Gastrointestinal hemorrhage in warfarin anticoagulated patients: incidence, risk factor, management, and outcome

Risk factors for anticoagulant-associated gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

There may be many predictors of anticoagulation-related gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), but until now, systematic reviews and assessments of the certainty of the evidence have not been published. We conducted a systematic review to identify all risk factors for anticoagulant-associated GIB to inform risk prediction in the management of anticoagulation- related GIB.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to search PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases (from inception through January 21, 2022) using the following search terms: anticoagulants, heparin, warfarin, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, DOACs, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, risk factors. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, studies of risk factors for anticoagulation-related GIB were identified. Risk factors for anticoagulant-associated GIB were used as the outcome index of this review.

RESULTS

We included 34 studies in our analysis. For anticoagulant-associated GIB, moderate-certainty evidence showed a probable association with older age, kidney disease, concomitant use of aspirin, concomitant use of the antiplatelet agent, heart failure, myocardial infarction, hematochezia, renal failure, coronary artery disease, helicobacter pylori infection, social risk factors, alcohol use, smoking, anemia, history of sleep apnea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, international normalized ratio (INR), obesity et al. Some of these factors are not included in current GIB risk prediction models. such as anemia, co-administration of gemfibrozil, co-administration of verapamil or diltiazem, INR, heart failure, myocardial infarction, etc.

CONCLUSION

The study found that anemia, co-administration of gemfibrozil, co-administration of verapamil or diltiazem, INR, heart failure, myocardial infarction et al. were associated with anticoagulation-related GIB, and these factors were not in the existing prediction models. This study informs risk prediction for anticoagulant-associated GIB, it also informs guidelines for GIB prevention and future research.

Guidelines on optimizing the use of proton pump inhibitors: PPI stewardship

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been available for over three decades and are among the most commonly prescribed medications. They are effective in treating a variety of gastric acid-related disorders. They are freely available and based on current evidence, use of PPIs for inappropriate indications and duration appears to be common. Over the years, concerns have been raised on the safety of PPIs as they have been associated with several adverse effects. Hence, there is a need for PPI stewardship to promote the use of PPIs for appropriate indication and duration. With this objective, the Indian Society of Gastroenterology has formulated guidelines on the rational use of PPIs. The guidelines were developed using a modified Delphi process. This paper presents these guidelines in detail, including the statements, review of literature, level of evidence and recommendations. This would help the clinicians in optimizing the use of PPIs in their practice and promote PPI stewardship.

A new model (Alfalfa-Warfarin-GIB) for predicting the risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding in warfarin patients

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to analyze the factors influencing warfarin-related major gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and to develop a score that would provide a reference for assessing the risk of major GIB associated with warfarin treatment.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of clinical and follow-up data from warfarin-treated patients. Scores were analyzed using logistic regression. The area under the subject working characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and Hosmer-Lemeshow test were used to evaluate the scoring performance.

RESULTS

A total of 1591 patients who met the requirements for warfarin use were included in this study, and 46 developed major GIB. After univariate analysis as well as multivariate logistic regression analysis, nine factors were found to be associated with increased risk of major GIB, namely age ≥ 65 years, history of peptic ulcer, history of major bleeding, abnormal liver function, abnormal renal function, cancer, anemia, labile international normalized ratio, and combination of antiplatelet agents/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. The Alfalfa-Warfarin-GIB score was constructed using these nine factors. The AUC and Bootstrap method-corrected AUC of the Alfalfa-Warfarin-GIB score were 0.916 (95% CI: 0.862-0.970, P < 0.001) and 0.919 (95% CI: 0.860-0.967, P < 0.001), respectively, which were higher than those of the HAS-BLED score (AUC = 0.868, 95% CI: 0.812-0.924, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Based on nine risk factors, the Alfalfa-Warfarin-GIB score was constructed to predict the risk of warfarin-related major GIB. The newly developed Alfalfa-Warfarin-GIB score has a better predictive value than the HAS-BLED score and may be an effective tool to help reduce the occurrence of major GIB in patients on warfarin.

