Restrictive versus liberal blood transfusion for gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Adherence to patient blood management strategy in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding: a prospective nationwide multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Patient blood management (PBM) adherence in clinical practice is unclear. This real-world practice study assessed the management of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding after the implementation of the PBM strategy.

METHODS

This was a nationwide multicenter and prospective study involving consecutive adults with GI bleeding between March 2019 and March 2021. Patients were examined according to hemoglobin (Hb) level at admission (<7 g/dl, n = 93; 7-8 g/dl, n = 47; 8-9 g/dl, n = 61; and >9 g/dl, n = 249). Study outcomes measures were morbidity and mortality during hospitalization and at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Appropriate anemia or iron deficiency management was considered when adherence to PBM policy was higher than 75%.

RESULTS

A total of 450 patients (57.6% men, median age: 74 years, interquartile range: 63-82) were included. Overall, 55.1% and 59.3% of patients received transfusion and iron supplementation, respectively. The rates of appropriate transfusion and iron supplementation adherence were 90.9% (range: 86.9-93.5%, P = 0.109) and 81.8% (range: 78.5-85.1%, P = 0.041), depending on Hb level, respectively. No associations were observed between adherence to the PBM strategy and length of stay (P = 0.263) or risk of further bleeding (P = 0.742). Patients who were transfused [hazard ratio (HR): 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27-0.85] and iron supplemented (HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.38-1.41), however, appropriately achieved a lower risk of death. Age (HR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.12-1.25) and further bleeding (HR: 39.08, 95% CI: 4.01-181.24) were poor prognostic factors. No serious adverse events were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In this nationwide study, there is a high level of adherence and safety of PBM for the treatment of GI bleeding. Adherence to the PBM strategy improved outcomes in patients with GI bleeding.

The impact of restrictive blood transfusion on the safety of patients with esophageal varices after endoscopic variceal ligation: A single-center retrospective study

An investigation was conducted to examine the impact of restrictive blood transfusion on the safety of early rebleeding following endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) in patients with liver cirrhosis. Data were collected from patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices who underwent EVL at the Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College between September 2021 and March 2023. Clinical information, including serum albumin levels, hemoglobin (Hb) levels, liver function classification, and the occurrence of early rebleeding, was recorded. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on their Hb levels: 60 g/L to 90 g/L (restrictive blood transfusion) or Hb ≥ 90 g/L after EVL. The impact of restrictive transfusion on the post-ligation safety of EVL was observed. A total of 246 cirrhotic patients were included in the analysis. Significant differences were found in Hb levels, liver function classification, early rebleeding rates, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization expenses between the restrictive transfusion and Hb ≥ 90 g/L groups. The early rebleeding rate was significantly varied between the groups with different Hb levels after EVL. Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that restrictive blood transfusion (OR = 4.61, 95% CI: 1.06-19.99; P = .041), Hb (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.95-0.97; P < .001), and Child-Pugh class C (OR = 6.37, 95% CI: 1.28-31.67; P = .024) were identified as independent factors influencing early rebleeding. Our findings suggest that the risk of early rebleeding in cirrhotic patients after EVL may be increased by restrictive blood transfusion, and this should be further investigated in future research.

Emergency medicine updates: Lower gastrointestinal bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a condition commonly seen in the emergency department. Therefore, it is important for emergency medicine clinicians to be aware of the current evidence regarding the diagnosis and management of this disease.

OBJECTIVE

This paper evaluates key evidence-based updates concerning LGIB for the emergency clinician.

DISCUSSION

LGIB is most commonly due to diverticulosis or anorectal disease, though there are a variety of etiologies. The majority of cases resolve spontaneously, but patients can have severe bleeding resulting in hemodynamic instability. Initial evaluation should focus on patient hemodynamics, the severity of bleeding, and differentiating upper gastrointestinal bleeding from LGIB. Factors associated with LGIB include prior history of LGIB, age over 50 years, and presence of blood clots per rectum. Computed tomography angiography is the imaging modality of choice in those with severe bleeding to diagnose the source of bleeding and guide management when embolization is indicated. Among stable patients without severe bleeding, colonoscopy is the recommended modality for diagnosis and management. A transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL hemoglobin is recommended based on recent data and guidelines (8 g/dL in those with myocardial ischemia), though patients with severe bleeding and hemodynamic instability should undergo emergent transfusion. Anticoagulation reversal may be necessary. If bleeding does not resolve, embolization or endoscopic therapies are necessary. There are several risk scores that can predict the risk of adverse outcomes; however, these scores should not replace clinical judgment in determining patient disposition.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of literature updates can improve the care of patients with LGIB.

Emergency medicine updates: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a condition commonly seen in the emergency department (ED). Therefore, it is important for emergency clinicians to be aware of the current evidence regarding the diagnosis and management of this disease.

OBJECTIVE

This paper evaluates key evidence-based updates concerning UGIB for the emergency clinician.

DISCUSSION

UGIB most frequently presents with hematemesis. There are numerous causes, with the most common peptic ulcer disease, though variceal bleeding in particular can be severe. Nasogastric tube lavage for diagnosis is not recommended based on the current evidence. A hemoglobin transfusion threshold of 7 g/dL is recommended (8 g/dL in those with myocardial ischemia), but patients with severe bleeding and hemodynamic instability require emergent transfusion regardless of their level. Medications that may be used in UGIB include proton pump inhibitors, prokinetic agents, and vasoactive medications. Antibiotics are recommended for those with cirrhosis and suspected variceal bleeding. Endoscopy is the diagnostic and therapeutic modality of choice and should be performed within 24 h of presentation in non-variceal bleeding after resuscitation, though patients with variceal bleeding may require endoscopy within 12 h. Transcatheter arterial embolization or surgical intervention may be necessary. Intubation should be avoided if possible. If intubation is necessary, several considerations are required, including resuscitation prior to induction, utilizing preoxygenation and appropriate suction, and administering a prokinetic agent. There are a variety of tools available for risk stratification, including the Glasgow Blatchford Score.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of literature updates can improve the ED care of patients with UGIB.

Adherence to a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy in critically ill patients: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials relatively consistently show that restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategies are safe and associated with similar outcomes compared to liberal transfusion strategies in critically ill patients. Based on these data, the general threshold for RBC transfusion was changed to 70 g/L at a 9-bed tertiary level intensive care unit in September 2020. Implementation measures included lectures, webinars and feedback during clinical practice. The aim of this study was to investigate how implementation of a restrictive transfusion strategy influenced RBC usage, haemoglobin trigger levels and adherence to prescribed trigger levels.

METHODS

In this registry-based, observational study, critically ill adult patients without massive bleeding were included and divided into a pre-cohort, with admissions prior to the change of transfusion strategy, and a post-cohort, with admissions following the change of transfusion strategy. These cohorts were compared regarding key RBC transfusion-related variables.

RESULTS

In total 5626 admissions were included in the analyses (pre-cohort n = 4373, post-cohort n = 1253). The median volume (interquartile range, IQR) of RBC transfusions per 100 admission days, in the pre-cohort was 6120 (4110-8110) mL versus 3010 (2890-4970) mL in the post-cohort (p < .001). This corresponds to an estimated median saving of 1128 € per 100 admission days after a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy was implemented. In total, 26% of the admissions in the pre-cohort and 19% in the post-cohort (p < .001) received RBC transfusion(s) during days 0-10. Both median (IQR) prescribed trigger levels (determined by intensivist) and actual haemoglobin trigger levels (i.e., levels prior to actual administration of transfusion) were higher in the pre- versus post-cohort (90 [80-100] vs. 80 [72-90] g/L, p < .001 and 89 [82-96] g/L vs. 83 [79-94], p < .001, respectively). Percentage of days without compliance with the prescribed transfusion trigger was higher in the pre-cohort than in the post-cohort (23% vs. 14%, p < .001). Sensitivity analyses, excluding patients with traumatic brain injury, ischemic heart disease and COVID-19 demonstrated similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a restrictive transfusion trigger in a critical care setting resulted in lasting decreased RBC transfusion use and costs, decreased prescribed and actual haemoglobin trigger levels and improved adherence to prescribed haemoglobin trigger levels.

