The Role of Imaging for GI Bleeding: ACG and SAR Consensus Recommendations

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is the most common GI diagnosis leading to hospitalization within the United States. Prompt diagnosis and treatment of GI bleeding is critical to improving patient outcomes and reducing high health care utilization and costs. Radiologic techniques including CT angiography, catheter angiography, CT enterography, MR enterography, nuclear medicine red blood cell scan, and technetium-99m pertechnetate scintigraphy (Meckel scan) are frequently used to evaluate patients with GI bleeding and are complementary to GI endoscopy. However, multiple management guidelines exist, which differ in the recommended utilization of these radiologic examinations. This variability can lead to confusion as to how these tests should be used in the evaluation of GI bleeding. In this document, a panel of experts from the American College of Gastroenterology and Society of Abdominal Radiology provide a review of the radiologic examinations used to evaluate for GI bleeding including nomenclature, technique, performance, advantages, and limitations. A comparison of advantages and limitations relative to endoscopic examinations is also included. Finally, consensus statements and recommendations on technical parameters and utilization of radiologic techniques for GI bleeding are provided. © Radiological Society of North America and the American College of Gastroenterology, 2024. Supplemental material is available for this article. This article is being published concurrently in American Journal of Gastroenterology and Radiology. The articles are identical except for minor stylistic and spelling differences in keeping with each journal's style. Citations from either journal can be used when citing this article. See also the editorial by Lockhart in this issue.

The Role of Imaging for Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Consensus Recommendations From the American College of Gastroenterology and Society of Abdominal Radiology

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is the most common GI diagnosis leading to hospitalization within the United States. Prompt diagnosis and treatment of GI bleeding is critical to improving patient outcomes and reducing high healthcare utilization and costs. Radiologic techniques including computed tomography angiography, catheter angiography, computed tomography enterography, magnetic resonance enterography, nuclear medicine red blood cell scan, and technetium-99m pertechnetate scintigraphy (Meckel scan) are frequently used to evaluate patients with GI bleeding and are complementary to GI endoscopy. However, multiple management guidelines exist which differ in the recommended utilization of these radiologic examinations. This variability can lead to confusion as to how these tests should be used in the evaluation of GI bleeding. In this document, a panel of experts from the American College of Gastroenterology and Society of Abdominal Radiology provide a review of the radiologic examinations used to evaluate for GI bleeding including nomenclature, technique, performance, advantages, and limitations. A comparison of advantages and limitations relative to endoscopic examinations is also included. Finally, consensus statements and recommendations on technical parameters and utilization of radiologic techniques for GI bleeding are provided.

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.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Radiologic Management of Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Bleeding: 2021 Update

Diverticulosis remains the commonest cause for acute lower gastrointestinal tract bleeding (GIB). Conservative management is initially sufficient for most patients, followed by elective diagnostic tests. However, if acute lower GIB persists, it can be investigated with colonoscopy, CT angiography (CTA), or red blood cell (RBC) scan. Colonoscopy can identify the site and cause of bleeding and provide effective treatment. CTA is a noninvasive diagnostic tool that is better tolerated by patients, can identify actively bleeding site or a potential bleeding lesion in vast majority of patients. RBC scan can identify intermittent bleeding, and with single-photon emission computed tomography, can more accurately localize it to a small segment of bowel. If patients are hemodynamically unstable, CTA and transcatheter arteriography/embolization can be performed. Colonoscopy can also be considered in these patients if rapid bowel preparation is feasible. Transcatheter arteriography has a low rate of major complications; however, targeted transcatheter embolization is only feasible if extravasation is seen, which is more likely in hemodynamically unstable patients. If bleeding site has been previously localized but the intervention by colonoscopy and transcatheter embolization have failed to achieve hemostasis, surgery may be required. Among patients with obscure (nonlocalized) recurrent bleeding, capsule endoscopy and CT enterography can be considered to identify culprit mucosal lesion(s). The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

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.

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.

Independent usefulness of flow phase 99mTc-red blood cell scintigraphy in predicting the results of angiography in acute gastrointestinal bleeding

OBJECTIVE:

In acute gastrointestinal bleeding, despite positive dynamic phase ⁹⁹mTc-red blood cell scintigraphy, invasive catheter angiography (CA) is frequently negative. In this study, we investigated the value of flow phase scintigraphy in predicting extravasation on CA.

METHODS:

Institutional review board approval with a waiver of informed consent was obtained for this retrospective study. A total of 173 scintigraphy procedures performed in 145 patients with GIB between January 2013 and August 2014 were analysed. Scintigraphy had two phases: flow (1 image/s for 1 min) followed by dynamic (1 image/30 s for 1 h). Patients who underwent CA within 24 hours of positive scintigraphy were assessed. Each scintigraphy phase was randomly and independently reviewed by two nuclear medicine physicians blinded to the outcomes of the other phase and of CA.

RESULTS:

A total of 42 patients (29%) had positive scintigraphy. Of these patients, 29 underwent CA, and extravasation was seen in 6 (21%). In all, dynamic phase scintigraphy was positive. 13 of the 29 patients also had positive flow phase scintigraphy. The sensitivity, specificity, positive-predictive value, and negative-predictive value of flow phase scintigraphy for extravasation on CA were 100, 70, 46, and 100%, respectively. Specificity and positive predictive value were higher when CA was performed within 4 hours of positive flow phase scintigraphy.