Reduced Time to Procedure for Gastrointestinal Bleeding After Warfarin Reversal With Four-Factor Complex Concentrate as Compared to Plasma

Background

Bleeding is a serious adverse effect of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). Anticoagulation reversal is required in some acute cases. This is usually accomplished by plasma transfusion or four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC). The aim of this study was to gain insight into the clinical course of patients with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding who require VKA reversal.

Methods

Medical records were collected from two centers from patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) for GI bleeding and received 4F-PCC or plasma for VKA reversal between January 2015 and December 2020. ED, hospital, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) as well as time from admission to GI procedure were determined.

Results

4F-PCC patients (n = 49) as compared to plasma (n = 63) patients were found to have a greater number of comorbidities (average of 4.2 vs. 2.7 comorbidities/patient) and more ICU admissions (47% vs. 21%). Time to GI procedure was significantly decreased in the 4F-PCC group (median (interquartile range (IQR)) 19.47 (9.23 - 30.25) vs. 27.88 (21.38 - 45.00) h; P = 0.01). When adjusting for comorbidities, differences in time to GI procedures were also significant in favor of 4F-PCC regardless of any comorbidities (P = 0.014), in atrial fibrillation (P = 0.045) and in hypertension (P = 0.02). The 4F-PCC patients had shorter LOS in the ED and ICU.

Conclusions

Our study demonstrated that compared to plasma, 4F-PCC was utilized in more acutely ill patients with higher rates of comorbidities and ICU admission. Nevertheless, the patients who received 4F-PCC had faster access to GI procedure and shorter ED and ICU LOS.

Gastrointestinal bleeding during anticoagulation with direct oral anticoagulants compared to vitamin K antagonists

Aim: Patients receiving oral anticoagulants with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have an increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). We compared cases of GIB associated with VKAs and DOACs in terms of risk factors, scores, timing, location, severity, and outcome. Methods: Data from patients treated at a university hospital in Switzerland for GIB under VKA and DOACs between 2012 and 2018 were analyzed in this investigator-driven, retrospective, single-center study. Results: A total of 248 patients (110 males; median age, 80 years; 134 VKA, 114 DOAC) were included. No significant differences in age, weight or sex were observed. The propensity of the VKA group for risk factors such as comorbidities, interacting medications, or a high risk for bleeding (HAS-BLED score) was higher than that of the DOAC group. 56% of the VKA-treated patients had a supratherapeutic INR, and 25% in the DOAC group received an unlicensed dose. Significantly more patients in the DOAC group were not formally overdosed with OAC whilst receiving amiodarone compared to the VKA group (57% vs. 18%, respectively, p = 0.03). Latency between the documented start of oral anticoagulation and GIB was shorter in the DOAC group (median 3 months) than in the VKA group (median 23.5 months, p¡0.001). There were no differences in terms of location and severity of the GIB, length of hospitalization, or mortality. Conclusion: Patients taking VKAs displayed more risk factors for GIB than those taking DOACs. Treatment with DOACs was associated with early GIB and calls for increased vigilance during the first months after commencement. Co-medication with amiodarone appeared to be a risk factor for GIB in patients taking DOACs.

Observed risk of recurrent bleeding and thromboembolic disease in COVID-19 patients with gastrointestinal bleeding