Restrictive versus liberal red blood cell transfusion strategies for people with haematological malignancies treated with intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without haematopoietic stem cell support

BACKGROUND

An estimated one-quarter to one-half of people diagnosed with haematological malignancies experience anaemia. There are different strategies for red blood cell (RBC) transfusions to treat anaemia. A restrictive transfusion strategy permits a lower haemoglobin (Hb) level whereas a liberal transfusion strategy aims to maintain a higher Hb. The most effective and safest strategy is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of restrictive versus liberal RBC transfusion strategies for people diagnosed with haematological malignancies treated with intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without a haematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRS) in MEDLINE (from 1946), Embase (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1982), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2023, Issue 2), and eight other databases (including three trial registries) to 21 March 2023. We also searched grey literature and contacted experts in transfusion for additional trials. There were no language, date or publication status restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs and prospective NRS that evaluated restrictive versus liberal RBC transfusion strategies in children or adults with malignant haematological disorders receiving intensive chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or both, with or without HSCT.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened references, full-text reports of potentially relevant studies, extracted data from the studies, and assessed the risk of bias. Any disagreement was discussed and resolved with a third review author. Dichotomous outcomes were presented as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Narrative syntheses were used for heterogeneous outcome measures. Review Manager Web was used to meta-analyse the data. Main outcomes of interest included: all-cause mortality at 31 to 100 days, quality of life, number of participants with any bleeding, number of participants with clinically significant bleeding, serious infections, length of hospital admission (days) and hospital readmission at 0 to 3 months. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies met eligibility; eight RCTs and one NRS. Six hundred and forty-four participants were included from six completed RCTs (n = 560) and one completed NRS (n = 84), with two ongoing RCTs consisting of 294 participants (260 adult and 34 paediatric) pending inclusion. Only one completed RCT included children receiving HSCT (n = 6); the other five RCTs only included adults: 239 with acute leukaemia receiving chemotherapy and 315 receiving HSCT (166 allogeneic and 149 autologous). The transfusion threshold ranged from 70 g/L to 80 g/L for restrictive and from 80 g/L to 120 g/L for liberal strategies. Effects were reported in the summary of findings tables only for the trials that included adults to reduce indirectness due to the limited evidence contributed by the prematurely terminated paediatric trial. Evidence from RCTs Overall, there may be little to no difference in the number of participants who die within 31 to 100 days using a restrictive compared to a liberal transfusion strategy, but the evidence is very uncertain (three studies; 451 participants; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.70, P=0.99; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in quality of life at 0 to 3 months using a restrictive compared to a liberal transfusion strategy, but the evidence is very uncertain (three studies; 431 participants; analysis unable to be completed due to heterogeneity; very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in the number of participants who suffer from any bleeding at 0 to 3 months using a restrictive compared to a liberal transfusion strategy (three studies; 448 participants; RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.06, P = 0.22; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in the number of participants who suffer from clinically significant bleeding at 0 to 3 months using a restrictive compared to a liberal transfusion strategy (four studies; 511 participants; RR: 0.94, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.19, P = 0.60; low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in the number of participants who experience serious infections at 0 to 3 months using a restrictive compared to a liberal transfusion strategy (three studies, 451 participants; RR: 1.20, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.55, P = 0.17; low-certainty evidence). A restrictive transfusion strategy likely results in little to no difference in the length of hospital admission at 0 to 3 months compared to a liberal strategy (two studies; 388 participants; analysis unable to be completed due to heterogeneity in reporting; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference between hospital readmission using a restrictive transfusion strategy compared to a liberal transfusion strategy (one study, 299 participants; RR: 0.89, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.50; P = 0.65; low-certainty evidence). Evidence from NRS The evidence is very uncertain whether a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy: reduces the risk of death within 100 days (one study, 84 participants, restrictive 1 death; liberal 1 death; very low-certainty evidence); or decreases the risk of clinically significant bleeding (one study, 84 participants, restrictive 3; liberal 8; very low-certainty evidence). No NRS reported on the other eligible outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this review were based on seven studies and 644 participants. Definite conclusions are challenging given the relatively few included studies, low number of included participants, heterogeneity of intervention and outcome reporting, and overall certainty of evidence. To increase the certainty of the true effect of a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy on clinical outcomes, there is a need for rigorously designed and executed studies. The evidence is largely based on two populations: adults with acute leukaemia receiving intensive chemotherapy and adults with haematologic malignancy requiring HSCT. Despite the addition of 405 participants from three RCTs to the previous review's results, there is still insufficient evidence to answer this review's primary outcome. If we assume a mortality rate of 3% within 100 days, we would need a total of 1492 participants to have an 80% chance of detecting, at a 5% level of significance, an increase in all-cause mortality from 3% to 6%. Further RCTs are needed overall, particularly in children.

Risk factors and management of gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with or without antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy: a multicenter real-world prospective study

BACKGROUND

Antiplatelet and anticoagulation drugs complicate acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) patients. Limited data about the risk factors and patient management has been presented. This study explored the association between previous antiplatelet or anticoagulant drug usage and clinical outcomes in GIB patients to improve awareness further and optimize treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter, non-interventional, real-world prospective study in 106 hospitals in 23 provinces in China. GIB patients confirmed in the emergency department were included and were grouped according to previous drug histories. Univariate analysis, multivariate logistic regression, and multivariate stratification models were performed separately to investigate the associations.

RESULTS

A total of 2299 patients (57.23 ± 17.21 years old, 68.3% male) were included, of whom 20.1% and 2.9% received antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy, respectively. The all-cause 28-day mortality rates in patients without antiplatelet or anticoagulants, patients undergoing antiplatelet treatment, and patients with anticoagulation therapy were 2.8%, 4.6%, and 10.5%, respectively. After adjusting for confounding factors, both antiplatelet [odd ratio (OR), 2.92; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.48-5.76; p = 0.002] and anticoagulation therapy (OR, 8.87; 95% CI, 3.02-26.02; p < 0.001) were associated with higher 28-day mortality. In the subgroup analysis, blood transfusion, especially red blood cell transfusion, in patients undergoing antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy was associated with a decreased death risk.

CONCLUSION

We confirmed an association between concurrent antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy in GIB patients and elevated 28-day mortality. Blood transfusions could improve poor outcomes in such patients.

Massive Transfusion Protocol and Outcome of Patients with Acute Variceal Bleeding

Background/Aims: The massive transfusion protocol (MTP) can improve the outcomes of trauma patients with hemorrhagic shock and some patients with non-traumatic hemorrhagic shock. However, no information is available regarding whether MTP can improve the outcomes of acute variceal bleeding (AVB). This study aimed to determine the effects of MTP on the outcomes of patients with AVB. Methods: Consecutive patients (n = 218) with AVB who did not have current malignancy and visited the emergency room between July 2014 and June 2022 were analyzed. 42-day mortality and failure to control the bleeding were compared between patients with and without MTP activation. Additionally, propensity-score matching was conducted. Results: The amount of blood product transfused was higher in the MTP group. The 42-day mortality rate (42.1% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.001) and the rate of failure to control bleeding (36.8% vs. 0.5%, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in those who received blood transfusions by MTP. MTP was an independent factor associated with 42-day mortality in the multivariable-adjusted analysis (HR 21.05; 95% CI 3.07-144.21, p = 0.002, HR 24.04; 95% CI 3.41-169.31, p = 0.001). The MTP group showed consistently higher 42-day mortality and failure to control bleeding in all subgroup analyses, stratified by systolic blood pressure, hemoglobin level, and the model for end-stage liver disease score. The MTP group also showed higher 42-day mortality (42.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.001) and failure to control bleeding (42.9% vs. 0%, p = 0.001) in a propensity score-matched analysis (n = 52). Conclusions: MTP was associated with poor outcomes in patients with AVB. Further studies are needed to see whether MTP can be an option for patients with massive AVB.

