Re-bleeding and its predictors after capsule endoscopy in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding in long-term follow-up

Recurrence rates and risk factors in obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB), defined in 2010, involves bleeding from the GI tract that remains unexplained after standard diagnostic procedures. OGIB, which accounts for about 5% of all GI bleeds, poses diagnostic and management challenges, particularly due to the anatomical features of the small intestine. Advances in capsule endoscopy (CE) and balloon-assisted endoscopy have improved the diagnostic and therapeutic landscape for small intestinal lesions.

Objective

To determine the recurrence rate and identify risk factors for recurrence following diagnostic and therapeutic interventions using CE and balloon-assisted endoscopy in patients with OGIB.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study at Gifu University Hospital analyzed CE procedures for patients with OGIB from 2008 to 2022. Patients underwent CE with subsequent treatments based on the findings. Statistical analyses, including Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models, were used to estimate cumulative recurrence rates and identify recurrence risk factors.

Results

Out of 417 patients, 65.2% had positive CE findings, leading to therapeutic interventions in 16.3% of cases. The cumulative recurrence rates at 12, 24, and 36 months were 4.3%, 9.0%, and 13.9%, respectively. Liver cirrhosis (hazard rate: 4.15, 95% confidence interval 1.88-9.18, p < 0.01) was identified as a significant risk factor for recurrence.

Conclusions

A significant recurrence rate in OGIB patients, with liver cirrhosis being a major risk factor. Despite diagnostic and therapeutic advances, a comprehensive approach including careful follow-up and consideration of risk factors is essential for management.

Patients on Antithrombotic Agents with Small Bowel Bleeding -Yield of Small Bowel Capsule Endoscopy and Subsequent Management

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Small bowel gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is associated with multiple blood transfusions, prolonged and/or multiple hospital admissions, utilization of significant healthcare resources, and negative effects on patient quality of life. There is a well-recognized association between antithrombotic medications and small bowel GIB. We aimed to identify the diagnostic yield of small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE) in patients on antithrombotic medications and the impact of SBCE on treatment course.

METHODS

The electronic medical records of nineteen hundred eighty-six patients undergoing SBCE were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

The diagnostic yield for detecting stigmata of recent bleeding and/or actively bleeding lesions in SBCE was higher in patients that were on antiplatelet agents (21.6%), patients on anticoagulation (22.5%), and in patients that had their SBCE performed while they were inpatient (21.8%), when compared to the patients not on antiplatelet agents (12.1%), patients not on anticoagulation (13.5%), and with patients that had their SBCE performed in the outpatient setting (12%). Of 318 patients who had stigmata of recent bleeding and/or actively bleeding lesion(s) identified on SBCE, SBCE findings prompted endoscopic evaluation (small bowel enteroscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), and/or colonoscopy) in 25.2%, with endoscopic hemostasis attempted in 52.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study, the largest conducted to date, emphasizes the importance of performing SBCE as part of the evaluation for suspected small bowel bleeding, particularly in patients taking antithrombotic therapy, and especially during their inpatient hospital stay.

Gastrointestinal bleeding of undetermined origin: What diagnostic strategy to propose?

Gastrointestinal bleeding of undetermined origin (GBUO) is defined as gastrointestinal bleeding without an identified cause or location despite an endoscopic assessment including an esogastroduodenal endoscopy (EOGD) and a total colonoscopy. A distinction is made between exteriorized GBUO and non-exteriorized occult GBUO. The causes in the majority of cases (vascular, inflammatory and tumoral) are located in the small intestine. The diagnostic strategy aiming to locate the origin of the GBUO is a real challenge. Innovation in endoscopic and imaging techniques has enabled minimally invasive exploration of the small intestine. In Europe, there is a strong consensus to recommend a video-capsule endoscopy (VCE) as the first-intention study. If there is reason to suspect intestinal obstruction, VCE is contraindicated and a CT-enteroscopy is then performed as first intention. Enteroscopy is performed as a second-line treatment, either for therapeutic purposes after a positive VCE or CT-enteroclysis, or for diagnostic purposes after a negative VCE. Finally, intraoperative enteroscopy (IOE) coupled with surgical exploration should be reserved either for therapeutic purposes in the event of impossibility or failure of preoperative enteroscopy, or for diagnostic purposes in the event of recurrent GBUO after failure of all other studies and explorations of the small intestine.

