Diagnostic and therapeutic yields of urgent balloon-assisted enteroscopy in overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

Early intervention with double balloon enteroscopy for higher yield for inpatient overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: A propensity matched analysis

Background and Aim

Overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OOGIB) is defined as continued bleeding with unknown source despite esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and colonoscopy evaluation. Small bowel evaluation through video capsule endoscopy (VCE) or double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) is often warranted. We studied the timing of DBE in hospitalized OOGIB patients regarding diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, and GI rebleeding.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of DBEs performed at a tertiary medical center between November 2012 and December 2020. The inclusion criterion was first admission for OOGIB undergoing DBE. Those without previous EGD or colonoscopy were excluded. Patients were stratified into two groups: DBE performed within 72 h of OOGIB (emergent) and beyond 72 h of OOGIB (nonemergent). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for the difference in patients in the two groups. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess factors associated with diagnostic and therapeutic yield. Kaplan-Meir survival curve showed GI bleed-free survival following initial bleed and was compared using the log rank test.

Results

A total of 154 patients met the inclusion criterion, of which 62 had emergent DBE and 92 had nonemergent DBE. The propensity-score-matched sample consisted of 112 patients, with 56 patients each in the emergent and nonemergent groups. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analysis showed a significant association between VCE and emergent DBE and diagnostic and therapeutic yield (P < 0.05). Emergent DBE patients had increased GI bleed-free survival compared to those in the nonemergent group (P = 0.009).

Conclusion

Our data demonstrate that emergent DBE during inpatient OOGIB can impact the overall diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, and GI rebleeding post DBE.

[Use of Device-Assisted Enteroscopy in Small Bowel Disease: An Expert Consensus Statement by the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases]

The introduction of device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) in the beginning of the 21st century has revolutionized the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the small intestine. In contrast to capsule endoscopy, the other main diagnostic modality of small bowel diseases, DAE has the unique advantages of allowing the observation of the region of interest in detail and enabling tissue acquisition and therapeutic intervention. As DAE becomes an essential procedure in daily clinical practice, there is an increasing need for correct guidelines on when and how it is to be performed and what technical factors should be taken into consideration. In response to these needs, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases has developed an expert consensus statement on the performance of DAE by reviewing current evidence. This expert consensus statement particularly focuses on the indications, choice of insertion route, therapeutic intervention, complications, and relevant technical points.

Enteroscopy in diagnosis and treatment of small bowel bleeding: A Delphi expert consensus

BACKGROUND

Enteroscopy plays an important role in the management of small bowel bleeding. However, current guidelines are not specifically designed for small bowel bleeding and recommendations from different international societies do not always align. Consequently, there is heterogeneity in the definitions of clinical entities, clinical practice policies, and adherence to guidelines among clinicians. This represents an obstacle to providing the best patient care and to obtain homogeneous data for clinical research.

AIMS

The aims of the study were to establish a consensus on the definitions of bleeding entities and on the role of enteroscopy in the management of small bowel bleeding using a Delphi process.

METHODS

A core group of eight experts in enteroscopy identified five main topics of small bowel bleeding management and drafted statements on each topic. An expert panel of nine gastroenterologists participated in three rounds of the Delphi process, together with the core group.

RESULTS

A total of 33 statements were approved after three rounds of Delphi voting.

CONCLUSION

This Delphi consensus proposes clear definitions and a unifying strategy to standardize the management of small bowel bleeding. Furthermore, it provides a useful guide in daily practice for both clinical and technical issues of enteroscopy.

Use of device-assisted enteroscopy in small bowel disease: an expert consensus statement by the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases

The introduction of device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) in the beginning of 21st century has revolutionized the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the small intestine. In contrast to capsule endoscopy, the other main diagnostic modality of the small bowel diseases, DAE has the unique advantages of observing the region of interest in detail and enabling tissue acquisition and therapeutic intervention. As DAE becomes an essential procedure in daily clinical practice, there is an increasing need for correct guidelines on when and how to perform it and what technical factors should be considered. In response to these needs, the Korean Association for the Study of Intestinal Diseases developed an expert consensus statement on the performance of DAE by reviewing the current evidence. This expert consensus statement particularly focuses on the indications, choice of insertion route, therapeutic intervention, complications, and relevant technical points.