Assessment, Resuscitation and Medical Management of Variceal and Nonvariceal Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) continues to be an important cause for emergency room visits and carries significant morbidity and mortality. Early resuscitative measures form the basis of the management of patients presenting with UGIB and can improve the outcomes of such patients including lowering mortality. In this review, using an evidence-based approach, we discuss the initial assessment and resuscitation of patients presenting with UGIB including identifying clues from history and physical examination to confirm UGIB, preendoscopic risk assessment tools, the role of early fluid resuscitation, utilization of blood products, use of pharmacologic interventions, and the optimal timing of endoscopy.

Early Goal-Directed Hemostatic Therapy for Severe Acute Bleeding Management in the Intensive Care Unit: A Narrative Review

This is a narrative review of the published evidence for bleeding management in critically ill patients in different clinical settings in the intensive care unit (ICU). We aimed to describe "The Ten Steps" approach to early goal-directed hemostatic therapy (EGDHT) using point-of-care testing (POCT), coagulation factor concentrates, and hemostatic drugs, according to the individual needs of each patient. We searched National Library of Medicine, MEDLINE for publications relevant to management of critical ill bleeding patients in different settings in the ICU. Bibliographies of included articles were also searched to identify additional relevant studies. English-language systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized trials, observational studies, and case reports were reviewed. Data related to study methodology, patient population, bleeding management strategy, and clinical outcomes were qualitatively evaluated. According to systematic reviews and meta-analyses, EGDHT guided by viscoelastic testing (VET) has been associated with a reduction in transfusion utilization, improved morbidity and outcome in patients with active bleeding. Furthermore, literature data showed an increased risk of severe adverse events and poor clinical outcomes with inappropriate prophylactic uses of blood components to correct altered conventional coagulation tests (CCTs). Finally, prospective, randomized, controlled trials point to the role of goal-directed fibrinogen substitution to reduce bleeding and the amount of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion with the potential to decrease mortality. In conclusion, severe acute bleeding management in the ICU is still a major challenge for intensive care physicians. The organized and sequential approach to the bleeding patient, guided by POCT allows for rapid and effective bleeding control, through the rational use of blood components and hemostatic drugs, since VET can identify specific coagulation disorders in real time, guiding hemostatic therapy with coagulation factor concentrates and hemostatic drugs with individual goals.

Review article: Advances in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common emergency with substantial associated morbidity and mortality. Elective colonoscopy plays an essential role in management, with an even more important role for radiology in the acute setting. Recent advances in the management of patients with LGIB warrant review as the management has recently evolved.

AIMS

To provide a comprehensive and updated overview of advances in the approach to patients with LGIB METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search to examine the current data for this narrative review supplemented by expert opinion.

RESULTS

The incidence of LGIB is increasing worldwide, partly related to an ageing population and the increasing use of antithrombotics. Diverticulosis continues to be the most common aetiology of LGIB. Pre-endoscopic risk stratification tools, especially the Oakland score, can aid appropriate patient triage. Adequate resuscitation continues to form the basis of management, while appropriate management of antithrombotics is crucial to balance the risk of worsening bleeding against increased cardiovascular risk. Radiological imaging plays an essential role in the diagnosis and treatment of acute LGIB, especially among unstable patients. Colonoscopy remains the gold-standard test for the elective management of stable patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The management of LGIB has evolved significantly in recent years, with a shift towards radiological interventions for unstable patients while reserving elective colonoscopy for stable patients. A multidisciplinary approach is essential to optimise the outcomes of patients with LGIB.

Challenges in the Management of Esophagogastric Varices and Variceal Hemorrhage in Cirrhosis - A Narrative Review

Over the past decade, significant advancements in pharmacological, endoscopic, and radiographic treatments have emerged in the management of patients with cirrhosis and esophagogastric varices or variceal hemorrhage. These advances have been in several areas, including the role of screening and primary prophylaxis (preventing an initial variceal bleed), evaluation and management of acute esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage, and in preventing variceal rebleeding. Therefore, we believe there is a need for an updated, evidence-based "narrative review" on this important clinical topic that will be relevant for internists, hospitalists, intensive care unit physicians, and those in training. We believe the guidance presented in this narrative review will enhance daily medical practice of health care professionals and has the potential to improve quality of care for these complex patients.

[Gastrointestinal bleeding in old age]

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a frequent symptom, with increasing age as a risk factor. Upper, middle and lower gastrointestinal bleeding are differentiated depending on the location, whereby only upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding are elucidated in this article. The symptomatology varies depending on the localization of the bleeding. German and international clinical guidelines currently exist for the preclinical and clinical management of gastrointestinal bleeding. The main focus of the article is on pre-endoscopic management of upper gastrointestinal nonvariceal and variceal bleeding, including the risk stratification, transfusion and coagulation management as well as the initial pharmacological treatment. In addition, current developments in endoscopic and interventional treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding are highlighted.

The impact of anemia and blood transfusion on mortality after open abdominal surgery in the elderly

BACKGROUND

Major abdominal surgery is associated with considerable mortality in the elderly. Anemia has been linked to increased mortality in other types of surgery, such as hip and cardiac surgery. This study aimed to assess the impact of preoperative anemia on mortality in the elderly undergoing major abdominal surgery, and how allogeneic red cell blood transfusion influences mortality in these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a single-center, register-based retrospective study on patients, who were aged beyond 60 years and underwent one of 81 open abdominal surgical procedures. Patients operated on during the period from January 1, 2000, to May 31, 2013, were consecutively identified in the Danish National Patient Registry. Plasma hemoglobin was measured within 30 days prior to surgery and the primary endpoint was 30-day postoperative mortality. Information about patient transfusions from the hospital blood bank was available from 1998 to 2010.

RESULTS

A total of 3199 patients were included of whom 85% underwent emergency surgery. The total mortality after 30 days was 20%. The median preoperative hemoglobin value of survivors was 7.7 mmol/L vs 6.9 mmol/L in those who died. The difference in hemoglobin values, between those who survived or died, decreased from the pre- to the post-operative phase. The 30-day postoperative mortality was 28%, 20%, and 12% in patients with a preoperative hemoglobin level in the lower, median, and upper quartile respectively. Transfusion therapy was associated with higher postoperative mortality, except in patients with very low hemoglobin values.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative anemia has a clear association with surgically related mortality. The distribution of hemoglobin values in patients with a fatal outcome differs significantly from that of survivors. Red cell transfusion is associated with increased mortality, except in patients with very low hemoglobin values which supports recent guidelines suggesting a restrictive transfusion strategy.

Potential benefits of restrictive transfusion in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

The optimal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy in acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is debated. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of restrictive compared to liberal transfusion strategies in the GIB population. We searched PubMed, CENTRAL, Embase, and Web of Science for randomised controlled trials on 15.01.2022 without restrictions. Studies comparing lower to higher RBC transfusion thresholds after GIB were eligible. We used the random effect model and calculated pooled mean differences (MD), risk ratios (RR) and proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI) to calculate the overall effect size. The search yielded 3955 hits. All seven eligible studies reported on the upper GIB population. Restrictive transfusion did not increase the in-hospital- (RR: 0.94; CI 0.46, 1.94) and 30-day mortality (RR: 0.71; CI 0.35, 1.45). In-hospital- and 28 to 45-day rebleeding rate was also not higher with the restrictive modality (RR: 0.67; CI 0.30, 1.50; RR:0.75; CI 0.49, 1.16, respectively). Results of individual studies showed a lower rate of transfusion reactions and post-transfusion intervention if the transfusion was started at a lower threshold. A haemoglobin threshold > 80 g/L may result in a higher untoward outcome rate. In summary, restrictive transfusion does not appear to lead to a higher rate of significant clinical endpoints. The optimal restrictive transfusion threshold should be further investigated.

