ABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
ABO Blood-Group System , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Recurrence , Humans , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Male , Female , Middle Aged , Aged , Risk Factors , Cohort Studies , Acute DiseaseABSTRACT
A 73-year-old man was admitted with four weeks of intermittent fever. He had a history of total aortic arch replacement for aortic arch aneurysm four years prior. CT scans showed no abnormalities before admission. Repeated blood cultures yielded Streptococcus anginosus and Prevotella melaninogenica, suggesting infective endocarditis (IE). Transesophageal echocardiography revealed a vegetation on the aortic valve, confirming IE. He suddenly presented with massive hematemesis and hypotension. Endoscopy revealed an elevated lesion with a laceration but no active bleeding in the esophagus. CT scans showed a thoracic aneurysm involving the esophagus. A diagnosis of aortoesophageal fistula (AEF) complicated by mycotic thoracic aortic aneurysm (MTAA) was made, and he underwent stent graft interpolation followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy. MTAAs are more prone to rupture than arteriosclerotic aneurysms as they are usually not true but pseudoaneurysms. Antecedent infection, including endocarditis, sepsis, predisposes to MTAA. AEF is a rare but life-threatening cause of gastrointestinal bleeding characterized by Chiari's triad. There have been no reports of such rapid formation of AEF after the graft replacement, as shown here. A recent article reported a rapid formation (16 days) of AEF after thoracic endovascular aortic repair, emphasizing prosthetic infection as the most important risk factor. Our case underscores the importance of suspecting AEF and conducting repeated appropriate examinations even if initial examinations do not reveal any aneurysms.
ABSTRACT
The study aimed to identify prognostic factors for patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and to develop a high-accuracy prediction tool. The analysis included 8254 cases of acute hematochezia patients who were admitted urgently based on the judgment of emergency physicians or gastroenterology consultants (from the CODE BLUE J-study). Patients were randomly assigned to a derivation cohort and a validation cohort in a 2:1 ratio using a random number table. Assuming that factors present at the time of admission are involved in mortality within 30 days of admission, and adding management factors during hospitalization to the factors at the time of admission for mortality within 1 year, prognostic factors were established. Multivariate analysis was conducted, and scores were assigned to each factor using regression coefficients, summing these to measure the score. The newly created score (CACHEXIA score) became a tool capable of measuring both mortality within 30 days (ROC-AUC 0.93) and within 1 year (C-index, 0.88). The 1-year mortality rates for patients classified as low, medium, and high risk by the CACHEXIA score were 1.0%, 13.4%, and 54.3% respectively (all P < 0.001). After discharge, patients identified as high risk using our unique predictive score require ongoing observation.
Subject(s)
Body Fluids , Cachexia , Humans , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Hospitalization , Patient Discharge , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Current evidence on the surgical rate, indication, procedure, risk factors, mortality, and postoperative rebleeding for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) is limited. METHODS: We constructed a retrospective cohort of 10,342 patients admitted for acute hematochezia at 49 hospitals (CODE BLUE J-Study) and evaluated clinical data on the surgeries performed. RESULTS: Surgery was performed in 1.3% (136/10342) of the cohort with high rates of colonoscopy (87.7%) and endoscopic hemostasis (26.7%). Indications for surgery included colonic diverticular bleeding (24%), colorectal cancer (22%), and small bowel bleeding (16%). Sixty-four percent of surgeries were for hemostasis for severe refractory bleeding. Postoperative rebleeding rates were 22% in patients with presumptive or obscure preoperative identification of the bleeding source and 12% in those with definitive identification. Thirty-day mortality rates were 1.5% and 0.8% in patients with and without surgery, respectively. Multivariate analysis showed that surgery-related risk factors were transfusion need ≥ 6 units (P < 0.001), in-hospital rebleeding (P < 0.001), small bowel bleeding (P < 0.001), colorectal cancer (P < 0.001), and hemorrhoids (P < 0.001). Endoscopic hemostasis was negatively associated with surgery (P = 0.003). For small bowel bleeding, the surgery rate was significantly lower in patients with endoscopic hemostasis as 2% compared to 12% without endoscopic hemostasis. CONCLUSIONS: Our cohort study elucidated the outcomes and risks of the surgery. Extensive exploration including the small bowel to identify the source of bleeding and endoscopic hemostasis may reduce unnecessary surgery and improve the management of ALGIB.