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

Turn over the new leaf of the treatment in peptic ulcer bleeding: a review of the literature

Peptic ulcer bleeding is the most common cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, which has a high mortality risk. The standard therapy for acute peptic ulcer bleeding combines medication administration and endoscopic therapies. Both pharmacologic and endoscopic therapies have developed continuously in the past few decades. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) already reached a high efficacy in ulcer healing and have been widely used in the past few decades. Endoscopic hemostasis, which includes local epinephrine injection, heater probe coagulation, use of hemostatic clips, and/or band ligation, is highly effective with an overall hemostatic success rate of 85%-90%. However, 10%-20% of patients could not be cured by the current standard combination treatment. Recurrent ulcer bleeding, despite an initial successful hemostasis, is also a big problem for longer hospitalization stays, higher mortality, and higher complication rates, especially for malignant ulcer bleeding. How to manage all types of peptic ulcer bleeding and how to prevent early recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding remain unresolved clinical problems. Recently, several novel medications and endoscopic methods have been developed. Potassium competitive acid blockers have shown a stronger and longer acid suppression than PPI. Hemostatic powder spray and hemostatic gel emulsion are novel hemostatic weapons with emerging evidence, which are potential missing pieces of the puzzle. This literature review will go through the development of endoscopic hemostasis to the prospects of novel endoscopic treatments.

Systematic review of self-assembling peptides as topical agents for treatment and prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a significant and potentially lethal event. We aimed to review the efficiency and safety of self-assembling peptides for the treatment and prevention of gastrointestinal tract bleeding.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search for studies describing the endoscopic use of self-assembling peptides for treatment or prevention of bleeding in the gastrointestinal tract in a parallel, independent fashion. The primary outcomes were rates of successful initial hemostasis, delayed bleeding, and rebleeding. The secondary outcomes were adverse events and ease and volume of gel used.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were analyzed. Overall success rate of self-assembling peptides in gastrointestinal bleeding was 87.7% (38%-100%), regardless of etiology or associated treatments. Rebleeding rate ranged from 0% to 16.2%, with a mean of 4.7%, and overall delayed bleeding rate was 5% (range, 0%-15.9%). Only three adverse events were reported in a pooled number of 815 patients. The volume of gel used varied (0.43 to 3.7 mL) according to indication and type of bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The limited available data on the use of self-assembling peptides in gastrointestinal endoscopy suggest a high efficiency and good safety profile.

Endoscopic Diagnosis, Grading, and Treatment of Bleeding Peptic Ulcer Disease

Peptic ulcer bleeding is a major cause for hospital admissions and has a significant mortality. Endoscopic interventions reduce the risk of rebleeding in high-risk patients and several options are available including injection therapies, thermal therapies, mechanical clips, hemostatic sprays, and endoscopic suturing. Proton-pump inhibitors and Helicobacter pylori treatment are important adjuncts to endoscopic therapy. Endoscopic therapy is indicated in Forrest 1a, 1b, and 2a lesions. Patients with Forrest 2b lesions may do well with proton-pump inhibitor therapy alone but can also be managed by removal of the clot and targeting endoscopic therapy to the underlying lesion.

Factors influencing re-bleeding after trans-arterial embolization for endoscopically unmanageable peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Acute peptic ulcer bleeding is the most common cause of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). Endoscopic hemostasis is the standard treatment. However, various conditions complicate endoscopic hemostasis. Transarterial visceral embolization (TAE) may be helpful as a rescue therapy. This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with rebleeding after TAE.

METHODS

We retrospectively investigated the records of 156 patients treated with TAE between January 2007 and December 2021. Rebleeding was defined as the presence of melena, hematemesis, or hematochezia, with a fall (>2.0 g/dl) in hemoglobin level or shock after TAE. The primary outcomes were rebleeding rate and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Seventy patients with peptic ulcer bleeding were selected, and rebleeding within a month after TAE occurred in 15 patients (21.4%). Among the patients included in rebleeding group, significant increases were observed in the prevalence of thrombocytopenia (73.3% vs. 16.4%, p<.001) and ulcers >1 cm (93.3% vs 54.5%, p = .014). The mean AIMS65 (albumin, international normalized ratio, mental status, systolic blood pressure, age >65 years) score (2.3 vs 1.4, p = .009) was significantly higher in the rebleeding group. Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that thrombocytopenia (odds ratio 31.92, 95% confidence interval 6.24-270.6, p<.001) and larger ulcer size (odds ratio 27.19, 95% confidence interval 3.27-677.7, p=.010) significantly increased the risk of rebleeding after TAE.

CONCLUSION

TAE was effective in the treatment of patients with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding. AIMS65 score was a significant predictor of rebleeding after TAE, and thrombocytopenia and larger ulcer size increased the risk of rebleeding after TAE.