Quality indicators for capsule endoscopy and deep enteroscopy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Capsule endoscopy (CE) and deep enteroscopy (DE) can be useful for diagnosing and treating suspected small-bowel disease. Guidelines and detailed recommendations exist for the use of CE/DE, but comprehensive quality indicators are lacking. The goal of this task force was to develop quality indicators for appropriate use of CE/DE by using a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

METHODS

An expert panel of 7 gastroenterologists with diverse practice experience was assembled to identify quality indicators. A literature review was conducted to develop a list of proposed quality indicators applicable to preprocedure, intraprocedure, and postprocedure periods. The panelists reviewed the literature; identified and modified proposed quality indicators; rated them on the basis of scientific evidence, validity, and necessity; and determined proposed performance targets. Agreement and consensus with the proposed indicators were verified using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

RESULTS

The voting procedure to prioritize metrics emphasized selecting measures to improve quality and overall patient care. Panelists rated indicators on the perceived appropriateness and necessity for clinical practice. After voting and discussion, 2 quality indicators ranked as inappropriate or uncertain were excluded. Each quality indicator was categorized by measure type, performance target, and summary of evidence. The task force identified 13 quality indicators for CE and DE.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive quality indicators have not existed for CE or DE. The task force identified quality indicators that can be incorporated into clinical practice. The panel also addressed existing knowledge gaps and posed research questions to better inform future research and quality guidelines for these procedures.

Quality Indicators for Capsule Endoscopy and Deep Enteroscopy

INTRODUCTION

Capsule endoscopy (CE) and deep enteroscopy (DE) can be useful for diagnosing and treating suspected small-bowel disease. Guidelines and detailed recommendations exist for the use of CE/DE, but comprehensive quality indicators are lacking. The goal of this task force was to develop quality indicators for appropriate use of CE/DE by using a modified RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

METHODS

An expert panel of 7 gastroenterologists with diverse practice experience was assembled to identify quality indicators. A literature review was conducted to develop a list of proposed quality indicators applicable to preprocedure, intraprocedure, and postprocedure periods. The panelists reviewed the literature; identified and modified proposed quality indicators; rated them on the basis of scientific evidence, validity, and necessity; and determined proposed performance targets. Agreement and consensus with the proposed indicators were verified using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method.

RESULTS

The voting procedure to prioritize metrics emphasized selecting measures to improve quality and overall patient care. Panelists rated indicators on the perceived appropriateness and necessity for clinical practice. After voting and discussion, 2 quality indicators ranked as inappropriate or uncertain were excluded. Each quality indicator was categorized by measure type, performance target, and summary of evidence. The task force identified 13 quality indicators for CE and DE.

DISCUSSION

Comprehensive quality indicators have not existed for CE or DE. The task force identified quality indicators that can be incorporated into clinical practice. The panel also addressed existing knowledge gaps and posed research questions to better inform future research and quality guidelines for these procedures.

Diagnostic and therapeutic yields of early capsule endoscopy and device-assisted enteroscopy in the setting of overt GI bleeding: a systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Small-bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) and device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) are essential in obscure GI bleeding (OGIB) management. However, the best timing for such procedures remains unknown. This meta-analysis aimed to compare, for the first time, diagnostic and therapeutic yields, detection of active bleeding and vascular lesions, recurrent bleeding, and mortality of "early" versus "nonearly" SBCE and DAE.

METHODS

MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify studies comparing early versus nonearly SBCE and DAE. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed; reporting quality was assessed.

