Endoscopic and angiographic management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding: Review of the published literature

The use of surgical intervention for lower gastrointestinal bleeding and its association with clinical outcomes and resource use

BACKGROUND

To assess the use of surgical intervention for lower gastrointestinal bleeding and evaluate its associated factors.

METHODS

The 2016 to 2019 National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify non-elective adult (≥18 years) hospitalizations for lower gastrointestinal bleeding. The International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes were used to ascertain patient characteristics, including signs of hemodynamic instability, potential lower gastrointestinal bleed source, and transfusion of blood products, as well as endoscopic, radiologic, and surgical intervention. Multivariable regression analyses were used to elucidate factors associated with operative management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding and evaluate its associated mortality, length of stay, and hospitalization costs.

RESULTS

Of an estimated 364,495 patients, 1.7% underwent an operation for lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Compared to those managed conservatively, patients who underwent surgical intervention more commonly had diverticular-related bleeding, signs of hypovolemia, and less frequently underwent endoscopic intervention. After the adjustment of patient and hospital characteristics, ischemic colitis (adjusted odds ratio 7.5, 95% confidence interval 1.8-30.9, ref: hemorrhoids), hemodynamic instability (adjusted odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval 1.5-2.0), and angiographic embolization (adjusted odds ratio 4.9, 95% confidence interval 3.9-6.0, ref: no endoscopic/radiologic intervention) were associated with greater odds of surgical intervention. Additionally, surgical intervention portended greater odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 6.2, 95% confidence interval 4.5-8.5), a longer length of stay (8.5 days, 95% confidence interval 8.0-9.0), and greater hospitalization cost ($29.1K, 95% confidence interval 26.7K-31.5K).

CONCLUSION

Operative management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding is rare and associated with significant morbidity and mortality compared to those managed conservatively. However, when surgical intervention is indicated, preoperative patient characteristics should be used to identify those at greater risk of an operation to facilitate early surgical consultation and inform expectations during the perioperative period.

Unmasking lower gastrointestinal bleeding under administration of norepinephrine

BACKGROUND

Bleeding in the gastrointestinal tract is common and transarterial embolization enables the clinician to control gastrointestinal bleeding. Contrast extravasation is a prerequisite for successful embolization. Provocative angiography is helpful in the detection of elusive bleeding.

AIM

We performed a retrospective analysis of angiographic treatment in patients with lower gastrointestinal hemorrhage and initially negative angiographies, as well as the role of norepinephrine (NE) in unmasking bleeding.

METHODS

We analyzed 41 patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding after angiography who had undergone treatment over a period of 10 years. All patients had a positive shock index and needed intensive care.

RESULTS

In three of four patients, angiography disclosed the site of bleeding when NE was used during the procedure for hemodynamic stabilization.

CONCLUSION

We suggest that angiography performed after the administration of NE in unstable patients with gastrointestinal bleeding and an initially negative angiography has the potential to unmask bleeding sites for successful embolization. However, this statement must be confirmed in prospective studies.

Encuesta internacional on-line sobre el manejo de la hemorragia digestiva baja grave. ¿Lo tenemos claro?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The diagnostic and therapeutic strategy in severe lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) varies depending on the patient's clinical situation. Actual clinical practice guidelines propose different management strategies. We aim to know the attitude of the gastroenterologists from different hospitalary centers in the management of this entity.

METHODS

Descriptive and observational study using an on-line questionnaire, addressed to gastroenterologists in Spain and Latin America, in December 2021.

RESULTS

We included 281 anonymous questionnaires of gastroenterologists from Spain and Latin America. Diagnostic and therapeutic management of severe LGIB was heterogeneous among the participants. Regarding to the first diagnostic modalities they showed variability between performing computed tomography angiography (CTA) (44.5%), gastroscopy (33.1%), colonoscopy (20.6%) and arteriography (1.1%). The therapeutic attitude after a positive CTA mostly varied between performing arteriography (38.1%) and colonoscopy (44.1%). If negative CTA, in the majority of cases a gastroscopy was performed. If the patient needed intensive critical unit (ICU) care and to undergo colonoscopy, most participants performed an urgent colonoscopy (<24h) (31% always, 43.4% in most cases); while if the patient did not require ICU admission this percentage was lower (10% always, 33.8% in most cases). The 40.9% of the participants admitted having doubts about the management of this patients and the 98.2% considered the need for a creation of an action protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high interhospitalary variability on the management of severe lower gastrointestinal bleeding among gastroenterologists. It is necessary to unify the diagnostic and therapeutic management of this pathology.

Endoscopic hemostasis makes the difference: Angiographic treatment in patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The large majority of gastrointestinal bleedings subside on their own or after endoscopic treatment. However, a small number of these may pose a challenge in terms of therapy because the patients develop hemodynamic instability, and endoscopy does not achieve adequate hemostasis. Interventional radiology supplemented with catheter angiography (CA) and transarterial embolization have gained importance in recent times.

AIM

To evaluate clinical predictors for angiography in patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB).

METHODS

We compared two groups of patients in a retrospective analysis. One group had been treated for more than 10 years with CA for LGIB (n = 41). The control group had undergone non-endoscopic or endoscopic treatment for two years and been registered in a bleeding registry (n = 92). The differences between the two groups were analyzed using decision trees with the goal of defining clear rules for optimal treatment.

