Adverse Events during Bowel Preparation and Colonoscopy in Patients with Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding Compared with Elective Non-Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Association of blood group O with a recurrent risk for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding from a multicenter cohort study

The relationship between blood group and rebleeding in acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the association between blood group O and clinical outcomes in patients with ALGIB. The study included 2336 patients with ALGIB whose bleeding source was identified during initial endoscopy (from the CODE BLUE-J Study). The assessed outcomes encompassed rebleeding and other clinical parameters. The rebleeding rates within 30 days in patients with blood group O and those without blood group O were 17.9% and 14.9%, respectively. Similarly, the rates within 1 year were 21.9% for patients with blood group O and 18.2% for those without blood group O. In a multivariate analysis using age, sex, vital signs at presentation, blood test findings, comorbidities, antithrombotic medication, active bleeding, and type of endoscopic treatment as covariates, patients with blood group O exhibited significantly higher risks for rebleeding within 30 days (odds ratio [OR] 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.65; P = 0.024) and 1 year (OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.04-1.61; P = 0.020) compared to those without blood group O. However, the thrombosis and mortality rates did not differ significantly between blood group O and non-O patients. In patients with ALGIB, blood group O has been identified as an independent risk factor for both short- and long-term rebleeding.

Is bowel preparation necessary for early colonoscopy in patients with suspected colonic diverticular bleeding?: A multicenter retrospective study with propensity score matching analysis

Objectives

There are few reports on bowel preparation for early colonoscopy in patients with suspected colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). We aim to clarify in a retrospective, multicenter study.

Methods

In a multicenter retrospective cohort study at 10 institutions, we analyzed clinical features of patients diagnosed with CDB, who underwent early colonoscopy within 24 h. We compared patients who were prepared with polyethylene glycol lavage (PEL) and those without PEL. We evaluated the effects of PEL for early colonoscopy in patients with suspected CDB.

Results

A total of 129 (53%) underwent under preparation with PEL and 113 patients without PEL. The PEL group was younger, had fewer comorbidities, and had better performance status. After adjusting for these variables with propensity score matching, the PEL group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (7.9 ± 4.7 vs. 10.1 ± 5.2 days; p = 0.001), and a higher cecal intubation rate (91.1% vs. 50.0%; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in adverse event rates, identification of stigmata of recent hemorrhage, or frequency in endoscopic hemostatic treatment.

Conclusions

PEL may be preferred for early colonoscopy in patients suspected of having CDB.

Management of Patients With Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Updated ACG Guideline

Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common reason for hospitalization in the United States and is associated with significant utilization of hospital resources, as well as considerable morbidity and mortality. These revised guidelines implement the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to propose recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools, thresholds for red blood cell transfusion, reversal agents for patients on anticoagulants, diagnostic testing including colonoscopy and computed tomography angiography (CTA), endoscopic therapeutic options, and management of antithrombotic medications after hospital discharge. Important changes since the previous iteration of this guideline include recommendations for the use of risk stratification tools to identify patients with LGIB at low risk of a hospital-based intervention, the role for reversal agents in patients with life-threatening LGIB on vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants, the increasing role for CTA in patients with severe LGIB, and the management of patients who have a positive CTA. We recommend that most patients requiring inpatient colonoscopy undergo a nonurgent colonoscopy because performing an urgent colonoscopy within 24 hours of presentation has not been shown to improve important clinical outcomes such as rebleeding. Finally, we provide updated recommendations regarding resumption of antiplatelet and anticoagulant medications after cessation of LGIB.