Prediction models for recurrence in patients with small bowel bleeding

Obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB) has traditionally been defined as gastrointestinal bleeding whose source remains unidentified after bidirectional endoscopy. OGIB can present as overt bleeding or occult bleeding, and small bowel lesions are the most common causes. The small bowel can be evaluated using capsule endoscopy, device-assisted enteroscopy, computed tomography enterography, or magnetic resonance enterography. Once the cause of small-bowel bleeding is identified and targeted therapeutic intervention is completed, the patient can be managed with routine visits. However, diagnostic tests may produce negative results, and some patients with small bowel bleeding, regardless of diagnostic findings, may experience rebleeding. Predicting those at risk of rebleeding can help clinicians form individualized surveillance plans. Several studies have identified different factors associated with rebleeding, and a limited number of studies have attempted to create prediction models for recurrence. This article describes prediction models developed so far for identifying patients with OGIB who are at greater risk of rebleeding. These models may aid clinicians in forming tailored patient management and surveillance.

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.

RHEMITT Score Predicts Rebleed After Capsule Endoscopy: First Validation at a U.S. Tertiary Care Center

BACKGROUND

Patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding undergo small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE), but often return for recurrent bleeding or anemia. The RHEMITT score evaluates patients based on 7 variables (heart failure, chronic kidney disease, Saurin P1/P2 lesions, major bleeding, incomplete SBCE, smoking status, and endoscopic treatment) and seeks to predict the risk of rebleeding.

AIMS

This study aims to perform an external validation of the RHEMITT score in the United States.

METHODS

SBCEs performed to evaluate anemia or GI bleeding from a tertiary-care center's PillCam database between 1/22/2018 and 7/21/2020 were reviewed. Variables based on the RHEMITT score were collected. The primary outcome was rebleeding, defined as (1) melena or hematochezia or (2) hemoglobin drop of 2 g/dL. Patient were categorized into low, intermediate, and high-risk categories based on RHEMITT score. The accuracy of the RHEMITT score for predicting rebleeding was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 361 SBCEs were included in the study. Age, indication for SBCE, endoscopic treatment, antiplatelet use, cirrhosis, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and major bleeding were significantly associated with risk of rebleed (p < 0.05). Each increasing risk category for the RHEMITT score predicted increased probability of this study's primary outcome, rebleeding (p < 0.001). There was a significant association between RHEMITT risk category and rebleeding-free survival (log-rank p < 0.001). An area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the RHEMITT score was 0.790 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings validate the RHEMITT score and confirm acceptable performance for predicting rebleeding at a tertiary referral center in the United States.

Long-term rebleeding rate and predictive factors of rebleeding after capsule endoscopy in patients with obscure GI bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The incidence of rebleeding in obscure GI bleeding (OGIB) remains unclear. This study used capsule endoscopy (CE) to determine the long-term rebleeding rate and predictive factors for rebleeding in patients with OGIB.