RESULTS

From 1974 records, 39 were included (4825 patients). Time intervals for the early approach varied, within 14 days in SBCE and 72 hours in DAE. The pooled diagnostic and therapeutic yields of early DAE were superior to those of SBCE (7.97% and 20.89%, respectively; P < .05). The odds for active bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 5.09; I² = 53%), positive diagnosis (OR, 3.99; I² = 45%), and therapeutic intervention (OR, 3.86; I² = 67%) were higher in the early group for SBCE and DAE (P < .01). Subgroup effects in diagnostic yield were only identified for the early group sample size. Our study failed to identify differences when studies were classified according to time intervals for early DAE (I² < 5%), but the analysis was limited because of a lack of data availability. Lower recurrent bleeding in early SBCE and DAE was observed (OR, .40; P < .01; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The role of small-bowel studies in the early evaluation of OGIB is unquestionable, impacting diagnosis, therapeutic intervention, and prognosis. Comparative studies are still needed to identify optimal timing.

Small bowel enteroscopy - A joint clinical guideline by the Spanish and Portuguese small-bowel study groups

The present evidence-based guidelines are focused on the use of device-assisted enteroscopy in the management of small-bowel diseases. A panel of experts selected by the Spanish and Portuguese small-bowel study groups reviewed the available evidence focusing on the main indications of this technique, its role in the management algorithm of each indication, and its diagnostic and therapeutic yield. A set of recommendations was issued accordingly.

Timing of enteroscopy in overt-obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

the impact of early enteroscopy on the outcome of overt-obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) is still unclear. Our aim was to evaluate the impact of early enteroscopy on overt-OGIB.

METHODS

the PubMed-MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were systematically reviewed. Observational retrospective studies comparing early versus non-early enteroscopy in overt-OGIB were identified. Data on diagnosis, treatment, and rebleeding were extracted from each study, and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

fifteen studies (comprising 1,907 patients) were included. Early enteroscopy was performed in 470 patients and non-early enteroscopy in 1,437 patients. Early enteroscopy was associated with a significantly higher diagnostic yield (odds ratio [OR] = 3.2, 95 % CI: 1.9-5.3; p = 0.002) and therapeutic yield (OR = 4.9, 95 % CI: 1.2-20.5; p = 0.03). However, moderate and high heterogeneity was observed in both analyses (DY I2 = 60.4 %; p = 0.002; TY I2 = 83.1 %; p < 0.001). When considering only studies where enteroscopy was performed during ongoing bleeding or within ≤ 24 h, ≤ 48 h, and ≤ 72 h of bleeding, heterogeneity was removed while the positive effect on diagnostic yield was maintained (OR = 4.7, 95 % CI: 3.4-6.6, p < 0.001, I2 = 0 %). Early enteroscopy did not significantly influence rebleeding rate (OR = 0.87, 95 % CI: 0.40-1.89, p = 0.72) in our analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

in conclusion, early enteroscopy, especially when performed during ongoing bleeding or within 24 h, 48 h or 72 h of the bleeding episode, may increase diagnostic yield. Although an effect on therapeutic yield was observed, the value of early intervention has to be cautiously evaluated due to the high heterogeneity found among results. In our meta-analysis, early enteroscopy did not significantly influence rebleeding rate.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic and therapeutic yield of small bowel endoscopy in patients with overt small bowel bleeding

BACKGROUND

Small bowel endoscopy, including small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) and balloon-assisted endoscopy (BAE), is useful for small bowel bleeding (SBB) assessment. However, the specific management strategy for overt SBB is not well established. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the pooled diagnostic yields (DYs) and therapeutic yields (TYs) of small bowel endoscopy in overt SBB and to determine the optimal endoscopy timing.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed of studies examining the DY and/or TY of small bowel endoscopy in overt SBB. Data on the DY, TY, and timing of small bowel endoscopy were extracted, pooled, and analyzed. The pooled DY and TY of small bowel endoscopy for patients with overt SBB were calculated. Meta-regression and subgroup analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included. The pooled DY was 65.2% and 74.0% for SBCE and BAE, respectively. The pooled TY of SBCE and BAE was 55.9% and 35.8%, respectively. A meta-regression model showed that the timing of endoscopy was significantly associated with the DY of BAE and the TY of SBCE and BAE.

CONCLUSIONS

Small bowel capsule endoscopy and BAE would be useful diagnostic and therapeutic modalities in overt SBB. According to the subgroup analysis, in which the TY seemed to be higher within 2 days after bleeding for SBCE and BAE, the optimal timing of endoscopy would be within 2 days.

