Erythromycin prior to endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: a cost-effectiveness analysis

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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.

Venous Thromboembolism Chemoprophylaxis in Knee Arthroscopy: A Break-Even Analysis of Cost

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious and costly complication after knee arthroscopy. There continues to be debate regarding the use of VTE prophylaxis after knee arthroscopy, and minimal research has explored its cost-effectiveness.

HYPOTHESIS

Both aspirin and enoxaparin would be cost-effective in preventing symptomatic VTE.

STUDY DESIGN

Economic and decision analysis; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

The literature was searched and the TriNetX research database was queried to determine a range of initial rates of VTE. An open-access retail database was used to determine the mean retail price for aspirin (325 mg) and enoxaparin (30 mg and 40 mg). Our institutional records were used to determine the cost of treating VTE. A "break-even" analysis was then performed to determine the absolute risk reduction necessary to make these drugs cost-effective. This value was then used to calculate the number of patients who would need to be treated (NNT) to prevent a single VTE while still breaking even on cost.

RESULTS

The cost of treating VTE was $9407 (US Dollars). Aspirin (325 mg), enoxaparin (30 mg), and enoxaparin (40 mg) were found to cost $1.86, $188.72, and $99.99, respectively. The low, TriNetX, and high rates of VTE were 0.34%, 0.86%, and 10.9%, respectively. Aspirin was cost-effective at all 3 rates if the initial rate decreased by 0.02% (NNT = 5058). Both formulations of enoxaparin were cost-effective at the high initial rate if they decreased by 2.01% (NNT = 50) and 1.06% (NNT = 94), respectively. However, at the low and TriNetX rates, the 2 doses of enoxaparin were not cost-effective because their final break-even rate exceeded the initial VTE rate.

CONCLUSION

Aspirin and, in some cases, enoxaparin are cost-effective treatments for VTE prophylaxis after knee arthroscopy.

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

BACKGROUND/AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

Quality indicators in gastroscopy. Gastroscopy procedure

Within the project "Quality indicators in digestive endoscopy", pioneered by the Spanish Society for Digestive Diseases (SEPD), the objective of this research is to suggest the structure, process, and results procedures and indicators necessary to implement and assess quality in the gastroscopy setting. First, a chart was designed with the steps to be followed during a gastroscopy procedure. Secondly, a team of experts in care quality and/or endoscopy performed a qualitative review of the literature searching for quality indicators for endoscopic procedures, including gastroscopies. Finally, using a paired analysis approach, a selection of the literature obtained was undertaken. For gastroscopy, a total of nine process indicators were identified (one preprocedure, eight intraprocedure). Evidence quality was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) classification scale.

Erythromycin infusion prior to endoscopy for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a pilot randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of erythromycin infusion and gastric lavage in order to improve the quality of visualization during emergency upper endoscopy.

METHODS

We performed a prospective randomized pilot study. Patients presented with hematemesis or melena within 12 hours and were randomly assigned to the erythromycin group (intravenous infusion of erythromycin), gastric lavage group (nasogastric tube placement with gastric lavage), or erythromycin + gastric lavage group (both erythromycin infusion and gastric lavage). The primary outcome was satisfactory visualization. Secondary outcomes included identification of a bleeding source, the success rate of hemostasis, duration of endoscopy, complications related to erythromycin infusion or gastric lavage, number of transfused blood units, rebleeding rate, and bleeding-related mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients were randomly assigned: 14 patients in the erythromycin group; 15 patients in the gastric lavage group; and 14 patients in the erythromycin + gastric lavage group. Overall satisfactory visualization was achieved in 81% of patients: 92.8% in the erythromycin group; 60.0% in the gastric lavage group; and 92.9% in the erythromycin + gastric lavage group, respectively (p = 0.055). The identification of a bleeding source was possible in all cases. The success rate of hemostasis, duration of endoscopy, and number of transfused blood units did not significantly differ between groups. There were no complications. Rebleeding occurred in three patients (7.0%). Bleeding-related mortality was not reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous erythromycin infusion prior to emergency endoscopy for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding seems to provide satisfactory endoscopic visualization.

Risks versus benefits of gastrointestinal endoscopy during pregnancy

Although gastrointestinal endoscopy is generally safe, its safety must be separately analyzed during pregnancy with regard to fetal safety. Fetal risks from endoscopic medications are minimized by avoiding FDA category D drugs, minimizing endoscopic medications, and anesthesiologist attendance at endoscopy. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy seems to be relatively safe for the fetus and may be performed when strongly indicated during pregnancy. Despite limited clinical data, endoscopic banding of esophageal varices and endoscopic hemostasis of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding seems justifiable during pregnancy. Flexible sigmoidoscopy during pregnancy also appears to be relatively safe for the fetus and may be performed when strongly indicated. Colonoscopy may be considered in pregnant patients during the second trimester if there is a strong indication. Data on colonoscopy during the other trimesters are limited. Therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography seems to be relatively safe during pregnancy and should be performed for strong indications (for example, complicated choledocholithiasis). Endoscopic safety precautions during pregnancy include the performance of endoscopy in hospital by an expert endoscopist and only when strongly indicated, deferral of endoscopy to the second trimester whenever possible, and obstetric consultation.

Endoscopic therapy for severe ulcer bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding secondary to ulcer disease occurs commonly and results in significant patient morbidity and medical expense. After initial resuscitation, carefully performed endoscopy provides an accurate diagnosis of the source of the UGI hemorrhage and can reliably identify those high-risk subgroups that may benefit most from endoscopic hemostasis. Effective endoscopic hemostasis of ulcer bleeding can significantly improve outcomes by reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirement, and need for surgery, as well as reduce the cost of medical care. This article discusses the important aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of bleeding from ulcers, with a focus on endoscopic therapy.