Comparison of outcomes for fixed and weight-based four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate dosing regimens

OBJECTIVES

Although fixed dose regimens using four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) are more widely accepted, using a 'one size fits all' approach remains an area of uncertainty. The primary objective of this study was to compare percentages of haemostasis between fixed dose and weight-based dose 4F-PCC regimens for multiple bleed types and anticoagulants. Secondary objectives compared differences in the time to administration and in-hospital mortality.

METHODS

This retrospective, cohort study took place at a community hospital and included patients ≥18 years of age receiving 4F-PCC for major bleeding while on either warfarin or a factor-Xa inhibitor between January 2015 and December 2022. Patients received either fixed dose (treatment) or weight-based dose (comparison). Patients who had been treated for a non-urgent procedure, with unknown haemorrhage source, not on anticoagulation, coagulopathic from hepatic failure, had received dabigatran or were allergic to heparin were excluded. Fisher's exact test and logistic regression were used to analyse primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

94 patients met the inclusion criteria; 38 patients were assigned to the treatment group and 56 to the comparator group. There was no statistical evidence of a difference in the achievement of haemostasis between groups (45% vs 46%, p=0.872). The fixed dose patients received the dose on average 13 min faster than weight-based (32 min vs 46 min, p=0.031). There was no difference in mortality (29% vs 29%, p=0.968).

CONCLUSION

Fixed 4F-PCC regimens may achieve similar outcomes and a faster time to administration compared with weight-based regimens.

How I treat anemia with red blood cell transfusion and iron

Severe anemia is commonly treated with red blood cell transfusion. Clinical trials have demonstrated that a restrictive transfusion strategy of 7 to 8 g/dL is as safe as a liberal transfusion strategy of 9 to 10 g/dL in many clinical settings. Evidence is lacking for subgroups of patients, including those with preexisting coronary artery disease, acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and myelodysplastic neoplasms. We present 3 clinical vignettes that highlight the clinical challenges in caring for patients with coronary artery disease with gastrointestinal bleeding, congestive heart failure, or myelodysplastic neoplasms. We emphasize that transfusion practice should be guided by patient symptoms and preferences in conjunction with the patient's hemoglobin concentration. Along with the transfusion decision, evaluation and management of the etiology of the anemia is essential. Iron-restricted erythropoiesis is a common cause of anemia severe enough to be considered for red blood cell transfusion but diagnosis and management of absolute iron deficiency anemia, the anemia of inflammation with functional iron deficiency, or their combination may be problematic. Intravenous iron therapy is generally the treatment of choice for absolute iron deficiency in patients with complex medical disorders, with or without coexisting functional iron deficiency.

Intravenous errc carboxymaltos vesus oral ferrous sulfate replament in elderly patients after acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (): protocol of a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a life-threatening emergency with a critical economic burden. As a result of bleeding, anaemia often requires intravenous or oral iron supplementation. Elderly patients are even more prone to untoward outcomes after hospital discharge if iron supplementation is inefficient. There is a gap in current guidelines on which supplementation route clinicians should choose. We aim to investigate the effect of one dose of intravenous iron therapy versus 3-month oral iron administration on anaemia in an elderly population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The FIERCE study is an open-label, randomised controlled, two-armed trial. At least 48 hours after the acute non-variceal GIB treatment, patients will be recruited in participating centres. A random sequence generator will allocate the participants to group A (intravenous ferric carboxymaltose, 1000 mg) or group B (oral ferrous sulfate (FS), ca. 200 mg every day) with an allocation ratio of 1:1 on the day of the planned discharge from the hospital. Randomisation will be stratified for participating centres and the need for transfusion within the same hospitalisation before recruitment to the trial. Quality of life assessment, functional measurement and laboratory tests will be performed at baseline, 1 and 3 months±7 days after enrolment to the trial. The primary endpoint is a composite endpoint, including all-cause mortality, anaemia-associated unplanned emergency visit and anaemia-associated unplanned hospital admission within 3 months of enrolment in the trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the relevant organisation, the Scientific and Research Ethics Committee of the Hungarian Medical Research Council (46395-5/2021/EÜIG). We will disseminate our results to the medical community and will publish our results in peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05060731).

Management of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Critical Care Transport

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a relatively common and life-threatening condition encountered by critical care transport crews. It is of paramount importance that transport crews understand the underlying pathophysiology of variceal and nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding as well as the nuanced management of this patient population. This article reviews the current clinical evidence on initial resuscitation, medical management, and advanced invasive therapies (such as balloon tamponade devices) that transport crews should be familiar with to manage these patients. In addition, we present a novel method of continuous balloon pressure monitoring of balloon tamponade devices that is applicable to the transport environment.

Derivation and validation of a novel risk score to predict need for haemostatic intervention in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (London Haemostat Score)

BACKGROUND

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is a common medical emergency, which takes up considerable healthcare resources. However, only approximately 20%-30% of bleeds require urgent haemostatic intervention. Current standard of care is for all patients admitted to hospital to undergo endoscopy within 24 hours for risk stratification, but this is difficult to achieve in practice, invasive and costly.

AIM

To develop a novel non-endoscopic risk stratification tool for AUGIB to predict the need for haemostatic intervention by endoscopic, radiological or surgical treatments. We compared this with the Glasgow-Blatchford Score (GBS).

DESIGN

Model development was carried out using a derivation (n=466) and prospectively collected validation cohort (n=404) of patients who were admitted with AUGIB to three large hospitals in London, UK (2015-2020). Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify variables that were associated with increased or decreased chances of requiring haemostatic intervention. This model was converted into a risk scoring system, the London Haemostat Score (LHS).

RESULTS

The LHS was more accurate at predicting need for haemostatic intervention than the GBS, in the derivation cohort (area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) 0.82; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.86 vs 0.72; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.77; p<0.001) and validation cohort (AUROC 0.80; 95% CI 0.75 to 0.85 vs 0.72; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.78; p<0.001). At cut-off scores at which LHS and GBS identified patients who required haemostatic intervention with 98% sensitivity, the specificity of the LHS was 41% vs 18% with the GBS (p<0.001). This could translate to 32% of inpatient endoscopies for AUGIB being avoided at a cost of only a 0.5% false negative rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The LHS is accurate at predicting the need for haemostatic intervention in AUGIB and could be used to identify a proportion of low-risk patients who can undergo delayed or outpatient endoscopy. Validation in other geographical settings is required before routine clinical use.

Management of Patients With Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Updated ACG Guideline

Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common reason for hospitalization in the United States and is associated with significant utilization of hospital resources, as well as considerable morbidity and mortality. These revised guidelines implement the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools, thresholds for red blood cell transfusion, reversal agents for patients on anticoagulants, diagnostic testing including colonoscopy and computed tomography angiography (CTA), endoscopic therapeutic options, and management of antithrombotic medications after hospital discharge. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools to identify patients with LGIB at low risk of a hospital-based intervention, the role for reversal agents in patients with life-threatening LGIB on vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants, the increasing role for CTA in patients with severe LGIB, and the management of patients who have a positive CTA. We recommend that most patients requiring inpatient colonoscopy undergo a nonurgent colonoscopy because performing an urgent colonoscopy within 24 hours of presentation has not been shown to improve important clinical outcomes such as rebleeding. Finally, we provide updated recommendations regarding resumption of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications after cessation of LGIB.