Does urgent balloon-assisted enteroscopy impact rebleeding and short-term mortality in overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The diagnostic yield (DY) and therapeutic yield (TY) of balloon-assisted enteroscopy (BAE) in overt obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) is higher in the first 72 h. This study aimed to evaluate if this higher DY and TY after urgent BAE impacted the rebleeding rate, time to rebleed and short-term mortality.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort-study, which consecutively included all patients submitted to BAE for overt OGIB, between 2010 and 2019. Patients were distributed in 2 groups: (1) Urgent BAE; (2) Non-urgent BAE. Rebleeding was defined as an Hb drop >2 g/dL, need for transfusional support or presence of melena/hematochezia.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were included, of which 17 (31.5%) were submitted to BAE in the first 72 h. DY and TY of urgent BAE (DY 88.2%; n = 15; TY 94.1%; n = 16) was higher compared to non-urgent BAE (DY 59.5%; n = 22; TY 45.9%; n = 17) (DY p = .03) (TY p = .001). The rebleeding rate at 1, 2, and 5 years was 32.0%, 34.0%and 37.0%, respectively. Rebleeding was lower after urgent BAE (17.6%; n = 3) compared to non-urgent BAE (45.9%; n = 17) (p = .04). Rebleeding tended to occurr earlier in non-urgent BAE, being at 6-months (32.5%) and 36 months (41.3%) (p = .05). OGIB related 30-day mortality was 5.4% (n = 2) for non-urgent BAE and 0% for urgent BAE (p = .5).

CONCLUSION

Urgent BAE might be associated with higher DY and TY with lower rebleeding and trend toward higher rebleeding-free time.

Small Bowel Enteroscopy - A Joint Clinical Guideline from the Spanish and Portuguese Small Bowel Study Groups

The present evidence-based guidelines are focused on the use of device-assisted enteroscopy in the management of small-bowel diseases. A panel of experts selected by the Spanish and Portuguese small bowel study groups reviewed the available evidence focusing on the main indications of this technique, its role in the management algorithm of each indication and on its diagnostic and therapeutic yields. A set of recommendations were issued accordingly.

The rebleeding rate in patients evaluated for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding after negative small bowel findings by device assisted enteroscopy

BACKGROUND

data on the long-term outcome of patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) with positive small bowel findings in capsule endoscopy but negative small bowel findings in device-assisted enteroscopy are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

this study aimed to evaluate the rebleeding rate and time to rebleed in patients with no small bowel findings in enteroscopy, after a positive capsule endoscopy in the setting of OGIB. Baseline predictors for rebleeding were assessed.

METHODS

a retrospective double-center study was performed, including patients with OGIB with positive findings by capsule endoscopy and negative small bowel findings by enteroscopy.

RESULTS

thirty-five patients were included. Rebleeding occurred in 40 % of patients during a median follow-up of 27 months. Further evaluation in patients with a rebleed was performed in 85.7 %, leading to a final diagnosis in 78.6 %. The rebleeding rate increased progressively over time, from 17.2 % at one month to 54.4 % at four years. Overt bleeding at the time of the first episode was a predictor of rebleeding (p = 0.03) according to the multivariate analysis. This was 50 % at one year compared with 21.8 % in patients with occult bleeding on admission.

CONCLUSIONS

in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding, long-term follow-up and further evaluation may be considered after a positive capsule endoscopy. Even if there are no small bowel findings by device-assisted enteroscopy. The rebleeding rate in our study was 40 %, mainly in the presence of an overt bleeding on admission.