METHODS

This single-center, observational study enrolled consecutive patients with OGIB who underwent CE as the first small intestinal examination between March 2004 and December 2015 and were followed up through medical records or letters.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-nine patients were included in the analysis. Survival curve analysis showed that the overall cumulative rebleeding rate in OGIB during the 5 years was 41.7%. Multivariate analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model revealed that overt OGIB (hazard ratio [HR], 2.017; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.299-3.131; P = .002), anticoagulants (HR, 1.930; 95% CI, 1.093-3.410; P = .023), positive balloon-assisted enteroscopy findings after CE (HR, 2.927; 95% CI, 1.791-4.783; P < .001), and iron supplements without therapeutic intervention (HR, 2.202; 95% CI, 1.386-3.498; P = .001) were associated with rebleeding, whereas a higher minimum hemoglobin level (HR, .902; 95% CI, .834-.975; P = .009) and therapeutic intervention (HR, .288; 95% CI, .145-.570; P < .001) significantly reduced the risk of rebleeding. Among the Charlson Comorbidity Index components, liver cirrhosis was an independent predictor associated with rebleeding in patients with OGIB (HR, 4.362; 95% CI, 2.622-7.259; P < .001) and in patients with negative CE findings (HR, 8.961; 95% CI, 4.424-18.150; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Rebleeding is common during the long-term follow-up of patients with OGIB. Careful follow-up is required for patients with liver cirrhosis or previous massive bleeding.

Effect of small bowel transit time on accuracy of video capsule endoscopy in evaluating suspected small bowel bleeding

BACKGROUND

Obscure small bowel bleeding is defined as gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) that is unidentifiable with esophagogastroduodenoscopy and a colonoscopy with video capsule endoscopy (VCE) being the next gold standard step for evaluation. Small bowel transit time (SBTT) is a metric of a VCE study that is defined as the time the capsule takes to travel through the small intestine.

AIM

To determine if SBTT within the VCE study, correlates to overall detection of obscure small bowel bleeds. Furthermore, we attempted to identify any existing correlation between SBTT and re-bleeding after a negative VCE study.

METHODS

This is a single center retrospective analysis of VCE studies performed for overt and occult GIB at Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, between 2015 and 2019. Inclusion criteria primarily consisted of patients 18 years or older who had a VCE study done as part of the workup for a GIB. Patients with incomplete VCEs, poor preparation, or with less than 6 mo of follow up were excluded. A re-bleeding event was defined either as overt or occult within a 6-mo timeframe. Overt re-bleeding was defined as Visible melena or hematochezia with > 2 gm/dL drop in hemoglobin defined an overt re-bleeding event; whereas an unexplained > 2 gm/dL drop in hemoglobin with no visible bleeding defined an occult re-bleed.

RESULTS

Results indicated that there was a significant and positive point biserial correlation between SBTT of 220 min and detection of a bleeding focus with a statistically significant p value of 0.008. However, the area under the curve was negligible when trying to identify a threshold time for SBTT to discriminate between risk of re-bleeding events after a negative VCE.

CONCLUSION

In terms of SBTT and association with accuracy of VCE finding a bleeding focus, 220 min was found to be adequate transit time to accurately find a bleeding focus, when present. It was found that no threshold SBTT could be identified to help predict re-bleeding after a negative VCE.

RHEMITT score: Predicting the risk of mid gastrointestinal rebleeding after small bowel capsule endoscopy: A prospective validation

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The RHEMITT score (Renal disease; Heart failure; Endoscopic findings; Major bleeding; Incomplete SBCE; Tobacco; Treatment by enteroscopy) was the first score to accurately predict the individual risk of small bowel rebleeding after capsule endoscopy (SBCE). The aim of the study is on the prospective validation of the RHEMITT score.

METHODS

Cohort of consecutive patients with mid-gastrointestinal bleeding (MGIB) submitted to SBCE and followed prospectively, during at least 12 months, since 2017 until 2020. Rebleeding was defined as an overt bleeding event (melena or hematochezia) or a hemoglobin decrease of at least 2 g/dL. The RHEMITT score was calculated for each patient and the rebleeding rates compared. The performance of the score was tested by calculating the area under curve of the receiver operator characteristic curve. A rebleeding-free survival was assessed, corresponding to the period between the date of SBCE and the date of the first post-SBCE rebleeding event.