Performance of the New ABC and MAP(ASH) Scores in the Prediction of Relevant Outcomes in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Background & Aims: Several risk scores have been proposed for risk-stratification of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. ABC score was found more accurate predicting mortality than AIMS65. MAP(ASH) is a simple, pre-endoscopy score with a great ability to predict intervention and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare ABC and MAP(ASH) discriminative ability for the prediction of mortality and intervention in UGIB. As a secondary aim we compared both scores with Glasgow-Blatchford score and AIMS65. Methods: Our study included patients admitted to the emergency room of Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital with UGIB (2017-2020). Information regarding clinical, biochemical tests and procedures was collected. Main outcomes were in-hospital mortality and a composite endpoint for intervention. Results: MAP(ASH) and ABC had similar AUROCs for mortality (0.79 vs. 0.80). For intervention, MAP(ASH) (AUROC = 0.75) and ABC (AUROC = 0.72) were also similar. Regarding rebleeding, AUROCs of MAP(ASH) and ABC were 0.67 and 0.61 respectively. No statistically differences were found in these outcomes. With a low threshold for MAP(ASH) ≤ 2, ABC and MAP(ASH) classified a similar proportion of patients as being at low risk of death (42% vs. 45.2%), with virtually no mortality under these thresholds. Conclusions: MAP(ASH) and ABC were similar for the prediction of relevant outcomes for UGIB, such as intervention, rebleeding and in-hospital mortality, with an accurate selection of low-risk patients. MAP(ASH) has the advantage of being easier to calculate even without the aid of electronic tools.

Clinical Guideline on Perioperative Management of Patients with Advanced Chronic Liver Disease

(1) Background: Patients with advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD) are living longer with more comorbidities because of improved medical and surgical management. However, patients with ACLD are at increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality; (2) Methods: We conducted a comprehensive review of the literature to support a narrative clinical guideline about the assessment of mortality risk and management of perioperative morbidity in patients with ACLD undergoing surgical procedures; (3) Results: Slight data exist to guide the perioperative management of patients with ACLD, and most recommendations are based on case series and expert opinion. The severity of liver dysfunction, portal hypertension, cardiopulmonary and renal comorbidities, and complexity of surgery and type (elective versus emergent) are predictors of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Expert multidisciplinary teams are necessary to evaluate and manage ACLD before, during, and after surgical procedures; (4) Conclusions: This clinical practice document updates the available data and recommendations to optimize the management of patients with advanced chronic liver disease who undergo surgical procedures.

How to manage lower gastrointestinal bleeding in 2022?

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB), originating mainly in the colon, rectum and anus, occurs most often in older patients (7th decade) with co-morbidity, half of whom have coagulation abnormalities due to anti-coagulant or anti-aggregant therapy. In three cases out of four, bleeding regresses spontaneously but can recur in up to one third of patients. The main causes are diverticular disease, vascular disorders (hemorrhoids, angiodysplasia) and colitis. Ten to 15% of patients present in hypovolemic shock. The main problem is to determine the precise location and etiology of bleeding. First-line steps include correction of hemodynamics, correction of coagulation disorders and transfusion, as necessary. Rectal digital examination allows differentiation between melena and hematochezia. In patients with severe LGIB, upper endoscopy can eliminate upper gastro-intestinal bleeding (UGIB). Computerized tomography (CT) angiography can pinpoint the source. If contrast material extravasates, the therapeutic strategy depends on the cause of bleeding and the general status of the patient: therapeutic colonoscopy, arterial embolization and/or surgery. In the absence of severity criteria (Oakland score≤10), ambulatory colonoscopy should be performed within 14 days. Discontinuation of anticoagulant and/or antiplatet therapy should be discussed case by case according to the original indications.

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.

Thromboelastography-Guided Therapy Enhances Patient Blood Management in Cirrhotic Patients: A Meta-analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

Patients with cirrhosis often have abnormal hemostasis, with increased risk of hemorrhage and thrombosis. Thromboelastography provides a rapid assessment of the coagulation status and can guide product transfusions in adult patients with cirrhosis. This study aimed to determine whether the use of thromboelastography in adult patients with cirrhosis decreases blood product use and impacts adverse events or mortality compared with standard practice. A registered (PROSPERO CRD42020192458) systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing thromboelastography-guided hemostatic management versus standard practice (control). Co-primary outcomes were the number of transfused platelet units and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) units. Secondary outcomes were mortality, adverse events, utilization of individual blood products, blood loss or excessive bleeding events, hospital/intensive care unit stay, and liver transplant/intervention outcomes. The search identified 260 articles, with five RCTs included in the meta-analysis. Platelet use was five times lower with thromboelastography versus the control, with a relative risk of 0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.03–0.90]; p = 0.04), but FFP use did not differ significantly. Thromboelastography was associated with less blood product (p < 0.001), FFP + platelets (p < 0.001), and cryoprecipitate (p < 0.001) use. No differences were reported in bleeding rates or longer term mortality between groups, with the thromboelastography group having lower mortality at 7 days versus the control (relative risk [95% CI] = 0.52 [0.30–0.91]; p = 0.02). Thromboelastography-guided therapy in patients with cirrhosis enhances patient blood management by reducing use of blood products without increasing complications.

Update on the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common emergency presentation requiring prompt resuscitation and management. Peptic ulcers are the most common cause of the condition. Thorough initial management with a structured approach is vital with appropriate intravenous fluid resuscitation and use of a restrictive transfusion threshold of 7-8 g/dL. Pre-endoscopic scoring tools enable identification of patients at high risk and at very low risk who might benefit from specific management. Endoscopy should be carried out within 24 h of presentation for patients admitted to hospital, although optimal timing for patients at a higher risk within this period is less clear. Endoscopic treatment of high risk lesions and use of subsequent high dose proton pump inhibitors is a cornerstone of non-variceal bleeding management. Variceal haemorrhage results in higher mortality than non-variceal haemorrhage and, if suspected, antibiotics and vasopressors should be administered urgently, before endoscopy. Oesophageal variceal bleeding requires endoscopic band ligation, whereas bleeding from gastric varices requires thrombin or tissue glue injection. Recurrent bleeding is managed by repeat endoscopic treatment. If uncontrolled bleeding occurs, interventional radiological embolisation or surgery is required for non-variceal bleeding or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement for variceal bleeding.

Indications and hemoglobin thresholds for red blood cell transfusion and iron replacement in adults with gastrointestinal bleeding: An algorithm proposed by gastroenterologists and patient blood management experts

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion has long been the cornerstone of treatment for anemia due to GI bleeding. However, blood is not devoid of potential adverse effects, and it is also a precious resource, with limited supplies in blood banks. Nowadays, all patients should benefit from a patient blood management (PBM) program that aims to minimize blood loss, optimize hematopoiesis (mainly by using iron replacement therapy), maximize tolerance of anemia, and avoid unnecessary transfusions. Integration of PBM into healthcare management reduces patient mortality and morbidity and supports a restrictive RBC transfusion approach by reducing transfusion rates. The European Commission has outlined strategies to support hospitals with the implementation of PBM, but it is vital that these initiatives are translated into clinical practice. To help optimize management of anemia and iron deficiency in adults with acute or chronic GI bleeding, we developed a protocol under the auspices of the Spanish Association of Gastroenterology, in collaboration with healthcare professionals from 16 hospitals across Spain, including expert advice from different specialties involved in PBM strategies, such as internal medicine physicians, intensive care specialists, and hematologists. Recommendations include how to identify patients who have anemia (or iron deficiency) requiring oral/intravenous iron replacement therapy and/or RBC transfusion (using a restrictive approach to transfusion), and transfusing RBC units 1 unit at a time, with assessment of patients after each given unit (i.e., “don’t give two without review”). The advantages and limitations of oral versus intravenous iron and guidance on the safe and effective use of intravenous iron are also described. Implementation of a PBM strategy and clinical decision-making support, including early treatment of anemia with iron supplementation in patients with GI bleeding, may improve patient outcomes and lower hospital costs.

