical guide for clinicians.

Multimodal protocol reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy

PURPOSE

To assess the impact of a multimodal antiemetic protocol on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after Le Fort I osteotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy with or without additional procedures at a single academic institution were recruited as the intervention cohort for an institutional review board-approved prospective clinical trial with a retrospective comparison group. The intervention cohort was managed with a multimodal antiemetic protocol, including total intravenous anesthesia; prophylactic ondansetron, steroids, scopolamine, and droperidol; gastric decompression at surgery end; opioid-sparing analgesia; avoidance of morphine and codeine; prokinetic erythromycin; and fluids at a minimum of 25 mL/kg. The comparison group consisted of consecutive patients from a larger study who underwent similar surgical procedures before protocol implementation. Data, including occurrence of PONV, were extracted from medical records. Data were analyzed in bivariate fashion with the Fisher exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Logistic regression was used to compare the likelihood of nausea and vomiting in the 2 cohorts after controlling for demographic and surgical characteristics. A P value less than .05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

The intervention (n = 93) and comparison (n = 137) groups were similar in gender (58% and 65% female patients; P = .29), race (72% and 71% Caucasian; P = .85), age (median, 19 and 20 years old; P = .75), proportion of patients with known risk factors for PONV (P = .34), percentage undergoing bimaxillary surgery (60% for the 2 groups), and percentage for whom surgery time was longer than 180 minutes (63% and 59%; P = .51). Prevalence of postoperative nausea was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the comparison group (24% vs 70%; P < .0001). Prevalence of postoperative vomiting was likewise significantly lower in the intervention group (11% vs 28%; P = .0013). The likelihood that patients in the comparison group would develop nausea was 8.9 and that for vomiting was 3.7 times higher than in the intervention group.

CONCLUSION

This multimodal protocol was associated with substantially decreased prevalence of PONV in patients undergoing Le Fort I osteotomy.