RESULTS

We included 162 patients, 102 (62.9%) were female, with a mean age of 64 years old. The sensitivities and specificities of the score grades for predicting rebleeding were as following: for low-risk patients, 0% (0-10%) and 28.8% (21.1-36.5%); for intermediate-risk patients, 23.3% (8.2-38.4%) and 72% (64.3-79.7%); for high-risk patients, 76.7% (61.6-91.8%) and 99.2% (97.7-100%), corresponding to an area under curve of the receiver operator characteristic of 0.988 (P < 0.001). Kaplan-Meyer plots were statistically different according to the attributed risk (log-rank P value <0.001; Breslow-Wilcoxon P value <0.001).

CONCLUSION

The RHEMITT score performed with excellent discriminative power in predicting rebleeding risk, and we herewith propose a surveillance of MGIB patients guided by the RHEMITT score.

Iron Deficiency and the Small bowel​

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews iron deficiency anemia (IDA) and suspected small bowel bleeding (SSBB) from initial consultation through laboratory evaluation, endoscopic evaluation, and therapeutic options.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent guidelines on management of SSBB, IDA, video capsule endoscopy (VCE), and device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) are reviewed. The advantages and limitations of VCE, DAE, and imaging are discussed. Medical treatment for refractory small bowel bleeding is discussed. Evaluation of IDA starts with a detailed history and physical exam. Additional lab work can establish the diagnosis of IDA and evaluate for associated conditions. If initial endoscopic tests are unrevealing, SSBB should be ruled out. Further investigation can be performed using video capsule endoscopy (VCE), device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE), and imaging. The mainstay of medical treatment of IDA secondary to SSBB is iron supplementation. Additional treatment is tailored to the pathology and may include medical, endoscopic and surgical options.

Characteristics, Location, and Clinical Outcomes of Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients Taking New Oral Anticoagulants Compared to Vitamin K Antagonists

New oral anticoagulants (NOACs) are commonly used in clinical practice as alternatives to vitamin K antagonists (VKA). However, the etiology, clinical course, and risk of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding remain unclear. We aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics and location of acute GI bleeding associated with NOACs and its severity and outcomes compared to VKA. This retrospective multicenter study included 381 subjects on anticoagulants who underwent appropriate diagnostic examination due to GI bleeding. Regarding the characteristics of acute GI bleeding, the proportion of vascular lesions was significantly lower in the NOACs group than that in the VKA group. Small bowel bleeding occurred less commonly in the NOACs group, but the difference did not reach statistical significance. Regarding severity and clinical outcomes, patients on NOACs received significantly smaller volumes of transfused blood products and had shorter ICU stays than those on VKA. Moreover, the need for surgery and the risk of rebleeding in the NOACs group were significantly lower than those in the VKA group. Patients on NOACs have better clinical outcomes in terms of severity of acute GI bleeding or rebleeding than patients on VKA. Patients on NOACs demonstrate different characteristics and location of acute GI bleeding than those on VKA.

Scoring systems in clinical small-bowel capsule endoscopy: all you need to know!

Capsule endoscopy (CE) emerged out of the pressing clinical need to image the small bowel (SB) in cases of midgut bleeding and provide an overall comfortable and reliable gastrointestinal (GI) diagnosis 1. Since its wider adoption in clinical practice, significant progress has been made in several areas including software development, hardware features and clinical indications, while innovative applications of CE never cease to appear 2 3. Currently, several manufacturers provide endoscopic capsules with more or less similar technological features 4. Although there is engaging and continuous academic and industry-fueled R&D, promising furtherment of CE technology 4 5, the current status of clinical CE remains that of by and large an imaging modality. Clinical relevance of CE images is cornerstone in the decision-making process for medical management. In one of the larger to date SB CE studies, 4,206 abnormal images were detected in 3,280 patients 6. Thus, CE leads to the identification of a large amount of potential pathology, some of which are pertinent (or relevant) while some (probably the majority) are not.