CONCLUSIONS:

Negative flow phase scintigraphy can identify patients who will not benefit from CA despite positive dynamic phase scintigraphy. The likelihood of extravasation on CA is higher when performed soon after positive flow phase scintigraphy.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:

Negative flow phase scintigraphy identifies patients who will not benefit from invasive catheter angiography despite positive results on subsequent dynamic phase scintigraphy. Increasing the delay between positive red blood cell scintigraphy and catheter angiography progressively reduces the likelihood of identifying extravasation, which is required to target embolization.

Successful Localization of the Source of Hemorrhage in Patient with Post-Whipple Surgery by 99mTc-Labelled Red Blood Cell Scintigraphy

Gastrointestinal Bleeding Scintigraphy (GIBS) of ^99mTc-labelled red blood cells is a relatively simple examination to perform, with high diagnostic accuracy and a relatively lower radiation dose. A positive scan can either suggest surgery without further investigation or can indicate angiography, a more targeted procedure. Whipple pancreatoduodenectomy is most often performed for tumors of the head of the pancreas. Pancreatoduodenectomy has 30%–40% morbidity and mortality, and while post-pancreatoduodenectomy hemorrhage is seen in less than 10% of patients, it accounts for 11%–38% mortality. The role of imaging in patients to detect relative hemodynamic stability is essential. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) shows the cause, site, and nature of bleeding, while digital subtraction angiography (DSA) has a diagnostic as well as a therapeutic role. We present a patient who presented with active gastrointestinal bleeding (GI) bleeding after undergoing a Whipple procedure, to highlight the role of GIBS in the successful localization of a bleeding site and the guidance of digital DSA in the embolization and control of the active bleeding.

Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding entails a range of severity and a multitude of options for localization and control of bleeding. With experience in trauma, critical care, endoscopy, and definitive surgical interventions, general surgeons are equipped to manage this condition in various clinical settings. This article examines traditional and emerging options for bleeding localization and control available to general surgeons.

CT for Evaluation of Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is common and necessitates rapid diagnosis and treatment. Bleeding can occur anywhere throughout the GI tract and may be caused by many types of disease. The variety of enteric diseases that cause bleeding and the tendency for bleeding to be intermittent may make it difficult to render a diagnosis. The workup of GI bleeding is frequently prolonged and expensive, with examinations commonly needing to be repeated. The use of computed tomography (CT) for evaluation of acute GI bleeding is gaining popularity because it can be used to rapidly diagnose active bleeding and nonbleeding bowel disease. The CT examinations used to evaluate acute GI bleeding include CT angiography and multiphase CT enterography. Understanding the clinical evaluation of acute GI bleeding, including the advantages and limitations of endoscopic evaluation, is necessary for the appropriate selection of patients who may benefit from CT. Multiphase CT enterography is used primarily to evaluate stable patients who have undergone upper and lower endoscopy without identification of a bleeding source. CT angiography is used to examine stable and unstable patients who respond to resuscitation, are believed to be actively bleeding, and are considered unlikely to have an upper GI source of hemorrhage. In the emergent setting, CT may yield critical information regarding the presence, location, and cause of active bleeding-data that can guide the choice of subsequent therapy. Recent developments in the use of and techniques for performing CT angiography have made it a potential first-line tool for evaluating acute GI bleeding. ^©RSNA, 2018.

A Novel Technique to Measure the Intensity of Abnormality on GI Bleeding Scans: Development, Initial Implementation, and Correlation With Conventional Angiography

PURPOSE

Develop a technique to quantify intensity of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) on Tc-labeled red blood cell (RBC) scintigraphy, correlate with angiography, and determine the tool's predictive value.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An IRB-approved, single institution database query of GI bleeding scans performed between January 2013 and December 2015. Reports from all studies and imaging from all positive studies were reviewed. A technique was developed for scan analysis, allowing for calculation of percent increase of activity in the region of interest (ROI, area of bleeding) and ROI in the aorta and liver (controls). Database query determined which patients underwent angiography, and which had positive angiograms. Median ROI percent increase in patients with positive scintigraphy and positive angiography was compared to those with positive scintigraphy and negative angiography.

RESULTS

Of 194 bleeding scans performed during the study period, 71 were positive for active LGIB, 37 had angiography, and 9 had active contrast extravasation. The new tool was used to analyze the 37 cases with positive nuclear scans sent for angiography. Median percent increase in ROI activity was 50% in those with positive scan and positive angiogram and 26.8% in those with positive scan but negative angiogram. Using ROI percent change quartiles, we observed a statistically significant association between percent increase in ROI activity from baseline and the probability of having a positive angiogram (Cochran-Armitage trend test, P = 0.01), such that there are no positive angiogram cases when ROI change was <20% and a majority of the positive angiogram cases (67%) in the highest quartile.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of processing protocol to determine percent increase in activity from baseline within ROI of active LGIB on scintigraphy has predictive value in determining which patients will not benefit from conventional angiography.