RESULTS

Patients in the CA group had a higher shock index, a higher Glasgow-Blatchford bleeding score (GBS), lower serum hemoglobin levels, and more rarely achieved hemostasis in primary endoscopy. These patients needed more transfusions, had longer hospital stays, and had to undergo subsequent surgery more frequently (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic hemostasis proved to be the crucial difference between the two patient groups. Primary endoscopic hemostasis, along with GBS and the number of transfusions, would permit a stratification of risks. After prospective confirmation of the present findings, the use of decision trees would permit the identification of patients at risk for subsequent diagnosis and treatment based on interventional radiology.

18F-PEG1-Vinyl Sulfone-Labeled Red Blood Cells as Positron Emission Tomography Agent to Image Intra-Abdominal Bleeding

¹⁸F-Labeled blood pool agents (BPAs) have attracted great attention for identifying bleeding sites. However, many BPAs are not sufficiently evaluated partially due to the limitations of labeling methods. In our previous work, we noticed that ¹⁸F-PEG1-vinyl sulfone (¹⁸F-VS) could efficiently label red blood cells (RBCs) ex vivo and in situ. However, its application as BPA is not fully evaluated. In this study, we systematically explored the feasibility of using ¹⁸F-VS-labeled RBCs as a positron emission tomography (PET) BPA for intra-abdominal bleeding diagnosis. In brief, we first optimized the labeling conditions, which lead to an 80% labeling yield of RBCs after incubating with ¹⁸F-VS in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) at 37°C for 20 min. ¹⁸F-VS-labeled RBCs were found to be stable in vitro, which could simplify its transportation/storage for in vivo applications. In normal rat PET study, the cardiovascular system could be clearly imaged up to 5 h post injection (p.i.). An intra-abdominal hemorrhage rat model demonstrated that the ¹⁸F-VS-labeled RBCs clearly showed the dynamic changes of extravascular radioactivity due to intra-abdominal hemorrhage. Validation in the model of gastrointestinal bleeding clearly demonstrated the great potential of using ¹⁸F-VS-labeled RBCs as a BPA, which could be further evaluated in future studies.

Time to Catheter Angiography for Gastrointestinal Bleeding after Prior Positive Investigation Does Not Affect Bleed Identification

Objective:

To determine, time to angiography for patients with positive gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) on prior investigation (endoscopy [ES], nuclear medicine [NM] Tc99m red blood cells (RBC) scan, or computed tomography angiography), affects angiographic bleed identification.

Materials and Methods:

Visceral Angiograms performed from January 2012 to August 2017 were evaluated. Initial angiograms performed for GIB were included in the study. Exclusion criteria included recent abdominal surgery or procedure (30 days), empiric embolization (embolization without visualized active bleeding), and use of vasodilators, or subsequent angiogram. Timing and results of ES, NM Tc99m RBC scan, or computed tomography angiogram and catheter angiogram were recorded. In addition, age, gender, angiogram time, anti- platelet therapy, anti-coagulation therapy, bleed location, international normalized ratio, and units of packed RBCs received in the 24 h before catheter angiography were included in the study.

Results:

One hundred and seventy angiograms were included in the final analysis. Forty-three angiograms resulted in the identification of an active bleed (68.9 years, and 67.4% male). All of these patients were embolized successfully. One hundred and twenty-seven angiograms failed to identify an active bleed (70.4 years, and 49.6% male). No significance was found across the two groups with respect to time from prior positive investigation. Receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated that units of packed RBCs received in the preceding 24 h were correlated with positive bleed identification on catheter angiography.

Conclusion:

Time to angiography from prior positive investigation, including ES, NM Tc99m RBC scan, or computed tomography angiogram does not correlate with positive angiographic outcomes. Increasing units of packed RBCs administered in the 24 h before angiogram do correlate with positive angiographic findings.

The Mexican consensus on the diagnosis and treatment of diverticular disease of the colon

Since the publication of the 2008 guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diverticular disease of the colon by the Asociación Mexicana de Gastroenterología, significant advances have been made in the knowledge of that disease. A systematic review of articles published in the medical literature from January 2008 to July 2018 was carried out to revise and update the 2008 guidelines and provide new evidence-based recommendations. All high-quality articles in Spanish and English published within that time frame were included. The final versions of the 43 statements accepted in the three rounds of voting, utilizing the Delphi method, were written, and the quality of evidence and strength of the recommendations were established for each statement, utilizing the GRADE system. The present consensus contains new data on the definition, classification, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and risk factors of diverticular disease of the colon. Special emphasis is given to the usefulness of computed tomography and colonoscopy, as well as to the endoscopic methods for controlling bleeding. Outpatient treatment of uncomplicated diverticulitis is discussed, as well as the role of rifaximin and mesalazine in the management of complicated acute diverticulitis. Both its minimally invasive alternatives and surgical options are described, stressing their indications, limitations, and contraindications. The new statements provide guidelines based on updated scientific evidence. Each statement is discussed, and its quality of evidence and the strength of the recommendation are presented.