Predictors of ICU admission associated with gastrointestinal endoscopy in medical inpatients: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures are commonly performed in medical inpatients. Limited prior research has examined factors associated with intensive care unit (ICU) admission after GI endoscopy in medical inpatients.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted using routinely-collected clinical and administrative data from all general medicine hospitalizations at five academic hospitals in Toronto, Canada between 2010 and 2020. We describe ICU admission and death within 48 h of GI endoscopy in medical inpatients. We examined adjusted associations of patient and procedural factors with ICU admission or death using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 18 290 medical inpatients who underwent endoscopy, 900 (4.9%) required ICU admission or died within 48 h of endoscopy. Following risk adjustment, ICU admission or death were associated with the following procedural factors: endoscopy on the day of hospital admission (aOR 3.16 [2.38-4.21]) or 1 day after admission (aOR 1.92 [1.51-2.44]) and esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) procedures; and the following patient factors: Charlson comorbidity index of two (aOR 1.38 [1.05-1.81]) or three or greater (aOR 1.84 [1.47-2.29]), older age, male sex, lower hemoglobin prior to endoscopy, increased creatinine prior to endoscopy, an admitting diagnosis of liver disease and certain medications (antiplatelet agents and corticosteroids).

CONCLUSIONS

ICU admission or death after endoscopy was associated with procedural factors such as EGD and timing of endoscopy, and patient factors indicative of acute illness and greater comorbidity. These findings can contribute to improved triage and monitoring for patients requiring inpatient endoscopy.

Colonoscopy: Preparation and Potential Complications

Colonoscopy is a fairly common test that serves both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. It has been considered the gold standard in colorectal cancer screening for several years. Due to the nature of the examination, various types of complications may occur. The purpose of this analysis is to describe the various complications related to the period of preparation for colonoscopy among hospitalized patients, including life-threatening ones, in order to know how to avoid complications while preparing for a colonoscopy. We analyzed the nursing and medical reports of 9962 patients who were prepared for colonoscopy between 2005 and 2016. The frequency of various side effects associated with intensive bowel cleansing prior to colonoscopy was assessed. In justified cases, additional medical data were collected from patients, their families or from other doctors providing advice to patients after complications. Out of 9962 patients prepared for colonoscopy, 180 procedures were discontinued due to complications and side effects, and in these cases no colonoscopy was performed. The most common complications were: vomiting; epistaxis; loss of consciousness with head injury; abdominal pain; acute diarrhea; symptoms of choking; heart rhythm disturbances; dyspnea; fractures of limbs and hands; acute coronary syndrome; hypotension; hypertension; cerebral ischemia; severe blood glucose fluctuations; increased muscle contraction and allergic reactions. In addition to the documentation of our own research, several works of other research groups were also analyzed. Currently, the literature does not provide data on the frequency and type of complications in the preparation period for colonoscopy. The advantage of our work is the awareness of the possibility of serious complications and postulating the necessary identification of threats. Individualization of the recommended procedures and increased supervision of patients undergoing bowel cleansing procedure, we hope, will reduce the occurrence of complications and side effects.

Endoscopic direct clipping versus indirect clipping for colonic diverticular bleeding: A large multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Direct and indirect clipping treatments are used worldwide to treat colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB), but their effectiveness has not been examined in multicenter studies with more than 100 cases.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the short- and long-term effectiveness of direct versus indirect clipping for CDB in a nationwide cohort.

METHODS

We studied 1041 patients with CDB who underwent direct clipping (n = 360) or indirect clipping (n = 681) at 49 hospitals across Japan (CODE BLUE-J Study).

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, sex, and important confounding factors revealed that, compared with indirect clipping, direct clipping was independently associated with reduced risk of early rebleeding (<30 days; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.592, p = 0.002), late rebleeding (<1 year; AOR 0.707, p = 0.018), and blood transfusion requirement (AOR 0.741, p = 0.047). No significant difference in initial hemostasis rates was observed between the two groups. Propensity-score matching to balance baseline characteristics also showed significant reductions in the early and late rebleeding rates with direct clipping. In subgroup analysis, direct clipping was associated with significantly lower rates of early and late rebleeding and blood transfusion need in cases of stigmata of recent hemorrhage with non-active bleeding on colonoscopy, right-sided diverticula, and early colonoscopy, but not with active bleeding on colonoscopy, left-sided diverticula, or elective colonoscopy.