Pharmacologic therapy for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

There are many clinical outcome measures for evaluation of the effectiveness of a pharmacologic agent in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). As a preemptive treatment, it should reduce the need for emergency endoscopy and endoscopic intervention, facilitate the efficient identification of the bleeding source and, hence, shorten procedure time and reduce the risk of procedure-related complications. As an effective adjunctive therapy after endoscopic hemostasis, it should reduce the incidence of recurrent bleeding and the need to repeat endoscopic hemostasis. This article provides an overview of different pharmacologic agents that have been used in the management of UGIB.

Prokinetics in acute upper GI bleeding: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent data suggest that administration of prokinetics before gastroscopy may be useful in patients with acute upper GI bleeding (UGIB). Published studies are limited in the number of subjects evaluated, and the conclusions are disparate.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the evidence of administering prokinetic agents before EGD in acute UGIB.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Comprehensive literature searches from 1990 to January 2010 were performed. We selected for meta-analysis randomized trials assessing prokinetic agents in acute UGIB. The primary outcome was the need for a repeat EGD. Secondary outcomes included endoscopic visualization, blood transfusions, duration of hospitalization, and surgery. Results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs).

RESULTS

From 487 citations identified, we selected 3 fully published articles and 2 abstracts assessing a total of 316 patients. Erythromycin (3 studies) and metoclopramide (2 studies) were compared with either placebo (2 studies) or no treatment (3 studies). A prokinetic agent significantly reduced the need for repeat EGD (OR 0.55; 95% CI, 0.32-0.94). The number of units of blood was not significantly altered (WMD, -0.40; 95% CI, -0.86 to 0.06) nor was hospital stay (WMD, -1.04; 95% CI, -2.83 to 0.76) or the need for surgery (OR 1.11; 95% CI, 0.27-4.67). Endoscopic visualization was not analyzed because the disparate definitions across studies did not allow for meaningful clinical inferences.

LIMITATIONS

The results are limited by the small number of subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous erythromycin or metoclopramide immediately before EGD in acute UGIB patients decreases the need for a repeat EGD, but does not improve other clinically relevant measurable outcomes.

Cost-effectiveness of fracture prevention in men who receive androgen deprivation therapy for localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) increases the risk for fractures in patients with prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of measuring bone mineral density (BMD) before initiating ADT followed by alendronate therapy in men with localized prostate cancer.

DESIGN

Markov state-transition model simulating the progression of prostate cancer and the incidence of hip fracture.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature.

TARGET POPULATION

A hypothetical cohort of men aged 70 years with locally advanced or high-risk localized prostate cancer starting a 2-year course of ADT after radiation therapy.

TIME HORIZON

Lifetime.

PERSPECTIVE

Societal.

INTERVENTION

No BMD test or alendronate therapy, a BMD test followed by selective alendronate therapy for patients with osteoporosis, or universal alendronate therapy without a BMD test.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), measured by cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

The ICERs for the strategy of a BMD test and selective alendronate therapy for patients with osteoporosis and universal alendronate therapy without a BMD test were $66,800 per QALY gained and $178,700 per QALY gained, respectively.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSES

The ICER for universal alendronate therapy without a BMD test decreased to $100,000 per QALY gained, assuming older age, a history of fractures, lower mean BMD before ADT, or a lower cost of alendronate.

LIMITATIONS

No evidence shows that alendronate reduces actual fracture rates in patients with prostate cancer who receive ADT. The model predicted fracture rates by using data on the surrogate BMD end point.

CONCLUSION

In patients starting adjuvant ADT for locally advanced or high-risk localized prostate cancer, a BMD test followed by selective alendronate for those with osteoporosis is a cost-effective use of resources. Routine use of alendronate without a BMD test is justifiable in patients at higher risk for hip fractures.

Therapeutic endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Endoscopy is the primary diagnostic and therapeutic tool for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The performance of endoscopic therapy depends on findings of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). For peptic ulcer disease-the most common etiology of UGIB-endoscopic therapy is indicated for findings of major SRH, such as active bleeding, oozing, or the presence of a nonbleeding visible vessel, but not indicated for minor SRH, such as a pigmented flat spot or a simple ulcer with a homogeneous clean base. Endoscopic therapies include injection, ablation, and mechanical therapy. Monotherapy reduces the risk of rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer disease with major SRH to about 20%. Combination therapy, especially injection followed by either ablation or mechanical therapy, is generally recommended to further reduce the risk of rebleeding to about 10%. Endoscopic dual hemostasis by an experienced endoscopist reduces the risk of rebleeding, the need for surgery, the number of blood transfusions required, and the length of hospital stay. This Review article comprehensively analyzes the principles, indications, instrumentation, techniques, and efficacy of endoscopic hemostasis.

Management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to ulcer disease is common and results in substantial patient morbidity and medical expense. After initial resuscitation to stabilize the patient, carefully performed endoscopy provides an accurate diagnosis and identifies high-risk ulcer patients who are likely to rebleed with medical therapy alone and will benefit most from endoscopic hemostasis. For patients with major stigmata of ulcer hemorrhage--active arterial bleeding, nonbleeding visible vessel, and adherent clot--combination therapy with epinephrine injection and either thermal coagulation (multipolar or heater probe) or endoclips is recommended. High-dose intravenous proton pump inhibitors are recommended as concomitant therapy after successful endoscopic hemostasis. Patients with minor stigmata or clean-based ulcers will not benefit from endoscopic treatment and should receive high-dose oral proton pump inhibitor therapy. Effective medical and endoscopic management of ulcer hemorrhage can significantly improve outcomes and decrease the cost of medical care by reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirements, and the need for surgery.