Thromboelastography-Guided Therapy Enhances Patient Blood Management in Cirrhotic Patients: A Meta-analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

Patients with cirrhosis often have abnormal hemostasis, with increased risk of hemorrhage and thrombosis. Thromboelastography provides a rapid assessment of the coagulation status and can guide product transfusions in adult patients with cirrhosis. This study aimed to determine whether the use of thromboelastography in adult patients with cirrhosis decreases blood product use and impacts adverse events or mortality compared with standard practice. A registered (PROSPERO CRD42020192458) systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing thromboelastography-guided hemostatic management versus standard practice (control). Co-primary outcomes were the number of transfused platelet units and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) units. Secondary outcomes were mortality, adverse events, utilization of individual blood products, blood loss or excessive bleeding events, hospital/intensive care unit stay, and liver transplant/intervention outcomes. The search identified 260 articles, with five RCTs included in the meta-analysis. Platelet use was five times lower with thromboelastography versus the control, with a relative risk of 0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.03-0.90]; p = 0.04), but FFP use did not differ significantly. Thromboelastography was associated with less blood product (p < 0.001), FFP + platelets (p < 0.001), and cryoprecipitate (p < 0.001) use. No differences were reported in bleeding rates or longer term mortality between groups, with the thromboelastography group having lower mortality at 7 days versus the control (relative risk [95% CI] = 0.52 [0.30-0.91]; p = 0.02). Thromboelastography-guided therapy in patients with cirrhosis enhances patient blood management by reducing use of blood products without increasing complications.

Thromboelastography-Guided Therapy Enhances Patient Blood Management in Cirrhotic Patients: A Meta-analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials

Patients with cirrhosis often have abnormal hemostasis, with increased risk of hemorrhage and thrombosis. Thromboelastography provides a rapid assessment of the coagulation status and can guide product transfusions in adult patients with cirrhosis. This study aimed to determine whether the use of thromboelastography in adult patients with cirrhosis decreases blood product use and impacts adverse events or mortality compared with standard practice. A registered (PROSPERO CRD42020192458) systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing thromboelastography-guided hemostatic management versus standard practice (control). Co-primary outcomes were the number of transfused platelet units and fresh frozen plasma (FFP) units. Secondary outcomes were mortality, adverse events, utilization of individual blood products, blood loss or excessive bleeding events, hospital/intensive care unit stay, and liver transplant/intervention outcomes. The search identified 260 articles, with five RCTs included in the meta-analysis. Platelet use was five times lower with thromboelastography versus the control, with a relative risk of 0.17 (95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.03-0.90]; p = 0.04), but FFP use did not differ significantly. Thromboelastography was associated with less blood product (p < 0.001), FFP + platelets (p < 0.001), and cryoprecipitate (p < 0.001) use. No differences were reported in bleeding rates or longer term mortality between groups, with the thromboelastography group having lower mortality at 7 days versus the control (relative risk [95% CI] = 0.52 [0.30-0.91]; p = 0.02). Thromboelastography-guided therapy in patients with cirrhosis enhances patient blood management by reducing use of blood products without increasing complications.

Gastrointestinal Emergencies and the Role of Endoscopy

Many gastrointestinal (GI) disorders present to the emergency room with acute clinical presentations, some even life threatening. Common emergencies encountered that require urgent endoscopic interventions include GI hemorrhage (variceal and nonvariceal), foreign body ingestion, obstructive jaundice, postprocedure-related complications such as postpolypectomy bleed or perforation, etc. A major advantage of emergency endoscopy is that it is cost effective and, on many occasions, can be life-saving. The present review will highlight a practical approach on various endoscopic modalities and their use in the GI emergencies.

The impact of red blood cell transfusion practices on inpatient mortality in variceal and non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding patients: a 20-year US nationwide retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies in upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding have reported inconsistent outcomes about packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion practices.

AIM

To assess whether PRBC transfusion is more likely to be dangerous in variceal bleeding than in non-variceal bleeding due to concern of over-transfusion leading to elevated portal pressure.

METHODS

We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (1999-2018). We identified patients with upper GI bleeding using an algorithmic approach, categorising bleeding from non-variceal or variceal sources. Our primary outcome was all-cause inpatient mortality. To control for the severity of bleeding, we performed propensity matching of baseline features, including age, gender, the presence of shock, the need for ICU care and co-morbidities. We also examined PRBC transfusion, inpatient mortality and hospitalisation rates for both populations.

RESULTS

We included 10,228,524 upper GI bleeding discharges; 755,135 patients had variceal bleeding. After propensity matching, PRBC transfusion in variceal bleeders was associated with a 22% increase in inpatient mortality, whereas non-variceal bleeders had a 9% increase in inpatient mortality. Compared to non-variceal bleeders receiving blood transfusion, variceal bleeders had nearly four-fold higher odds of inpatient mortality (propensity-matched OR: 3.8; 95% CI: 3.7-3.8; p < 0.001). Notably, PRBC transfusion rates in both groups have declined since 2011, although it has remained higher in variceal bleeders. Mortality for upper GI bleeding has been declining since 1999.

CONCLUSIONS

Although decreased over the last decade, PRBC transfusion rates remain high for variceal bleeders. In addition, PRBC transfusion appears to be more detrimental in variceal bleeders than in non-variceal bleeders.

[Rational therapy with erythrocyte concentrates - Update 2022]

The use of red blood cell concentrates must follow the dictates of a rational indication. To further ensure this, the "Cross-Sectional Guidelines for Therapy with Blood Components and Plasma Derivatives" 1 of the German Medical Association, published in 2009 and last revised in part in 2014, were systematically revised in 2020. This article presents them.

Comparison of Risk Scores for Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Clinical prediction models, or risk scores, can be used to risk stratify patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB), although the most discriminative score is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To identify all LGIB risk scores available and compare their prognostic performance.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from January 1, 1990, through August 31, 2021, was conducted. Non-English-language articles were excluded.

STUDY SELECTION

Observational and interventional studies deriving or validating an LGIB risk score for the prediction of a clinical outcome were included. Studies including patients younger than 16 years or limited to a specific patient population or a specific cause of bleeding were excluded. Two investigators independently screened the studies, and disagreements were resolved by consensus.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were abstracted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline independently by 2 investigators and pooled using random-effects models.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Summary diagnostic performance measures (sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC]) determined a priori were calculated for each risk score and outcome combination.

RESULTS

A total of 3268 citations were identified, of which 9 studies encompassing 12 independent cohorts and 4 risk scores (Oakland, Strate, NOBLADS [nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, no diarrhea, no abdominal tenderness, blood pressure ≤100 mm Hg, antiplatelet drug use (nonaspirin), albumin <3.0 g/dL, disease score ≥2 (according to the Charlson Comorbidity Index), and syncope], and BLEED [ongoing bleeding, low systolic blood pressure, elevated prothrombin time, erratic mental status, and unstable comorbid disease]) were included in the meta-analysis. For the prediction of safe discharge, the AUROC for the Oakland score was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82-0.88). For major bleeding, the AUROC was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90-0.95) for the Oakland score, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.69-0.77) for the Strate score, 0.58 (95% CI, 0.53-0.62) for the NOBLADS score, and 0.65 (95% CI, 0.61-0.69) for the BLEED score. For transfusion, the AUROC was 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98-1.00) for the Oakland score and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.85-0.90) for the NOBLADS score. For hemostasis, the AUROC was 0.36 (95% CI, 0.32-0.40) for the Oakland score, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.85) for the Strate score, and 0.24 (95% CI, 0.20-0.28) for the NOBLADS score.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The Oakland score was the most discriminative LGIB risk score for predicting safe discharge, major bleeding, and need for transfusion, whereas the Strate score was best for predicting need for hemostasis. This study suggests that these scores can be used to predict outcomes from LGIB and guide clinical care accordingly.