CONCLUSIONS

Our large nationwide study highlights the use of direct clipping for CDB treatment whenever possible. Differences in bleeding pattern and colonic location can also be considered when deciding which clipping options to use.

Novel frontiers of agents for bowel cleansing for colonoscopy

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) is characterized by rapid declines in the wake of widespread screening. Colonoscopy is the gold standard for CRC screening, but its accuracy is related to high quality of bowel preparation (BP). In this review, we aimed to summarized the current strategy to increase bowel cleansing before colonoscopy. Newly bowel cleansing agents were developed with the same efficacy of previous agent but requiring less amount of liquid to improve patients’ acceptability. The role of the diet before colonoscopy was also changed, as well the contribution of educational intervention and the use of adjunctive drugs to improve patients’ tolerance and/or quality of BP. The review also described BP in special situations, as lower gastrointestinal bleeding, elderly people, patients with chronic kidney disease, patients with inflammatory bowel disease, patients with congestive heart failure, inpatient, patient with previous bowel resection, pregnant/lactating patients. The review underlined the quality of BP should be described using a validate scale in colonoscopy report and it explored the available scales. Finally, the review explored the possible contribution of bowel cleansing in post-colonoscopy syndrome that can be related by a transient alteration of gut microbiota. Moreover, the study underlined several points needed to further investigations.

Safety and Effectiveness of Endoscopic Band Ligation for Colonic Diverticular Bleeding in Elderly Patients

INTRODUCTION

Colonic diverticulosis increases with age, leading to a higher risk of colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) in the elderly. As life expectancy continues to increase, the need for endoscopic hemostasis for CDB in the elderly can also be expected to increase. However, there have been no reports to date on the feasibility of endoscopic hemostasis for elderly CDB patients. Several recent studies have addressed the effectiveness of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) for CDB. In this study, we evaluate the safety and effectiveness of EBL in elderly CDB patients compared to younger CDB patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of consecutive patients treated with EBL for the first time at a tertiary referral center between March 2011 and November 2017. Patients were grouped according to age into those at least 75 years old (the Elderly) and those <75 years old (the Nonelderly). Patient characteristics, technical success, and complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

EBL was performed in 153 patients during the study period (49 Elderly patients and 104 Nonelderly patients). Elderly patients were less likely to be male (p < 0.001) and had lower hemoglobin levels on admission (p < 0.001). Bleeding on the right side of the splenic flexure was observed more frequently in the Nonelderly (p = 0.002). Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and use of antithrombotic agents were significantly higher in the Elderly (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Active bleeding tended to be observed more frequently in the Elderly (p = 0.054), while the difference was not significant. There were no significant differences in the shock index, procedure time, or units of packed red blood cells transfused between the 2 groups. No significant differences in the technical success rate (97.1 vs. 98%, p = 0.76), early rebleeding rate (10.2 vs. 14.4%, p = 0.47), or other complications (2 vs. 1%, p = 0.58) were observed. Perforation and abscess formation were not observed in either group. Female gender, left-sidedness, higher CCI, and lower hemoglobin level were all significantly more frequently observed in the Elderly on multiple logistic regression analysis.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