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Hemostasis, Endoscopic , Humans , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/surgery , Hemostasis, Endoscopic/methods , Risk Factors , Colorectal Neoplasms/etiologyABSTRACT
AIM: No studies have compared the clinical outcomes of early and delayed feeding in patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB). This study aimed to evaluate the benefits and risks of early feeding in a nationwide cohort of patients with ALGIB in whom haemostasis was achieved. METHODS: We reviewed data for 5910 patients with ALGIB in whom haemostasis was achieved and feeding was resumed within 3 days after colonoscopy at 49 hospitals across Japan (CODE BLUE-J Study). Patients were divided into an early feeding group (≤1 day, n = 3324) and a delayed feeding group (2-3 days, n = 2586). Clinical outcomes were compared between the groups by propensity matching analysis of 1508 pairs. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the early and delayed feeding groups in the rebleeding rate within 7 days after colonoscopy (9.4% vs. 8.0%; p = 0.196) or in the rebleeding rate within 30 days (11.4% vs. 11.5%; p = 0.909). There was also no significant between-group difference in the need for interventional radiology or surgery or in mortality. However, the median length of hospital stay after colonoscopy was significantly shorter in the early feeding group (5 vs. 7 days; p < 0.001). These results were unchanged when subgroups of presumptive and definitive colonic diverticular bleeding were compared. CONCLUSION: The findings of this nationwide study suggest that early feeding after haemostasis can shorten the hospital stay in patients with ALGIB without increasing the risk of rebleeding.
Subject(s)
Colonoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Humans , Length of Stay , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Colonoscopy/methods , Acute Disease , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Multicenter Studies as TopicABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Weekend admissions showed increased mortality in several medical conditions. This study aimed to examine the weekend effect on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) and its mortality and other outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study (CODE BLUE-J Study) was conducted at 49 Japanese hospitals between January 2010 and December 2019. In total, 8,120 outpatients with acute hematochezia were enrolled and divided into weekend admissions and weekday admissions groups. Multiple imputation (MI) was used to handle missing values, followed by propensity score matching (PSM) to compare outcomes. The primary outcome was mortality; the secondary outcomes were rebleeding, length of stay (LOS), blood transfusion, thromboembolism, endoscopic treatment, the need for interventional radiology, and the need for surgery. Colonoscopy and computed tomography (CT) management were also evaluated. RESULTS: Before PSM, there was no significant difference in mortality (1.3% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.133) between weekend and weekday admissions. After PSM with MI, 1,976 cases were matched for each admission. Mortality was not significantly different for weekend admissions compared with weekday admissions (odds ratio [OR] 1.437, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.785-2.630; p = 0.340). No significant difference was found with other secondary outcomes in weekend admissions except for blood transfusion (OR 1.239, 95% CI 1.084-1.417; p = 0.006). Weekend admission had a negative effect on early colonoscopy (OR 0.536, 95% CI 0.471-0.609; p < 0.001). Meanwhile, urgent CT remained significantly higher in weekend admissions (OR 1.466, 95% CI 1.295-1.660; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Weekend admissions decrease early colonoscopy and increase urgent CT but do not affect mortality or other outcomes except transfusion.
Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Patient Admission , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , Hospital Mortality , Time Factors , Length of Stay , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Acute DiseaseABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Length of stay (LOS) in hospital affects cost, patient quality of life, and hospital management; however, existing gastrointestinal bleeding models applicable at hospital admission have not focused on LOS. We aimed to construct a predictive model for LOS in acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the records of 8,547 patients emergently hospitalized for ALGIB at 49 hospitals (the CODE BLUE-J Study). A predictive model for prolonged hospital stay was developed using the baseline characteristics of 7,107 patients and externally validated in 1,440 patients. Furthermore, a multivariate analysis assessed the impact of additional variables during hospitalization on LOS. RESULTS: Focusing on baseline characteristics, a predictive model for prolonged hospital stay was developed, the LONG-HOSP score, which consisted of low body mass index, laboratory data, old age, nondrinker status, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, facility with ≥800 beds, heart rate, oral antithrombotic agent use, symptoms, systolic blood pressure, performance status, and past medical history. The score showed relatively high performance in predicting prolonged hospital stay and high hospitalization costs (area under the curve: 0.70 and 0.73 for derivation, respectively, and 0.66 and 0.71 for external validation, respectively). Next, we focused on in-hospital management. Diagnosis of colitis or colorectal cancer, rebleeding, and the need for blood transfusion, interventional radiology, and surgery prolonged LOS, regardless of the LONG-HOSP score. By contrast, early colonoscopy and endoscopic treatment shortened LOS. CONCLUSIONS: At hospital admission for ALGIB, our novel predictive model stratified patients by their risk of prolonged hospital stay. During hospitalization, early colonoscopy and endoscopic treatment shortened LOS.
Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Quality of Life , Humans , Length of Stay , Retrospective Studies , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , ColonoscopyABSTRACT
Background and Aim: While short and long attachment caps are available for colonoscopy, it is unclear which type is more appropriate for stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) identification in acute hematochezia. This study aimed to compare the performance of short versus long caps in acute hematochezia diagnoses and outcomes. Methods: We selected 6460 patients who underwent colonoscopy with attachment caps from 10 342 acute hematochezia cases in the CODE BLUE-J study. We performed propensity score matching (PSM) to balance baseline characteristics between short and long cap users. Then, the proportion of definitive or presumptive bleeding etiologies found on the initial colonoscopy and SRH identification rates were compared. We also evaluated rates of blood transfusions, interventional radiology, or surgery, as well as the rate of rebleeding and mortality within 30 days after the initial colonoscopy. Results: A total of 3098 patients with acute hematochezia (1549 short cap and 1549 long cap users) were selected for PSM. The rate of colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) diagnosis was significantly higher in long cap users (P = 0.006). While the two groups had similar rates of the other bleeding etiologies, the frequency of unknown etiologies was significantly lower in long cap users (P < 0.001). The rate of SRH with active bleeding was significantly higher in long cap users (P < 0.001). Other clinical outcomes did not differ significantly. Conclusion: Compared to that with short caps, long cap-assisted colonoscopy is superior for the diagnosis of acute hematochezia, especially CDB, and the identification of active bleeding.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Currently, large, nationwide, long-term follow-up data on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) are scarce. We investigated long-term risks of recurrence after hospital discharge for ALGIB using a large multicenter dataset. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 5048 patients who were urgently hospitalized for ALGIB at 49 hospitals across Japan (CODE BLUE-J study). Risk factors for the long-term recurrence of ALGIB were analyzed by using competing risk analysis, treating death without rebleeding as a competing risk. RESULTS: Rebleeding occurred in 1304 patients (25.8%) during a mean follow-up period of 31 months. The cumulative incidences of rebleeding at 1 and 5 years were 15.1% and 25.1%, respectively. The mortality risk was significantly higher in patients with out-of-hospital rebleeding episodes than in those without (hazard ratio, 1.42). Of the 30 factors, multivariate analysis showed that shock index ≥1 (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.25), blood transfusion (SHR, 1.26), in-hospital rebleeding (SHR, 1.26), colonic diverticular bleeding (SHR, 2.38), and thienopyridine use (SHR, 1.24) were significantly associated with increased rebleeding risk. Multivariate analysis of colonic diverticular bleeding patients showed that blood transfusion (SHR, 1.20), in-hospital rebleeding (SHR, 1.30), and thienopyridine use (SHR, 1.32) were significantly associated with increased rebleeding risk, whereas endoscopic hemostasis (SHR, 0.83) significantly decreased the risk. CONCLUSIONS: These large, nationwide follow-up data highlighted the importance of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment during hospitalization and the assessment of the need for ongoing thienopyridine use to reduce the risk of out-of-hospital rebleeding. This information also aids in the identification of patients at high risk of rebleeding.