Background and study aim  COVID-19 patients are at increased risk for venous thromboembolism (VTE) requiring the use of anticoagulation. Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is increasingly being reported, complicating the decision to initiate or resume anticoagulation as providers balance the risk of thrombotic disease with the risk of bleeding. Our study aimed to assess rebleeding rates in COVID-19 patients with GIB and determine whether endoscopy reduces these rebleeding events. We also report 30-day VTE and mortality rates. Methods  This was a retrospective study evaluating 56 COVID-19 patients with GIB for the following outcomes: 30-day rebleeding rate, 30-day VTE rate, effects of endoscopic intervention on the rate of rebleeding, and 30-day mortality. Results  The overall rates of VTE and rebleeding events were 27 % and 41 %, respectively. Rebleeding rates in patients managed conservatively was 42 % compared with 40 % in the endoscopy group. Overall, 87 % of those who underwent invasive intervention resumed anticoagulation vs. 55 % of those managed medically ( P  = 0.02). The all-cause 30-day mortality and GIB-related deaths were 32 % and 9 %, respectively. Mortality rates between the endoscopic and conservative management groups were not statistically different (25 % vs. 39 %; P  = 0.30). Conclusions  Although rebleeding rates were similar between the endoscopic and conservative management groups, patients who underwent intervention were more likely to restart anticoagulation. While endoscopy appeared to limit the duration that anticoagulation was withheld, larger studies are needed to further characterize its direct effect on mortality outcomes in these complex patients.

The outcomes of three-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (3F-PCC) in warfarin anticoagulation reversal: a prospective, single-arm, open-label, multicentre study

There is a wide variation on the efficacy of three-factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate (3F-PCC) in warfarin reversal. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of 3F-PCC in warfarin reversal. This multicentre prospective study analysed data from adult patients on warfarin who received 3F-PCC (Prothrombinex-VF®) for anticoagulation reversal between June 2019 to October 2020. Purposive sampling was used in this study. Study endpoints included target INR achievement, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and in-hospital all-cause mortality. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess independent predictors of study endpoints. One-hundred thirty-seven patients with a median age of 68 (59-76) years were recruited, who were predominantly male (59.9%, n = 82). A total of 102 patients required 3F-PCC for life-threatening (40.9%, n = 56) and clinically significant bleeding (33.6%, n = 46). Initial INRs ranged from 1.55 to undetectable high (> 26). All patients had INR reduction, of which 62% (n = 85) achieved target INR, whereas 12.4% (n = 17) achieved INR below the target range. Median INR was reduced from 4.76 (3.14-8.32) to 1.54 (1.27-1.88) post-3F-PCC (p < 0.001). The use of adjunctive reversal agents and initial INR < 3.6 were the significant predictors for target INR achievement. Six (4.4%) ADRs were observed. Two (1.5%) cases with the suspected acute coronary syndrome were associated with mortality. Ischemic stroke occurred in one (0.7%) patient. The incidence of in-hospital all-cause mortality was 21.2% (n = 29). The rate of INR achievement was 62% in our study without apparent increased risk of thromboembolic events and in-hospital all-cause mortality.

Resuming Anticoagulation Following Hospitalization for Gastrointestinal Bleeding Is Associated with Reduced Thromboembolic Events and Improved Mortality: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Systemic anticoagulants are widely prescribed for prevention and treatment of thromboembolism, but are commonly complicated by gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). Limited data exist on the management of anticoagulation after hospitalization for GIB and the subsequent risks of recurrent GIB, thromboembolism, and mortality.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies to determine risk of recurrent GIB, thromboembolism, and mortality after resuming anticoagulation following GIB. PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in patients with atrial fibrillation, venous thromboembolism, or valvular heart disease who received long-term warfarin or direct oral anticoagulants before experiencing GIB. Studies were included if data were available on anticoagulation management and outcomes of recurrent GIB, thromboembolism, and mortality following GIB.

RESULTS

A total of 5354 studies were reviewed of which 10 were included in the meta-analysis. There were 2080 patients who resumed anticoagulation and 2296 patients who discontinued anticoagulation post-index GIB. Resumption of anticoagulation was associated with a significant increase in recurrent GIB (OR 1.646, 95% CI 1.035-2.617, p = 0.035). There was a significant decrease in thromboembolic events in patients who resumed anticoagulation compared to those who did not (OR 0.340, 95% CI 0.178-0.652, p = 0.001, I² = 62.7%). Resumption of anticoagulation was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (OR 0.499, 95% CI 0.419-0.595, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

While resumption of anticoagulation following index GIB was associated with a significant increase in recurrent GIB, it was also associated with a significant decrease in thromboembolic events and all-cause mortality.