Soon artificial intelligence (AI) is likely to carry out several roles currently performed by humans; in fact, we are witnessing only the first stages of a transition in the clinical adoption of AI-based solutions in several aspects of gastroenterology including CE 7. Until then though, human-based decision-making profoundly impacts patient care and – although not suggested in the updated European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) European curriculum 8 9 – it should be an integral part of CE training. Frequently, interpretation of CE images by experts or at least experienced readers differs. In a tandem CE reading study, expert review of discordant cases revealed a 50 % (13/25 discordant results) error rate by experienced readers, corresponding (in 5/13 cases) to ‘over-classification’ of an irrelevant abnormality 10. Another comparative study showed an ‘over-classification’ of such irrelevant abnormalities in ~10 % of CE readings 11. One thing which has been for a while on the table – in relation to optimizing and/or standardizing CE reporting and subsequent decision-making – is the need for reproducible scoring systems and for a reliable common language among clinicians responsible for further patient’s management.

Over the years, several of these scoring systems were developed while others appear in the wake of software and hardware improvements aiming to replace and/or complement their predecessors. This review presents a comprehensive account of the currently available classification/scoring systems in clinical CE spanning from predicting the bleeding potential of identified SB lesions (with emphasis on vascular lesions), and the individual rebleeding risk; scoring systems for the prediction of SB lesions in patients with obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGlB), having the potential to improve patient selection and rationalize the use of enteroscopy, with better allocation of resources, optimized diagnostic workflow and tailored treatment. This review also includes scores for reporting the inflammatory burden, the cleansing level that underscores confidence in CE reporting and the mass or bulge question in CE. Essentially, the aim is to become a main text for reference when scoring is required and facilitate the inclusion of -through readiness of access- one of the other in the final report.

Capsule enteroscopy versus scintigraphy for the diagnosis of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Capsule enteroscopy (CE) and 99mTc Red blood cell (RBC) scintigraphy are frequently used tests in the investigation of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding (OGIB). There is a scarcity of data comparing both diagnostic modalities. This study aims to assess the performance of CE and scintigraphy for the diagnosis of OGIB.

METHODS

Patients who underwent CE and scintigraphy for OGIB were selected and analyzed retrospectively. The hemorrhagic potential of CE findings was rated using Saurin's classification. The concordance between both diagnostic techniques for bleeding detection and localization was analyzed.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients (62% female), with a median age of 63 years, were included. Capsule enteroscopy identified 37 patients (43%) with high hemorrhagic potential (P2) lesions. Most scintigraphy exams were positive for gastrointestinal bleeding (82%). No concordance was found between the detection of lesions with hemorrhagic potential in CE and scintigraphy (kappa <0). The distribution of P0, P1, and P2 findings was similar in patients with positive or negative scintigraphy (p=0.526). There was no agreement regarding the location of P2 findings in CE and the bleeding detected in the scintigraphy (kappa <0). Patients with P2 lesions had significantly lower median levels of hemoglobin (p=0.002) at presentation. No significant difference was found in hemoglobin values between patients with positive or negative scintigraphy (p=0.058).

CONCLUSION

Significant diagnostic discrepancy was observed between CE and scintigraphy. The findings of CE correlated better with hemoglobin values at presentation than the scintigraphy results. Therefore, scintigraphy didn't appear to be useful in the diagnostic workup of OGIB.  .

Role of Video Capsule in Small Bowel Bleeding

Video capsule endoscopy has an essential role in the diagnosis and management of small bowel bleeding and is the first-line study recommended for this purpose. This article reviews the risk factors for small bowel bleeding, optimal timing for video capsule endoscopy testing, and algorithms recommended for evaluation. Used primarily for the assessment of nonacute gastrointestinal blood loss, video capsule endoscopy has an emerging role for more urgent use in emergency settings and in special populations. Future software incorporation of neural networks to enhance lesion detection will likely result in an augmented role of video capsule endoscopy in small bowel bleeding.