Doppler-Guided Second-Look Endoscopy in Peptic Ulcer Bleeding: A Randomised Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment guided by Doppler endoscopic probes (DEPs) during index endoscopy may be associated with improved outcome in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB). As competencies for DEP evaluation are not always available for index endoscopy, we examined the outcome associated with DEP evaluation at second-look endoscopy.

METHODS

The study was designed as a non-blinded, parallel group, randomised controlled trial. Patients admitted with PUB from Forrest Ia-IIb ulcers, controlled by endoscopic therapy, were randomised (1:1 ratio) to second-look endoscopy <24 h with DEP evaluation of the bleeding ulcer or continued standard treatment. Patients were followed up for 30 days. The primary outcome was rebleeding. Secondary outcomes included the number of transfusions, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 62 patients were included. At second-look endoscopy, 91% (29/32) of patients had a positive DEP signal at the ulcer base and were treated with contact thermal therapy (n = 29), injection of diluted adrenaline (n = 23), and haemoclips (n = 7). Among the 32 patients treated with DEP evaluation, only one rebled (3%) compared to four patients (13%) in the control group (p = 0.20). There were no differences in the secondary outcomes between groups, and there were no complications related to DEP evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Second-look endoscopy with DEP-guided evaluation and treatment is safe and associated with a very low risk of rebleeding (3%) in patients with PUB. Second-look endoscopy with DEP evaluation may be considered in selected PUB patients at high risk of rebleeding, and may represent an alternative to the use of DEP for index endoscopy. Nevertheless, we did not find that second-look endoscopy with DEP evaluation significantly improved patient outcome compared to standard treatment.

Adherence to guidelines in patients with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) - results from a retrospective single tertiary center registry

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) are regularly published, yet little is known concerning adherence to recommendations in practice.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess adherence to European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recommendations in patients with non-variceal UGIB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All hospitalized patients with an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) performed due to suspected non-variceal UGIB at our department were included in a prospective registry. Data between 2018-2020 from this registry were retrospectively analyzed. Adherence to the 2015 ESGE bleeding and propofol sedation guidelines was assessed. Adherence to recommendations concerning preendoscopic (risk) evaluation, preendoscopic PPI, transfusion management, and endoscopic management of peptic ulcers was analyzed.

RESULTS

Among 1005 patients (mean age 70.4 years, 42.1% women) the most common bleeding etiologies were gastric or duodenal ulcers (16.8%), esophagitis/GERD (11.1%), and angiodysplasia (9.9%); mortality was 7.6%. Adherence to preendosopic risk evaluation was low, in 0% a Mallampati classification and in 37.5% an ASA scoring was documented. Preendoscopic PPI was started at 58.6%, and adherence to recommended transfusion management was >98%. Peptic ulcers were Forrest-graded in 72.8%. High-risk ulcers were treated appropriately in 77.9% and low-risk ulcers were not treated in 73.6%. Especially Forrest Ib ulcers were undertreated, with an adherence of 59.6%. Only 22/179 (12.3%) patients with peptic ulcers and early endoscopy were consistently managed according to ESGE recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to ESGE guidelines in patients with non-variceal UGIB is moderate to low, even at a tertiary university hospital. Strategies must be devised for guidelines to reach patients in everyday practice.

Predictors of Rebleeding in Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding of Peptic Ulcer Etiology in Kashmiri Population

Background Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) represents a substantial clinical and economic burden and rebleeding is one of the most important predictors of morbidity and mortality. Identifying patients who are likely to rebleed is a critical component of effectively managing patients with bleeding peptic ulcers. So, the study was undertaken to look for predictors of rebleeding in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers and try to find out the new scoring system to predict rebleeding in our population. Material and methods A retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained hospital data of UGIB patients was done and 480 patients of endoscopically documented peptic ulcers whose complete data was available were taken for study. Results Among the studied patients, men constituted 84.6%, and most of the patients were in the third to sixth decade of life with a mean age of 40.9±15.9 years, 76% were from rural areas. Only males with a mean age of 38.4±19.8 rebled with a rebleeding rate of 2.9% only. Half of the patients who rebled were in shock at the time of presentation. Those who rebled received more units of blood transfusion (mean 3±1.8), had a large mean ulcer size of Forest class IIa and IIb and epinephrine injection monotherapy group with varied statistical significance. Among rebleeders (n=14), eight patients were managed by a second endoscopic therapy, and six (42.8%) rebleeders and 1.25% of patients in total needed surgery. Two patients ultimately died giving overall mortality of 0.4% and mortality of 14.3% among rebleeders. Conclusion Our study found a very low rebleeding rate and mortality which could be explained by a young population with fewer co-morbidities and better response to proton pump inhibitor therapy. The significant parameters related to rebleeding were shock at presentation, degree of smoking, units of blood transfused, ulcer size, and high-risk endoscopic stigmata.