Colorectal Surgery in Critically Unwell Patients: A Multidisciplinary Approach

A proportion of patients require critical care support following elective or urgent colorectal procedures. Similarly, critically ill patients in intensive care units may also need colorectal surgery on occasions. This patient population is increasing in some jurisdictions given an aging population and increasing societal expectations. As such, this population often includes elderly, frail patients or patients with significant comorbidities. Careful stratification of operative risks including the need for prolonged intensive care support should be part of the consenting process. In high-risk patients, especially in setting of unplanned surgery, treatment goals should be clearly defined, and appropriate ceiling of care should be established to minimize care that is not in the best interest of the patient. In this article we describe approaches to critically unwell patients requiring colorectal surgery and how a multidisciplinary approach with proactive intensive care involvement can help achieve the best outcomes for these patients.

Acute Upper Non-variceal and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a common surgical emergency requiring hospital admission and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Appropriate decision-making is essential to make a prompt diagnosis, accurate risk assessment, and proper resuscitation of patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. Despite multiple randomized trials and meta-analyses, there is still controversy on various management issues like appropriate risk stratification, the timing of endoscopy, choosing an appropriate endoscopic, and radiological intervention in these groups of patients. As the usage of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antiplatelet, and antithrombotic agents is common in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding, the physician is challenged with proper management of these drugs. The present review summarizes the current strategies for risk stratification, localization of bleeding source, endoscopic and radiological intervention in patients with acute nonvariceal upper GI, middle GI, and lower GI bleeding.

Transfusion thresholds for guiding red blood cell transfusion

BACKGROUND

The optimal haemoglobin threshold for use of red blood cell (RBC) transfusions in anaemic patients remains an active field of research. Blood is a scarce resource, and in some countries, transfusions are less safe than in others because of inadequate testing for viral pathogens. If a liberal transfusion policy does not improve clinical outcomes, or if it is equivalent, then adopting a more restrictive approach could be recognised as the standard of care.  OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review update was to compare 30-day mortality and other clinical outcomes for participants randomised to restrictive versus liberal red blood cell (RBC) transfusion thresholds (triggers) for all clinical conditions. The restrictive transfusion threshold uses a lower haemoglobin concentration as a threshold for transfusion (most commonly, 7.0 g/dL to 8.0 g/dL), and the liberal transfusion threshold uses a higher haemoglobin concentration as a threshold for transfusion (most commonly, 9.0 g/dL to 10.0 g/dL).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials through updated searches: CENTRAL (2020, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2020), Embase (1974 to November 2020), Transfusion Evidence Library (1950 to November 2020), Web of Science Conference Proceedings Citation Index (1990 to November 2020), and trial registries (November 2020). We  checked the reference lists of other published reviews and relevant papers to identify additional trials. We were aware of one trial identified in earlier searching that was in the process of being published (in February 2021), and we were able to include it before this review was finalised.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of surgical or medical participants that recruited adults or children, or both. We excluded studies that focused on neonates. Eligible trials assigned intervention groups on the basis of different transfusion schedules or thresholds or 'triggers'. These thresholds would be defined by a haemoglobin (Hb) or haematocrit (Hct) concentration below which an RBC transfusion would be administered; the haemoglobin concentration remains the most commonly applied marker of the need for RBC transfusion in clinical practice. We included trials in which investigators had allocated participants to higher thresholds or more liberal transfusion strategies compared to more restrictive ones, which might include no transfusion. As in previous versions of this review, we did not exclude unregistered trials published after 2010 (as per the policy of the Cochrane Injuries Group, 2015), however, we did conduct analyses to consider the differential impact of results of trials for which prospective registration could not be confirmed.   DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We identified trials for inclusion and extracted data using Cochrane methods. We pooled risk ratios of clinical outcomes across trials using a random-effects model. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We conducted predefined analyses by clinical subgroups. We defined participants randomly allocated to the lower transfusion threshold as being in the 'restrictive transfusion' group and those randomly allocated to the higher transfusion threshold as being in the 'liberal transfusion' group.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 48 trials, involving data from 21,433 participants (at baseline), across a range of clinical contexts (e.g. orthopaedic, cardiac, or vascular surgery; critical care; acute blood loss (including gastrointestinal bleeding); acute coronary syndrome; cancer; leukaemia; haematological malignancies), met the eligibility criteria. The haemoglobin concentration used to define the restrictive transfusion group in most trials (36) was between 7.0 g/dL and 8.0 g/dL.  Most trials included only adults; three trials focused on children. The included studies were generally at low risk of bias for key domains including allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data. Restrictive transfusion strategies reduced the risk of receiving at least one RBC transfusion by 41% across a broad range of clinical contexts (risk ratio (RR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.66; 42 studies, 20,057 participants; high-quality evidence), with a large amount of heterogeneity between trials (I² = 96%). Overall, restrictive transfusion strategies did not increase or decrease the risk of 30-day mortality compared with liberal transfusion strategies (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.15; 31 studies, 16,729 participants; I² = 30%; moderate-quality evidence) or any of the other outcomes assessed (i.e. cardiac events (low-quality evidence), myocardial infarction, stroke, thromboembolism (all high-quality evidence)). High-quality evidence shows that the liberal transfusion threshold did not affect the risk of infection (pneumonia, wound infection, or bacteraemia). Transfusion-specific reactions are uncommon and were inconsistently reported within trials. We noted less certainty in the strength of evidence to support the safety of restrictive transfusion thresholds for the following predefined clinical subgroups: myocardial infarction, vascular surgery, haematological malignancies, and chronic bone-marrow disorders.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Transfusion at a restrictive haemoglobin concentration decreased the proportion of people exposed to RBC transfusion by 41% across a broad range of clinical contexts. Across all trials, no evidence suggests that a restrictive transfusion strategy impacted 30-day mortality, mortality at other time points, or morbidity (i.e. cardiac events, myocardial infarction, stroke, pneumonia, thromboembolism, infection) compared with a liberal transfusion strategy. Despite including 17 more randomised trials (and 8846 participants), data remain insufficient to inform the safety of transfusion policies in important and selected clinical contexts, such as myocardial infarction, chronic cardiovascular disease, neurological injury or traumatic brain injury, stroke, thrombocytopenia, and cancer or haematological malignancies, including chronic bone marrow failure.  Further work is needed to improve our understanding of outcomes other than mortality. Most trials compared only two separate thresholds for haemoglobin concentration, which may not identify the actual optimal threshold for transfusion in a particular patient. Haemoglobin concentration may not be the most informative marker of the need for transfusion in individual patients with different degrees of physiological adaptation to anaemia. Notwithstanding these issues, overall findings provide good evidence that transfusions with allogeneic RBCs can be avoided in most patients with haemoglobin thresholds between the range of 7.0 g/dL and 8.0 g/dL. Some patient subgroups might benefit from RBCs to maintain higher haemoglobin concentrations; research efforts should focus on these clinical contexts.

Factors associated with red blood cell transfusion among hospitalized patients: a cross-sectional study

Red blood cell (RBC) transfusion is a clinically effective therapy in anemia, for example in patients with malignancies (Shander et al., 2020), bleeding (Odutayo et al., 2017), and preoperative anemia (Padmanabhan et al., 2019). The past few decades have witnessed a shortage of blood for transfusion due to limited health insurance coverage for blood use and the rapid expansion of hospitals (Chen et al., 2011; Shi et al., 2014). Blood donation levels may easily be affected by general changes in the environment, policy, major events such as disasters, and public sentiment (Hu et al., 2019). Meanwhile, the transfusion of allogeneic RBC is a double-edged sword, increasing the possibility of infectious and immunological complications, and also leading to higher morbidity and mortality after transfusion (Frank et al., 2012). Considering that the continual shortfall has been increasingly prominent, identifying the factors associated with RBC transfusion could help blood transfusion departments to improve their supply of blood products as well as their inventory management (O'Donnell et al., 2018).