Subject(s)
Diverticular Diseases , Hemostasis, Endoscopic , Humans , Patient Discharge , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Acute Disease , Risk Factors , Hospitals , Thienopyridines , RecurrenceABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) directly indicate a need for endoscopic therapy in acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Colonoscopy would be prioritized for patients with highly suspected SRH, but the predictors of colonic SRH remain unclear. We aimed to construct a predictive model for the efficient detection of SRH using a nationwide cohort. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 8360 patients admitted through hospital emergency departments for acute LGIB in the CODE BLUE-J Study (49 hospitals throughout Japan). All patients underwent inpatient colonoscopy. To develop an SRH predictive model, 4863 patients were analyzed. Baseline characteristics, colonoscopic factors (timing, preparation, and devices), and computed tomography (CT) extravasation were extensively assessed. The performance of the model was externally validated in 3497 patients. RESULTS: Colonic SRH was detected in 28% of patients. A novel predictive model for detecting SRH (CS-NEED score: ColonoScopic factors, No abdominal pain, Elevated PT-INR, Extravasation on CT, and DOAC use) showed high performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.74 for derivation and 0.73 for external validation). This score was also highly predictive of active bleeding (AUC 0.73 for derivation and 0.76 for external validation). Patients with low (0-6), intermediate (7-8), and high (9-12) scores in the external validation cohort had SRH identification rates of 20%, 31%, and 64%, respectively (P < 0.001 for trend). CONCLUSIONS: A novel predictive model for colonic SRH identification (CS-NEED score) can specify colonoscopies likely to achieve endoscopic therapy in acute LGIB. Using the model during initial management would contribute to finding and treating SRH efficiently.
Subject(s)
Colonic Diseases , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Colonoscopy/methods , Colonic Diseases/diagnosis , HospitalizationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Ligation therapy, including endoscopic detachable snare ligation (EDSL) and endoscopic band ligation (EBL), has emerged as an endoscopic treatment for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB); its comparative effectiveness and risk of recurrent bleeding remain unclear, however. Our goal was to compare the outcomes of EDSL and EBL in treating CDB and identify risk factors for recurrent bleeding after ligation therapy. METHODS: We reviewed data of 518 patients with CDB who underwent EDSL (n = 77) or EBL (n = 441) in a multicenter cohort study named the Colonic Diverticular Bleeding Leaders Update Evidence From Multicenter Japanese Study (CODE BLUE-J Study). Outcomes were compared by using propensity score matching. Logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed for recurrent bleeding risk, and a competing risk analysis was used to treat death without recurrent bleeding as a competing risk. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the 2 groups in terms of initial hemostasis, 30-day recurrent bleeding, interventional radiology or surgery requirements, 30-day mortality, blood transfusion volume, length of hospital stay, and adverse events. Sigmoid colon involvement was an independent risk factor for 30-day recurrent bleeding (odds ratio, 1.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.40; P = .042). History of acute lower GI bleeding (ALGIB) was a significant long-term recurrent bleeding risk factor on Cox regression analysis. A performance status score of 3/4 and history of ALGIB were long-term recurrent bleeding factors on competing risk regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in outcomes between EDSL and EBL for CDB. After ligation therapy, careful follow-up is required, especially in the treatment of sigmoid diverticular bleeding during admission. History of ALGIB and performance status at admission are important risk factors for long-term recurrent bleeding after discharge.