Thirty-Year Incidence and Mortality Trends in Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Finland

IMPORTANCE

Epidemiological data on lower gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in the general population are sparse.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence, recurrence, mortality, and case fatality rates of major upper GIB and lower GIB in the general population of Finland between 1987 and 2016.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This prospective cohort study used data from the 1987 to the 2012 cycles of the National FINRISK Study, a health examination survey that was conducted every 5 years in Finland. Survey participants were adults aged 25 to 74 years who were recruited from a population register by random sampling; those with a history of hospitalization for GIB were excluded. Participants were followed up from survey enrollment to onset of GIB that led to hospitalization, death from any cause, or study end (December 31, 2016). Follow-up was performed through linkage with national electronic health registers. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Incidence, recurrence, mortality, and case fatality rates for all, upper, lower, and unspecified GIB. Outcome measures were stratified by sex and age group.

RESULTS

Among the 39 054 participants included in the study, 494 (1.3%) experienced upper GIB (321 men [65.0%]; mean [SD] age, 52.8 [12.1] years) and 645 (1.7%) had lower GIB (371 men [57.5%]; mean [SD] age, 54.0 [11.7] years). The age-standardized incidence rate was 0.94 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 0.85-1.04) for upper GIB and 1.26 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 1.15-1.38) for lower GIB; the incidence was higher in men than in women. Between 1987 and 2016 the incidence rate of upper GIB remained mostly stable, ranging from 0.40 to 0.66 per 1000 person-years, whereas constant increases occurred in the incidence of lower GIB until the rate stabilized. The proportion of recurrent GIB events showed an increasing trend from 1987 to 2016. The upper GIB-specific mortality was higher (0.07 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 0.04-0.09) than the lower GIB-specific mortality (0.01 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 0.001-0.03). Case fatality was high for those with upper GIB (7.0%; 95% CI, 4.7-10.1) compared with those with lower GIB (0.4%; 95% CI, 0.1-1.3). Case fatality remained stable over the years but was higher in men (between 5% and 10%) than women (<2%) with GIB.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found that the overall incidence rate of upper GIB was lower than the incidence of lower GIB, but the recurrence, mortality, and 28-day case fatality were higher in participants with upper GIB. These data can serve as a reference when putting into context the rates of drug-associated GIB and can inform efforts to improve GIB care and outcome and to prevent rebleeding or death for patients with major GIB.

Comparison of clinical performance of four gastrointestinal bleeding risk scores in Chinese patients with atrial fibrillation receiving oral anticoagulants

Gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common bleeding complication during anticoagulant therapy. A reliable bleeding risk score can help the clinician assess risk of bleeding in individual patients and select the anticoagulant regimen. This study retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with atrial fibrillation who received anticoagulant therapy from July 2015 to December 2018 at two centers-the Fujian Medical University Union Hospital and Fuzhou Second Hospital Affiliated to Xiamen University. Demographic data, clinical findings, and laboratory results were collected from the hospital records. Patients were followed up for 6 months. The performance of four bleeding risk scores (New Score, RIETE Score, Cuschieri et al. Score, de Groot et al. Score) for prediction of gastrointestinal bleeding was assessed using the area under the curve. A total of 3462 patients (mean age, 66.3 ± 11.5 years; 59.6% males; 1055 direct oral anticoagulants users and 2407 warfarin users) were followed up for 6 months. While 99/3462 (2.9%) patients had gastrointestinal bleeding. The area under the curves for the New, RIETE, Cuschieri et al., de Groot et al. scores were 0.652 (95% CI 0.576-0.728), 0.862 (95% CI 0.809-0.914), 0.606 (95% CI 0.527-0.685), and 0.873 (95% CI 0.816-0.929), respectively. Among the four BRSs evaluated, the RIETE score and the de Groot et al. score appear to have the good predictive value, while the NEW score and the Cuschieri et al. score did not sufficiently predict gastrointestinal bleeding risk within the study Chinese population.