EBL may be similarly safe and effective for the treatment of CDB in the elderly as in the nonelderly.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that the initial assessment of patients presenting with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding should include: a history of co-morbidities and medications that promote bleeding; hemodynamic parameters; physical examination (including digital rectal examination); and laboratory markers. A risk score can be used to aid, but should not replace, clinician judgment.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 2 : ESGE recommends that, in patients presenting with a self-limited bleed and no adverse clinical features, an Oakland score of ≤ 8 points can be used to guide the clinician decision to discharge the patient for outpatient investigation.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 7 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of 7-9 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and a history of acute or chronic cardiovascular disease, a more liberal red blood cell transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 8 g/dL prompting red blood cell transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin concentration of ≥ 10 g/dL is desirable.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5: ESGE recommends that, in patients with major acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding, colonoscopy should be performed sometime during their hospital stay because there is no high quality evidence that early colonoscopy influences patient outcomes.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends that patients with hemodynamic instability and suspected ongoing bleeding undergo computed tomography angiography before endoscopic or radiologic treatment to locate the site of bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends withholding vitamin K antagonists in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding and correcting their coagulopathy according to the severity of bleeding and their thrombotic risk. In patients with hemodynamic instability, we recommend administering intravenous vitamin K and four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (PCC), or fresh frozen plasma if PCC is not available.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends temporarily withholding direct oral anticoagulants at presentation in patients with major lower gastrointestinal bleeding.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE does not recommend withholding aspirin in patients taking low dose aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention. If withheld, low dose aspirin should be resumed, preferably within 5 days or even earlier if hemostasis is achieved or there is no further evidence of bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 10: ESGE does not recommend routinely discontinuing dual antiplatelet therapy (low dose aspirin and a P2Y12 receptor antagonist) before cardiology consultation. Continuation of the aspirin is recommended, whereas the P2Y12 receptor antagonist can be continued or temporarily interrupted according to the severity of bleeding and the ischemic risk. If interrupted, the P2Y12 receptor antagonist should be restarted within 5 days, if still indicated.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.

Efficacy and Safety of Early vs Elective Colonoscopy for Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

BACKGROUND & AIMS

We performed a large, multicenter, randomized controlled trial to determine the efficacy and safety of early colonoscopy on outcomes of patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB).

METHODS

We performed an open-label study at 15 hospitals in Japan of 170 patients with ALGIB randomly assigned (1:1) to groups that underwent early colonoscopy (within 24 hours of initial visit to the hospital) or elective colonoscopy (24-96 hours after hospital admission). The primary outcome was identification of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). Secondary outcomes were rebleeding within 30 days, endoscopic treatment success, need for transfusion, length of stay, thrombotic events within 30 days, death within 30 days, and adverse events.

RESULTS

SRH were identified in 17 of 79 patients (21.5%) in the early colonoscopy group vs 17 of 80 patients (21.3%) in the elective colonoscopy group (difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, -12.5 to 13.0; P = .967). Rebleeding within 30 days of hospital admission occurred in 15.3% of patients in the early colonoscopy group and 6.7% of patients in the elective colonoscopy group (difference, 8.6; 95% confidence interval, -1.4 to 18.7); there were no significant differences between groups in successful endoscopic treatment rate, transfusion rate, length of stay, thrombotic events, or death within 30 days. The adverse event of hemorrhagic shock occurred during bowel preparation in no patient in the early group vs 2 patients (2.5%) in the elective colonoscopy group.

CONCLUSIONS

In a randomized controlled study, we found that colonoscopy within 24 hours after hospital admission did not increase SRH or reduce rebleeding compared with colonoscopy at 24-96 hours in patients with ALGIB. ClinicalTrials.gov, Numbers: UMIN000021129 and NCT03098173.

The role of colonoscopy and endotherapy in the management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding

Colonoscopy is an integral diagnostic and therapeutic tool in the management of patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). After resuscitation, reversal of coagulopathy, and exclusion of a proximal source of bleeding, colonoscopy should be performed in most patients with LGIB. Bowel preparation, typically with polyethylene glycol based solutions, is needed to closely inspect the colonic mucosa for bleeding sources. Colonoscopy within 24 h is recommended for high-risk patients with ongoing bleeding, although there is limited evidence that this strategy improves clinical outcomes. When active or stigmata of bleeding is detected, endoscopic intervention is indicated and can reduce future rebleeding. The most common options for endoscopic intervention include clipping, endoscopic band ligation, and coagulation, however rigorous head-to-head comparisons of different endoscopic tools are unavailable. Future research is needed to determine the optimal timing of colonoscopy, appropriate reversal strategies for patients on antithrombotics, and the most effective endoscopic hemostatic therapy.