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients 80 years old and over. A comparison with younger patients and risk factors analysis for in-hospital and delayed mortality

INTRODUCTION

Outcomes in old patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) have been scarcely studied. Our aim was to compare very old individuals (>80 years old) with younger patients with UGIB, and to identify risk factors for the main outcomes.

METHODS

A single-centre prospectively collected database was analysed. Descriptive, inferential and multivariate logistic regression models were performed. Main clinical outcomes were in-hospital and delayed 6-month mortality.

RESULTS

698 patients were included, 143 very old and 555 aged <80. Old patients differed from younger ones in comorbidities (85.9% vs. 62%, P < .0001), oral anticoagulants (32.3% vs. 12.7%; P < .0001), and antiplatelets intake (32.3% vs. 21.2%; P < .007). No differences were found in the need for endoscopic interventions, blood unit transfusions, hospital stay, in-hospital rebleeding and mortality. Among very old patients, creatinine levels were higher in those who died compared with the ones who survived (1.92 ± 1.46 vs. 1.25 ± 0.59 mg/dL; P = .002), they had lower haemoglobin levels (8.1 ± 1.4 vs. 9.1 ± 2.4 g/dL; P = .04) and longer hospital stays (17.75 ± 15.5 vs. 8.1 ± 8.4 days; P < .0001). Logistic regression showed creatinine levels (OR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.24-4.74; P = .01), cirrhosis (OR: 2.88, 95% CI: 1.88-17.34; P = .04) and being an impatient (OR: 3.90; 95% CI: 1.11-20; P = .035) were independent risk factors for mortality in older patients. They had an increased delayed 6-month mortality compared with younger patients (17.5% vs. 8%, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Creatinine levels, cirrhosis or the onset of UGIB while being an inpatient were independent risk factors for mortality in very old patients. Delayed mortality was higher among them, mostly caused by cardiovascular events and neoplasms, but not in-hospital mortality.

Early detection of anaemia in primary care with haemoglobinometry: ANHEMOG clinical trial protocol

Abstract

Background

Detecting, treating and monitoring anaemia has a functional, social and economic impact on patients’ quality of life and the health system, since inadequate monitoring can lead to more accident & emergency visits and hospitalizations. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact in the patient clinical outcomes of using haemoglobinometry to early detect anaemia in patients with chronic anaemia in primary care.

Methods

Randomized controlled trial Capillary haemoglobin will be measured using a haemoglobinometer on a monthly basis in the intervention group. In the control group, the protocol currently in force at the primary care centre will be followed and venous haemoglobin will be measured. Any cases of anaemia detected in either group will be referred to the transfusion circuit of the reference hospital.

Discusion

The results will shed light on the impact of the intervention on the volume of hospitalizations and accident & emergency (A&E) visits due to anaemia, as well as patients’ quality of life. Chronic and repeated bouts of anaemia are detected late, thus leading to decompensation in chronic diseases and, in turn, more A&E visits and hospitalizations. The intervention should improve these outcomes since treatment could be performed without delay. Improving response times would decrease decompensation in chronic diseases, as well as A&E visits and hospitalizations, and improve quality of life. The primary care nurse case manager will perform the intervention, which should improve existing fragmentation between different care levels.

Trial registration

NCT04757909. Registered 17 February 2021. Retrospectively registered.

Progress in new hemostasis techniques for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is one of the most common acute and critical illnesses in the emergency department. It mainly refers to gastrointestinal bleeding above the Treitz ligament, and the mortality rate is about 2%-10%. The main clinical manifestations are hematemesis and/or hematochezia. The diagnosis is mainly based on clinical manifestations combined with laboratory and imaging findings. Due to the rapid onset and severe nature of the condition, there are various treatment methods according to different causes. This article reviews the diagnosis and treatment of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Red Blood Cell Transfusion Volumes According to AIMS65 Scores in Patients with Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

OBJECTIVE

Fluid supplementation and red blood cell (RBC) transfusions form first-line management strategies to maintain circulating blood volumes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). In this study, we aimed to analyze the utility of the AIMS65 score in predicting the volume of RBC transfusion required in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.

METHODS

In this single-center, retrospective study, the data of patients admitted between January 2019 and December 2019 with suspected UGIB were retrospectively reviewed. The RBC volume transfused during pre- and postendoscopic hemostasis was measured in relation to various patient factors including the AIMS65 scores.

RESULTS

Transfusion rates, the mean number of transfused RBC units, and the duration of hospital stay differed significantly between patients with low AIMS65 scores and those with high AIMS65 scores. Patients with an AIMS65 score of 3 were transfused with more RBC units in the postendoscopic hemostasis period, compared with those with an AIMS65 score of 0, 1, or 2 (with a mean of 4.33 ± 2.07 and 2.67 ± 4.1 units transfused during the pre-endoscopic and postendoscopic hemostasis periods, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Patients with UGIB and with an AIMS65 score of 3 were more likely to require transfusions of RBCs.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that the initial assessment of patients presenting with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding should include: a history of co-morbidities and medications that promote bleeding; hemodynamic parameters; physical examination (including digital rectal examination); and laboratory markers. A risk score can be used to aid, but should not replace, clinician judgment.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends that, in patients presenting with a self-limited bleed and no adverse clinical features, an Oakland score of ≤ 8 points can be used to guide the clinician decision to discharge the patient for outpatient investigation.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 7 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of 7-9 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and a history of acute or chronic cardiovascular disease, a more liberal red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 8 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of ≥ 10 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients with major acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding, colonoscopy should be performed sometime during their hospital stay because there is no high quality evidence that early colonoscopy influences patient outcomes.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends that patients with hemodynamic instability and suspected ongoing bleeding undergo computed tomography angiography before endoscopic or radiologic treatment to locate the site of bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends withholding vitamin K antagonists in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding and correcting their coagulopathy according to the severity of bleeding and their thrombotic risk. In patients with hemodynamic instability, we recommend administering intravenous vitamin K and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), or fresh frozen plasma if PCC is not available.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends temporarily withholding direct oral anticoagulants at presentation in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE does not recommend withholding aspirin in patients taking low dose aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention. If withheld, low dose aspirin should be resumed, preferably within 5 days or even earlier if hemostasis is achieved or there is no further evidence of bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 10: ESGE does not recommend routinely discontinuing dual antiplatelet therapy (low dose aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor antagonist) before cardiology consultation. Continuation of the aspirin is recommended, whereas the P2Y12 receptor antagonist can be continued or temporarily interrupted according to the severity of bleeding and the ischemic risk. If interrupted, the P2Y12 receptor antagonist should be restarted within 5 days, if still indicated.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

New Trends and Advances in Non-Variceal Gastrointestinal Bleeding-Series II

The gastrointestinal tract is a long tubular structure wherein any point in the mucosa along its entire length could be the source of a hemorrhage. Upper (esophagel and gastroduodenal) and lower (jejunum, ileum, and colon) gastrointestinal bleeding are common. Gastroduodenal and colonic bleeding are more frequent than bleeding from the small bowel, but nowadays the entire gastrointestinal tract can be explored endoscopically and bleeding lesions can be locally treated successfully to stop or prevent further bleeding. The extensive use of antiplatelet and anticoagulants drugs in cardiovascular patients is, at least in part, the cause of the increasing number of patients suffering from gastrointestinal bleeding. Patients with these conditions are usually older and more fragile because of their comorbidities. The correct management of antithrombotic drugs in cases of gastrointestinal bleeding is essential for a successful outcome for patients. The influence of the microbiome in the pathogenesis of small bowel bleeding is an example of the new data that are emerging as potential therapeutic target for bleeding prevention. This text summarizes the latest research and advances in all forms of acute gastrointestinal bleeding (i.e., upper, small bowel and lower). Diagnosis is approached, and medical, endoscopic or antithrombotic management are discussed in the text in an accessible and comprehensible way.