Thirty-day mortality in atrial fibrillation patients with gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department: differences between direct oral anticoagulant and warfarin users

More clinical data are required on the safety of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Although patients treated with warfarin and DOACs have a similar risk of bleeding, short-term mortality after a gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) episode in DOAC-treated patients has not been clarified. The objective of this study was to assess differences in 30-day mortality in patients treated with DOACs or warfarin admitted to the emergency department (ED) for GIB. This was a multicentre retrospective study conducted over 2 years. The study included patients evaluated at three different EDs for GIB. The baseline characteristics were included. Subsequently, we assessed the differences in past medical history and clinical data between the two study groups (DOAC and warfarin users). Differences between the two groups were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Among the 284 patients presenting GIB enrolled in the study period, 39.4% (112/284) were treated with DOACs and 60.6% (172/284) were treated with warfarin. Overall, 8.1% (23/284) of patients died within 30 days. Among the 172 warfarin-treated patients, 8.7% (15/172) died within 30 days from ED evaluation. In the 112 DOAC-treated patients, the mortality rate was 7.1% (8/112). The Cox regression analysis, adjusted for possible clinical confounders, and the Kaplan-Meier curves did not outline differences between the two treatment groups. The present study shows no differences between DOACs and warfarin in short-term mortality after GIB.

American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: optimal management of anticoagulation therapy

BACKGROUND

Clinicians confront numerous practical issues in optimizing the use of anticoagulants to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE).

OBJECTIVE

These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians and other health care professionals in their decisions about the use of anticoagulants in the management of VTE. These guidelines assume the choice of anticoagulant has already been made.

METHODS

ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The McMaster University GRADE Centre supported the guideline development process, including updating or performing systematic evidence reviews. The panel prioritized clinical questions and outcomes according to their importance for clinicians and patients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess evidence and make recommendations, which were subject to public comment.

RESULTS

The panel agreed on 25 recommendations and 2 good practice statements to optimize management of patients receiving anticoagulants.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong recommendations included using patient self-management of international normalized ratio (INR) with home point-of-care INR monitoring for vitamin K antagonist therapy and against using periprocedural low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) bridging therapy. Conditional recommendations included basing treatment dosing of LMWH on actual body weight, not using anti-factor Xa monitoring to guide LMWH dosing, using specialized anticoagulation management services, and resuming anticoagulation after episodes of life-threatening bleeding.

Risk analysis of new oral anticoagulants for gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage in atrial fibrillation patients: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antithrombotic therapy using new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has been generally shown to have a favorable risk-benefit profile. Since there has been dispute about the risks of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), we sought to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis using Bayesian inference to analyze the risks of GIB and ICH in AF patients taking NOACs.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 20 randomized controlled trials of 91 671 AF patients receiving anticoagulants, antiplatelet drugs, or placebo. Bayesian network meta-analysis of two different evidence networks was performed using a binomial likelihood model, based on a network in which different agents (and doses) were treated as separate nodes. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were modeled using Markov chain Monte Carlo methods.

RESULTS

Indirect comparisons with the Bayesian model confirmed that aspirin+clopidogrel significantly increased the risk of GIB in AF patients compared to the placebo (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01-0.92). Warfarin was identified as greatly increasing the risk of ICH compared to edoxaban 30 mg (OR 3.42, 95% CI 1.22-7.24) and dabigatran 110 mg (OR 3.56, 95% CI 1.10-8.45). We further ranked the NOACs for the lowest risk of GIB (apixaban 5 mg) and ICH (apixaban 5 mg, dabigatran 110 mg, and edoxaban 30 mg).

CONCLUSIONS

Bayesian network meta-analysis of treatment of non-valvular AF patients with anticoagulants suggested that NOACs do not increase risks of GIB and/or ICH, compared to each other.