Diagnosis and management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: guidelines from the British Society of Gastroenterology

This is the first UK national guideline to concentrate on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) and has been commissioned by the Clinical Services and Standards Committee of the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG). The Guidelines Development Group consisted of representatives from the BSG Endoscopy Committee, the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, the British Society of Interventional Radiology, the Royal College of Radiologists, NHS Blood and Transplant and a patient representative. A systematic search of the literature was undertaken and the quality of evidence and grading of recommendations appraised according to the GRADE(Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. These guidelines focus on the diagnosis and management of acute LGIB in adults, including methods of risk assessment and interventions to diagnose and treat bleeding (colonoscopy, computed tomography, mesenteric angiography, endoscopic therapy, embolisation and surgery). Recommendations are included on the management of patients who develop LGIB while receiving anticoagulants (including direct oral anticoagulants) or antiplatelet drugs. The appropriate use of blood transfusion is also discussed, including haemoglobin triggers and targets.

Role of endoscopy in acute gastrointestinal bleeding in real clinical practice: An evidence-based review

Although upper gastrointestinal bleeding is usually segregated from lower gastrointestinal bleeding, and guidelines for gastrointestinal bleeding are divided into two separate sections, they may not be distinguished from each other in clinical practice. Most patients are first observed with signs of bleeding such as hematemesis, melena, and hematochezia. When a patient with these symptoms presents to the emergency room, endoscopic diagnosis and treatment are considered together with appropriate initial resuscitation. Especially, in cases of variceal bleeding, it is important for the prognosis that the endoscopy is performed immediately after the patient stabilizes. In cases of suspected lower gastrointestinal bleeding, full colonoscopy after bowel preparation is effective in distinguishing the cause of the bleeding and treating with hemostasis. The therapeutic aspect of endoscopy, using the mechanical method alone or injection with a certain modality rather than injection alone, can increase the success rate of bleeding control. Therefore, it is important to consider the origin of bleeding and how to approach it. In this article, we aim to review the role of endoscopy in diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis in patients with acute gastrointestinal bleeding in a real clinical setting.

Clinical features of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and its diagnostic strategy with emergency enteroscopy

AIM

To investigate the clinical features of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and its diagnostic strategy with emergency enteroscopy.

METHODS

Two hundred and ten patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding at our hospital from January 2014 to December 2017 were selected, and the clinical features of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding were analyzed. The patients were then divided into two groups based on the bowel preparation method used: a cleansing enema group (169 cases) and an oral cathartic group (41 cases). The influence of intestinal tract cleanliness on emergency enteroscopy diagnosis was then analyzed.

RESULTS

The ratio of males to females in 210 patients was 1.50:1. The elderly, middle-aged, and young patients accounted for 45.71% (96/210), 29.05% (61/210), and 25.24% (53/210), respectively. There were 10.48% of hidden blood loss and 89.52% of overt blood loss. The hemorrhage was mostly common with melena, bright red bloody stools, and dark red bloody stools. The bleeding was mostly caused by intestinal inflammation or infection (35.71%) and polyps of the rectum and colon (20.95%). Colorectal cancer, intestinal inflammation or infection, and polyps of the rectum and colon were main causes in the elderly group. Intestinal inflammation or infection, polyps of the rectum and colon, and colorectal cancer were main causes in the middle-aged group. Intestinal inflammation or infection, polyps of the rectum and colon, and vascular disease were main causes in the young group. The excellent rate of intestinal tract cleanliness in the cleansing enema group was lower than that of the oral cathartic group (P < 0.05). The diagnostic accuracy of enteroscopy with excellent, good, and poor cleanliness was 91.04% (61/67), 80.85% (38/47), and 52.42% (65/124), respectively. The diagnostic accordance rate of enteroscopy with excellent or good cleanliness was higher than that of enteroscopy with poor cleanliness (P < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in the diagnostic accordance rate between enteroscopy with excellent and good cleanliness (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Acute lower gastrointestinal hemorrhage is common in males and the elderly population. Main causes are intestinal inflammation and polyps of the rectum and colon, and there is certain difference in the causes of bleeding in patients of different ages. Hemorrhage is mostly common with melena, bright red bloody stools, and dark red bloody stools. Good intestinal tract cleanliness can increase the diagnostic rate of emergency enteroscopy, and the intestinal tract cleanliness associated with oral cathartic is better than that of cleansing enema. Therefore, based on patient's hemodynamic stability, using bowel preparation with oral cathartic can improve the diagnostic accordance rate.