Subject(s)
Diverticular Diseases , Diverticulum, Colon , Hemostasis, Endoscopic , Humans , Cohort Studies , Diverticular Diseases/complications , Diverticular Diseases/therapy , Diverticulum, Colon/complications , Diverticulum, Colon/surgery , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/surgery , Hemostasis, Endoscopic/adverse effects , Ligation/adverse effects , Multicenter Studies as Topic , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to determine the optimal timing of colonoscopy and factors that benefit patients who undergo early colonoscopy for acute lower GI bleeding. METHODS: We identified 10,342 patients with acute hematochezia (CODE BLUE-J study) admitted to 49 hospitals in Japan. Of these, 6270 patients who underwent a colonoscopy within 120 hours were included in this study. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method was used to adjust for baseline characteristics among early (≤24 hours, n = 4133), elective (24-48 hours, n = 1137), and late (48-120 hours, n = 1000) colonoscopy. The average treatment effect was evaluated for outcomes. The primary outcome was 30-day rebleeding rate. RESULTS: The early group had a significantly higher rate of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) identification and a shorter length of stay than the elective and late groups. However, the 30-day rebleeding rate was significantly higher in the early group than in the elective and late groups. Interventional radiology (IVR) or surgery requirement and 30-day mortality did not significantly differ among groups. The interaction with heterogeneity of effects was observed between early and late colonoscopy and shock index (shock index <1, odds ratio [OR], 2.097; shock index ≥1, OR, 1.095; P for interaction = .038) and performance status (0-2, OR, 2.481; ≥3, OR, .458; P for interaction = .022) for 30-day rebleeding. Early colonoscopy had a significantly lower IVR or surgery requirement in the shock index ≥1 cohort (OR, .267; 95% confidence interval, .099-.721) compared with late colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Early colonoscopy increased the rate of SRH identification and shortened the length of stay but involved an increased risk of rebleeding and did not improve mortality and IVR or surgery requirement. Early colonoscopy particularly benefited patients with a shock index ≥1 or performance status ≥3 at presentation.
Subject(s)
Colonoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Colonoscopy/methods , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/diagnosis , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Acute Disease , Odds RatioABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: While angioectasia is an important cause of acute hematochezia, relevant clinical features remain unclear. This study aims to reveal risk factors, clinical outcomes, and the effectiveness of therapeutic endoscopy for patients with acute hematochezia due to angioectasia. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at 49 Japanese hospitals between January 2010 and December 2019, enrolling patients hospitalized for acute hematochezia (CODE BLUE-J study). Baseline factors and clinical outcomes for angioectasia were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 10,342 patients with acute hematochezia, 129 patients (1.2%) were diagnosed with angioectasia by colonoscopy. The following factors were significantly associated with angioectasia: chronic kidney disease, liver disease, female, body mass index < 25, and anticoagulant use. Patients with angioectasia were at a significant increased risk of blood transfusions compared to those without angioectasia (odds ratio [OR] 2.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69-4.02). Among patients with angioectasia, 36 patients (28%) experienced rebleeding during 1-year follow-up. The 1-year cumulative rebleeding rates were 37.0% in the endoscopic clipping group, 14.3% in the coagulation group, and 32.8% in the conservative management group. Compared to conservative management, coagulation therapy significantly reduced rebleeding risk (P = 0.038), while clipping did not (P = 0.81). Multivariate analysis showed coagulation therapy was an independent factor for reducing rebleeding risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.40; 95% CI 0.16-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Our data showed patients with angioectasia had a greater comorbidity burden and needed more blood transfusions in comparison with those without angioectasia. To reduce rebleeding risk, coagulation therapy can be superior for controlling hematochezia secondary to angioectasia.