Risk of gastrointestinal bleeding during anticoagulant treatment

INTRODUCTION

Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a major problem in patients on oral anticoagulation therapy. This issue has become even more pressing since the introduction of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in 2009. Areas covered: Here we review current evidence related to GIB associated with oral anticoagulants, focusing on randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and post-marketing observational studies. Dabigatran 150 mg twice daily and rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily increase the risk of GIB compared to warfarin. The risk increase with edoxaban is dose-dependent, while apixaban shows apparently, no increased risk. We summarize what is known about GIB risk factors for individual anticoagulants, the location of GIB in patients taking these compounds, and prevention strategies that lower the risk of GIB. Expert opinion: Recently there has been an important shift in the clinical presentation of GIB. Specifically, upper GIB has decreased with the decreased incidence of peptic ulcers due to the broad use of proton pump inhibitors and the decreased prevalence of H. pylori infections. In contrast, the incidence of lower GIB has increased, due in part to colonic diverticular bleeding and angiodysplasia in the elderly. In this population, the addition of oral anticoagulation therapy, especially DOACs, seems to increase the risk of lower GIB.

Gastrointestinal bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage in concomitant users of warfarin and antihyperlipidemics

BACKGROUND

Drug interactions, particularly those involving warfarin, are a major clinical and public health problem. Minimizing serious bleeding caused by anticoagulants is a recent major focus of the United States (US) Department of Health and Human Services. This study quantified the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) among concomitant users of warfarin and individual antihyperlipidemics.

METHODS

The authors conducted a high-dimensional propensity score-adjusted cohort study of new concomitant users of warfarin and an antihyperlipidemic, among US Medicaid beneficiaries from five states during 1999-2011. Exposure was defined by concomitant use of warfarin plus one of eight antihyperlipidemics. The primary outcome measure was a composite of GIB/ICH within the first 30days of concomitant use. As a secondary outcome measure, GIB/ICH was examined within the first 180days of concomitant use.

RESULTS

Among 236,691 persons newly-exposed to warfarin and an antihyperlipidemic, the crude incidence of GIB/ICH was 13.2 (95% confidence interval 12.7 to 13.8) per 100person-years. Users were predominantly older, female, and Caucasian. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for warfarin and individual statins were consistent with no association. Warfarin+gemfibrozil was associated with an 80% increased risk of GIB/ICH within the first month of concomitant use (aHR=1.8, 1.4 to 2.4). Warfarin+fenofibrate was associated with a similar increased risk (aHR=1.8, 1.2 to 2.7), yet with an onset during the second month of concomitant use.

CONCLUSIONS

Among warfarin-treated persons, the use of fibrates-but not statins-increases the risk of hospital presentation for GIB/ICH.

Do NSAIDs and ASA Cause More Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Elderly than Adults?

Purpose. NSAIDs and ASA may cause upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) both in adults and in elderly. There is no study that compares this increased bleeding risk between adult and elderly subjects. Methods. A total of 524 patients with UGIB were included in this study. The data of patients were, respectively, analyzed. Results. NSAIDs and ASA-associated UGIB rates were similar between <65 years (345 patients) (group 1) and ≥65 years (179 patients) (group 2) (28.4% versus 23.5%, p = 0.225 and 13% versus 19%, p = 0.071, resp.). Warfarin-associated UGIB was found significantly higher in group 2 than group 1. Elderly patients with NSAID-associated UGIB had significantly higher length of stay (LoS) and CoH than adult patients with NSAID-associated UGIB (p = 0.002 and 0.001, resp.). Elderly patients with ASA-associated UGIB had significantly higher CoH than adult patients with NSAID-associated UGIB. Conclusions. Using NSAIDs without gastroprotective drugs or using ASA with gastroprotective drugs in elderly patients is as safe as in adult patients. Not only should adding gastroprotective drugs to ASA or NSAID be based on their risk of UGIB, but the cost of hospitalization of ASA or NSAID-associated UGIB should be considered.