Perforated Diverticulitis of the Transverse Colon: An Unexpected Cause of Abdominal Pain During Preoperative Bowel Preparation

Diverticulitis affecting the transverse colon is uncommon, with perforation being exceptionally rare. It is not usually considered in the differential diagnosis of a patient with acute abdominal pain. We report a case of nonspecific abdominal pain secondary to a perforated diverticulum in the transverse colon during preoperative bowel preparation. A 74-year-old Caucasian female had sudden onset abdominal pain and nausea with routine bowel preparation. This undifferentiated acute abdomen was suggestive of a bowel perforation, which was later confirmed by a computed tomography scan. Surgical exploration determined the location of the perforation in the transverse colon. We report an unusual presentation of preoperative abdominal pain during routine bowel preparation. It is extraordinarily uncommon to see rupture of a transverse colon diverticulum in a patient with sigmoid involvement, and bowel preparation as a cause of rupture has not been previously documented. Because perforation of a transverse colon diverticulum generally has a nonspecific clinical presentation, it should be considered in the differential diagnosis for a patient with known diverticular disease who has acute onset abdominal pain and signs of peritonism.

Colonoscopy in Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Diagnosis, Timing, and Bowel Preparation

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding is bleeding from a colonic source. Rapid colon purge using 4 to 6 L of polyethylene glycol followed by early colonoscopy, within 24 hours of presentation, is recommended to optimize the detection and management of bleeding sources. Although the data are mixed, early colonoscopy seems to be associated with higher detection of bleeding lesions and therapeutic interventions. There is no clear benefit for early colonoscopy in terms of reduced duration of stay, rebleeding, transfusion requirement, or surgery compared with patients undergoing elective colonoscopy. Further studies are needed to determine the effect of early colonoscopy on clinically important outcomes.

A multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing the identification rate of stigmata of recent hemorrhage and rebleeding rate between early and elective colonoscopy in outpatient-onset acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The clinical benefit of early colonoscopy within 24 h of arrival in patients with severe acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) remains controversial. This trial will compare early colonoscopy (performed within 24 h) versus elective colonoscopy (performed between 24 and 96 h) to examine the identification rate of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) in ALGIB patients. We hypothesize that, compared with elective colonoscopy, early colonoscopy increases the identification of SRH and subsequently improves clinical outcomes.

Methods

This trial is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial examining the superiority of early colonoscopy over elective colonoscopy (standard therapy) in ALGIB patients. The primary outcome measure is the identification of SRH. Secondary outcomes include 30-day rebleeding, success of endoscopic treatment, need for additional endoscopic examination, need for interventional radiology, need for surgery, need for transfusion during hospitalization, length of stay, 30-day thrombotic events, 30-day mortality, preparation-related adverse events, and colonoscopy-related adverse events. The sample size will enable detection of a 9% SRH rate in elective colonoscopy patients and a SRH rate of ≥ 26% in early colonoscopy patients with a risk of type I error of 5% and a power of 80%.

Discussion

This trial will provide high-quality data on the benefits and risks of early colonoscopy in ALGIB patients.