Evaluation of the sensitivity of the Express View function in the Mirocam® capsule endoscopy software

Background: A new computer algorithm called Express-View has recently been introduced by Mirocam, but data concerning its application and efficacy are scarce.Objective: To evaluate the lesion detection rate, per-patient sensitivity and the diagnostic accuracy using Express-View.Methods: All patients who performed CE between January 2018 and June 2019, whose indication was obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) and with findings on CE, were included. Lesions identified in conventional reading were selected and considered as reference.Results: Eighty-nine patients were included, 50.6% male, with a mean age of 68.4 years-old (±12.3). The Express-View mode detected 85.5% of lesions previously detected by conventional reading (524 out of 613). There were 89 missed lesions, mainly erosions or ulcers (44.9%) and angioectasias (38.2%). The lesion detection rate was found to be lower in the jejunum and ileum compared to extra-small bowel locations and duodenum (p = .04). Although Express-View had a per-patient sensitivity for all lesions of 56.2% and a per-patient sensitivity for all clinically significant lesions of 83.1%, it achieved a diagnostic accuracy of 91%.Conclusions: The per-patient sensitivity for all lesions was shown to be below expectations, although the lesion detection rate, the per-patient sensitivity for all clinically significant lesions, and the diagnostic accuracy were shown to be higher.

Emergent Double Balloon Enteroscopy in Overt Suspected Small Bowel Bleeding: Diagnosis and Therapy

Background

Double balloon enteroscopy (DBE) is a diagnosis and therapy method for suspected small bowel bleeding (SSBB). The data for emergent DBE is limited in overt SSBB cases. The aim of this study was to investigate the role of diagnosis and therapy of emergent DBE in patients with overt SSBB.

Material/Methods

The clinical and endoscopic data for patients with overt SSBB undergoing DBE in a single center from January 2010 to December 2017 were collected and analyzed. Emergent DBE was defined as DBE performed less than 3 days of last bleeding onset.

Results

A total of 265 DBEs in 265 patients with overt SSBB were enrolled (mean age, 44.7±17.3 years; 66.8% males). The patients were divided into 3 groups according to the timing of DBE: less than 3 days (n=32), more than 3 days and less than 7 days (n=146), and more than 7 days (n=87) (first group was the emergent group, the latter 2 groups were the non-emergent groups). The diagnosis yield for the emergent group was significantly higher than the non-emergent groups (84.4% versus 65.1% or 59.8%, respectively, P<0.05), but was not different between the 2 non-emergent groups (P>0.05). The top 3 diagnoses were angioectasias (19.6%), diverticulum (16.2%), and tumor (12.1%). For therapy yield, there was a remarkable reducing trend in the emergent group (<3 days), and the 2 non-emergent groups (3 to 7 days group and >7 days group: 78.1%, 58.2% and 39.1%, respectively, P<0.05. The top 3 endoscopic treatments were hemostatic clips (21.9%), argon plasma coagulation (15.8%), and epinephrine injection (14.0%).

Conclusions

The emergent DBE had the highest yields for diagnosis and therapy. The study finding showed a pivotal role of emergent DBE in overt SSBB.

Impact of Urgent Double-Balloon Enteroscopy on the Short-Term and Long-Term Outcomes in Overt Small Bowel Bleeding

BACKGROUND

Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) is a safe and useful procedure for managing small bowel bleeding. However, there are limited studies regarding the preferable timing of DBE and its impact on long-term outcomes.

AIM

We aimed to evaluate the association between the timing of DBE and the long-term outcomes of patients suspected of having overt small bowel bleeding who underwent DBE.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively collected database of patients who underwent DBE procedures between May 2004 and April 2016. The electronic medical records were reviewed, and interviews were conducted via mail and telephone.

RESULTS

One-hundred sixty-five patients could be followed up. The bleeding source was detected during the initial DBE (DBE-positive group) for 102 patients. Sixty-three patients had no definite lesion during the initial DBE (DBE-negative group). Urgent DBE (DBE within 24 h after the last bleeding episode) was performed more often for the DBE-positive group (50/102; 49.0%) than for the DBE-negative group (10/63; 16.1%) (p < 0.0001). Nine patients in the DBE-positive group underwent curative surgery after diagnosis. Among the remaining DBE-positive patients, 38 of 93 (40.9%) had recurrent bleeding during 2675 days of follow-up. Twenty-one of 63 patients (33.3%) in the DBE-negative group had recurrent bleeding during 2490 days of follow-up. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of intervals without rebleeding (p = 0.17).

CONCLUSION

Urgent DBE at the initial bleeding episode was useful for detecting lesions. However, the rebleeding rate was not dependent on the initial DBE results.

