Acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: predictive factors and clinical outcome for the patients who needed first-time mesenteric conventional angiography

Twenty years of embolization for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a meta-analysis of rebleeding and ischaemia rates

BACKGROUND

Transarterial embolization (TAE) for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) can be technically challenging due to the compromise between achieving haemostasis and causing tissue ischaemia. The goal of the present study is to determine its technical success, rebleeding, and post-embolization ischaemia rates through meta-analysis of published literature in the last twenty years.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were queried. Technical success, rebleeding, and ischaemia rates were extracted. Baseline characteristics such as author, publication year, region, study design, embolization material, percentage of superselective embolization were retrieved. Subgroup analysis was performed based on publication time and embolization agent.

RESULTS

A total of 66 studies including 2121 patients who underwent embolization for acute LGIB were included. Endoscopic management was attempted in 34.5%. The pooled overall technical success, rebleeding, post-embolization ischaemia rates were 97.0%, 20.7%, and 7.5%, respectively. Studies published after 2010 showed higher technical success rates (97.8% vs 95.2%), lower rebleeding rates (18.6% vs 23.4%), and lower ischaemia rates (7.3% vs 9.7%). Compared to microcoils, NBCA was associated with a lower rebleeding rate (9.3% vs 20.8%) at the expense of a higher post-embolization ischaemia rate (9.7% vs 4.0%). Coagulopathy (P = .034), inotropic use (P = .040), and malignancy (P = .002) were predictors of post-embolization rebleeding. Haemorrhagic shock (P < .001), inotropic use (P = .026), malignancy (P < .001), coagulopathy (P = .002), blood transfusion (P < .001), and enteritis (P = .023) were predictors of mortality. Empiric embolization achieved a similarly durable haemostasis rate compared to targeted embolization (23.6% vs 21.1%) but a higher risk of post-embolization ischaemia (14.3% vs 4.7%).

CONCLUSION

For LGIB, TAE has a favourable technical success rate and low risk of post-embolization ischaemia. Its safety and efficacy profile has increased over the last decade. Compared to microcoils, NBCA seemed to offer a more durable haemostasis rate at the expense of higher ischaemia risk. Due to the heterogeneity of currently available evidence, future prospective and comparative studies are warranted.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

(1) Acute LGIB embolization demonstrate a high technical success rate with acceptable rate of rebleeding and symptomatic ischaemia rates. Most ischaemic stigmata discovered during routine post-embolization colonoscopy were minor. (2) Although NBCA seemed to offer a more durable haemostasis rate, it was also associated with a higher risk of ischaemia compared to microcoils. (3) Coagulopathy, malignant aetiology, and inotropic use were predictors of rebleeding and mortality. (4) Routine post-embolization endoscopy to assess for ischaemia is not indicated.

How to manage lower gastrointestinal bleeding in 2022?

Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB), originating mainly in the colon, rectum and anus, occurs most often in older patients (7th decade) with co-morbidity, half of whom have coagulation abnormalities due to anti-coagulant or anti-aggregant therapy. In three cases out of four, bleeding regresses spontaneously but can recur in up to one third of patients. The main causes are diverticular disease, vascular disorders (hemorrhoids, angiodysplasia) and colitis. Ten to 15% of patients present in hypovolemic shock. The main problem is to determine the precise location and etiology of bleeding. First-line steps include correction of hemodynamics, correction of coagulation disorders and transfusion, as necessary. Rectal digital examination allows differentiation between melena and hematochezia. In patients with severe LGIB, upper endoscopy can eliminate upper gastro-intestinal bleeding (UGIB). Computerized tomography (CT) angiography can pinpoint the source. If contrast material extravasates, the therapeutic strategy depends on the cause of bleeding and the general status of the patient: therapeutic colonoscopy, arterial embolization and/or surgery. In the absence of severity criteria (Oakland score≤10), ambulatory colonoscopy should be performed within 14 days. Discontinuation of anticoagulant and/or antiplatet therapy should be discussed case by case according to the original indications.

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.

Clinical factors associated with successful embolization of lower gastrointestinal bleeding

AIM

To develop a model of clinical factors that may predict: (1) technically and clinically successful embolization of a bleeding vessel at digital subtraction angiography (DSA) for lower gastrointestinal bleed (LGIB); (2) a negative DSA in the presence of positive CT-mesenteric angiography (CTMA) for LGIB.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of all DSAs conducted with intent for embolization for acute LGIB over a 10-year period was undertaken. Pre-procedural and intra-procedural clinical variables were evaluated using uni- and multi-variate analysis.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-three DSAs were evaluated. Technical success was 81% and clinical success 78% where DSA was positive. Technical success was associated with super-selective approach, contrast extravasation on CT, haemoglobin drop, anatomical source and time from CT to DSA on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis, time from CT to DSA was significant with a higher success probability within 120 min with different factors being salient depending on degree of delay. Clinical success was only associated with activated partial thromboplastin time (<27.5 s). A negative DSA was associated with anatomical source, haemodynamic stability, platelet count and time from CT to DSA on univariate analysis. The latter three remained so on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

A triaging approach to utilizing emergency DSA may be helpful. If prolonged delay between CT and DSA is anticipated, with haemodynamic stability and a near-normal platelet count, the DSA may not be fruitful. Technical success may be more likely if DSA occurs within 120 min. Clinical success may be more likely if activated partial thromboplastin time is within normal range.