Trial registration

UMIN-CTR Identifier, UMIN000021129. Registered on 21 February 2016; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT03098173. Registered on 24 March 2017.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2558-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Patients' comorbidities reduce the clinical value of emergency colonoscopy: results of a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Urgent endoscopy is often used to diagnose and sometimes treat acute upper gastrointestinal syndromes (hemorrhage, toxic ingestion, and occlusion). However, its suitability concerning the management of lower gastrointestinal conditions in emergency circumstances is controversial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 We studied the role of emergency colonoscopy in diagnosis and treatment of all consecutive patients presenting with acute lower gastrointestinal symptoms referred to our hospital on an emergency basis. All patients were first managed by physicians from the emergency room and/or the intensive care unit (ICU); the treatments included fluid resuscitation, blood transfusion, and antibiotic or cardiotonic as needed. Bowel cleansing was performed to purge the colon of clots, stool, and blood when clinically possible; alternatively, a bowel enema was used. Patients only underwent a computed tomography (CT) scan prior to the colonoscopy in clinically relevant situations. Colonoscopy was performed within 6 - 36 hours after hospitalization or the beginning of the clinical symptoms (hemorrhage, sepsis, colon distension) or occlusion, as assessed by abdominal CT scan.

RESULTS

 From 2010 to 2015, 603 patients underwent urgent colonoscopy; among them, 214 (36 %) presented with lower GI bleeding, while 264 (44 %) had symptoms suggestive of intestinal ischemia; almost half (49 %, n = 295) of the patients were hospitalized in the ICU. Patients received therapies, such as clips (15 %), epinephrine injections (5 %), bipolar coagulation (7 %), or devolvulation (3 %) using colonoscopy or antibiotic therapy when needed. No perforation was observed after colonoscopy and only three cases of hemorrhage recurrence were documented as complications after the procedure. Overall, 192 patients died within 1 month after colonoscopy due to four independent risk situations, as follows: septic shock, heart transplantation, multiorgan failure, and ischemic colitis. Only 67 (35 %) underwent urgent intestinal surgery when ischemic colitis was identified, and this did not have a significant effect on the mortality rate.

CONCLUSIONS

 Urgent bedside colonoscopy is feasible and safe for routine use. The highest advantage was observed in patients with red blood hemorrhage, diarrhea, and colon distension when symptoms were not associated with multiorgane failure, heart transplantation, or septic shock. As revealed by colonoscopy and pathological features, ischemic colitis is associated with a bad prognosis, and patients experience a higher rate of early mortality regardless of whether they undergo urgent colon surgery.

Comparison of claims data on hospitalization rates and repeat procedures in patients receiving a bowel preparation prior to colonoscopy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate outcomes of colorectal screening using sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate compared with other prescription bowel-preparation agents. Primary endpoints were rates of procedure-associated hospitalizations, diagnosis at hospitalization, and rates of early repeat screenings.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study identified patients using the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan databases, which contain fully adjudicated, de-identified, medical- and prescription-drug claims, as well as demographic and enrollment information for individuals with commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare supplemental insurance coverage. Patients who had a colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy over a 3-year period were identified using International Classification of Diseases Clinical Modification procedure codes, recorded on claims from physicians and facilities. First, screening colonoscopy was identified for each patient, and the study was limited to those patients who could be observed for ≥6 months before and 3 months after the screening procedure. Total number of hospitalizations and rates of early repeat screenings were evaluated for all patients who received sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate and compared with those who received other bowel-preparation agents. Individual prescription medications that could affect the outcome of the cleansing agent were identified; further evaluations were made to establish whether patients had comorbid conditions, such as chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, or psychiatric illness. Statistical methods included descriptive statistics, two-tailed t-tests, and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 566,628 procedures were identified in the MarketScan databases and included in the study. Sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate performed well in terms of safety outcomes, with no hospitalizations due to diagnosis of hyponatremia, dehydration, or other fluid disorders in the 10 days after procedure. Early repeat rates among sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate patients were comparable with rates observed for all other cleansing agents.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of colorectal screening using sodium picosulfate and magnesium citrate were not significantly different compared with other prescription bowel-preparation agents.