Device-assisted enteroscopy: An update on techniques, clinical indications and safety

After more than 15 years since its introduction into clinical practice, indications for device-assisted enteroscopy have greatly expanded. Alongside the consolidated indications such as the diagnosis and treatment of small bowel bleeding, Crohn's disease, hereditary polyposis, small-bowel tumors and complicated celiac disease, device-assisted enteroscopy is nowadays largely used to perform endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with altered anatomy, stent placement, retrieval of foreign bodies, direct insertion of jejunal feeding tubes, and in selected cases of incomplete colonoscopy. This has been made possible by the technical improvements of the enteroscopes and accessories and by the widespread use of the method. Device-assisted enteroscopy endotherapy currently offers a safe and effective alternative to major surgery and often represents the preferred option for treatment of small-bowel pathology. Its safety profile is favourable even in the elderly patient, provided that it is performed in high-volume and experienced centers. The evolution of the enteroscopy technique is a challenge for the future and could be facilitated by the new enteroscopes models. These prototypes need a thorough clinical and safety assessment especially for the complex therapeutic procedures. Large prospective, multicenter studies should be performed to assess whether the use of device-assisted enteroscopy leads to improved patients' long-term outcomes.

Enteroscopy in the Elderly: Review of Procedural Aspects, Indications, Yield, and Safety

Background

As human longevity continues to increase, age-related diseases are more common, which leads to a higher use of gastroenterology services. Endoscopic procedures are generally considered to be of higher risk in the elderly with multiple comorbidities. However, some endoscopic techniques have already been proved to be well tolerated in the elderly.

Summary

<underline></underline>Enteroscopy enables the nonsurgical diagnosis and therapeutic management of a wide variety of small bowel diseases. Although it has been shown to be safe and effective, with high diagnostic yield and therapeutic success rate in the general population, its safety and efficacy in the elderly is largely unknown, and there are still some concerns about its use in these patients.

Key Messages

This review will focus on enteroscopy in elderly people, taking into account patient and procedure characteristics, indications, findings, yield, and complication rate.

Diagnostic Value and Safety of Emergency Single-Balloon Enteroscopy for Obscure Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND

This study assesses the diagnostic performance of emergency single-balloon enteroscopy (SBE) for obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) under general anesthesia versus conscious sedation.

STUDY

The data of 102 OGIB in-patients from June 2015 to June 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The diagnosis and detection rates and adverse events were calculated overall and in relation to age, gender, type of operation and anesthesia, bleeding type, different times of examination, and SBE route. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 24.0, and the diagnosis and detection rates were compared using the Chi-square test.

RESULTS

Among the 102 patients, 66 patients had positive findings, while 11 patients had suspected positive findings, and the diagnosis and detection rates were 64.7% and 75.5%, respectively. Ulcers (19.6%) and tumors (16.7%) were the most common causes of OGIB. There were no statistical differences in diagnosis and detection rates between the ages of ≥60 and <60 and between different genders. Patients with emergency SBE had higher diagnosis and detection rates (68.6% vs. 35.3%, P = 0.023; 80.0% vs. 47.1%, P = 0.016, respectively), when compared with nonemergency SBE patients. The diagnosis rate at 24 hours was higher than that at 2-7 days and one week (88.0% vs. 61.5%, P = 0.030; 88.0% vs. 53.8%, P = 0.007). For overt bleeding, the difference in diagnosis rates at 24 hours, 2-7 days, and one week was statistically significant (100.0% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.006; 100.0% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.006). For occult bleeding, the pairwise comparison revealed no statistical difference. Patients with general anesthesia had a higher detection rate, when compared to patients with conscious sedation (87.9% vs. 63.9%, P = 0.004). In addition, adverse events under general anesthesia were lower, when compared to adverse events under conscious sedation (28.8% vs. 69.4%, P = 0.020). There was no significant difference in adverse events at the different time points (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Emergency SBE under general anesthesia achieves higher diagnosis and detection rates, and fewer adverse events under conscious sedation, when compared to nonemergency SBE, regardless of the route. For patients with overt bleeding, it is easier to find lesions by emergency SBE within 24 hours.