Subject(s)
Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Humans , Female , Cohort Studies , Retrospective Studies , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Risk Factors , Dilatation, Pathologic , RecurrenceABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Diverticulitis, Colonic/therapy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Hemostasis, Endoscopic/methods , Age Factors , Aged , Blood Transfusion/statistics & numerical data , Colonoscopy , Diverticulitis, Colonic/epidemiology , Female , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Hemostasis, Endoscopic/instrumentation , Humans , Japan/epidemiology , Male , Multivariate Analysis , Odds Ratio , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , Secondary Prevention/methods , Sex Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Treatment strategies for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) based on stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) remain unstandardized, and no large studies have evaluated their effectiveness. We sought to identify the best strategy among combinations of SRH identification and endoscopic treatment strategies. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 5823 CDB patients who underwent colonoscopy at 49 hospitals throughout Japan (CODE-BLUE J-Study). Three strategies were compared: find SRH (definitive CDB) and treat endoscopically, find SRH (definitive CDB) and treat conservatively, and without finding SRH (presumptive CDB) treat conservatively. In conducting pairwise comparisons of outcomes in these groups, we used propensity score-matching analysis to balance baseline characteristics between the groups being compared. RESULTS: Both early and late recurrent bleeding rates were significantly lower in patients with definitive CDB treated endoscopically than in those with presumptive CDB treated conservatively (<30 days, 19.6% vs 26.0% [P < .001]; <365 days, 33.7% vs 41.6% [P < .001], respectively). In patients with definitive CDB, the early recurrent bleeding rate was significantly lower in those treated endoscopically than in those treated conservatively (17.4% vs 26.7% [P = .038] for a single test of hypothesis; however, correction for multiple testing of data removed this significance). The late recurrent bleeding rate was also lower, but not significantly, in those treated endoscopically (32.0% vs 36.1%, P = .426). Definitive CDB treated endoscopically showed significantly lower early and late recurrent bleeding rates than when treated conservatively in cases of SRH with active bleeding, nonactive bleeding, and in the right-sided colon but not left-sided colon. CONCLUSIONS: Treating definitive CDB endoscopically was most effective in reducing recurrent bleeding over the short and long term, compared with not treating definitive CDB or presumptive CDB. Physicians should endeavor to find and treat SRH for suspected CDB.
Subject(s)
Diverticular Diseases , Diverticulum, Colon , Hemostasis, Endoscopic , Colon , Colonoscopy , Diverticular Diseases/etiology , Diverticular Diseases/therapy , Diverticulum, Colon/complications , Diverticulum, Colon/therapy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/etiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Hemostasis, Endoscopic/adverse effects , Humans , Recurrence , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of perioperative antibiotics against post-endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) coagulation syndrome (PECS) in patients undergoing colorectal ESD. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled, parallel, superiority trial was conducted at 21 Japanese tertiary institutions. Patients with superficial colorectal lesions ≥20 mm and those undergoing ESD management for a single lesion were eligible. Patients with perforation during and after ESD were withdrawn. Before the ESD procedure, participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to either undergo conventional treatment (nonantibiotic group) or investigational treatment (antibiotic group). In the antibiotic group, 3 g of ampicillin-sulbactam was administered just before, 8 hours after, and the morning after ESD. The primary endpoint was the incidence of PECS. The onset of PECS was defined as localized abdominal pain (both spontaneous pain and tenderness) and fever (≥37.6°C) or inflammatory response (leukocytosis [≥10,000 cells/µL] or elevated C-reactive protein level [≥.5 mg/dL]). RESULTS: From February 5, 2019 to September 7, 2020, 432 patients were enrolled and assigned to the antibiotic group (n = 216) or nonantibiotic group (n = 216). After withdrawal of 52 patients, 192 in the antibiotic group and 188 in the nonantibiotic group were analyzed. PECS occurred in 9 of 192 patients (4.7%) in the antibiotic group and 14 of 188 patients (7.5%) in the nonantibiotic group, with an odds ratio of .61 (95% confidence interval, .23-1.56; P = .29). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative use of antibiotics was not effective in reducing the incidence of PECS in patients undergoing colorectal ESD. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000035178.).
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Colorectal Neoplasms/surgery , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/adverse effects , Endoscopic Mucosal Resection/methods , Humans , Prospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Outcomes of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding have not been compared according to hospital capacity. We aimed to perform a propensity score-matched cohort study with path and mediation analyses for acute hematochezia patients. Hospitals were divided into high- versus low-volume hospitals for emergency medical services. Rebleeding and death within 30 days were compared. Computed tomography, early colonoscopy (colonoscopy performed within 24 h), and endoscopic therapies were included as mediators. A total of 2644 matched pairs were yielded. The rebleeding rate within 30 days was not significant between high- and low-volume hospitals (16% vs. 17%, P = 0.44). The mortality rate within 30 days was significantly higher in the high-volume cohort than in the low-volume cohort (1.7% vs. 0.8%, P = 0.003). Treatment at high-volume hospitals was not a significant factor for rebleeding (odds ratio [OR] = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-1.06; P = 0.23), but was significant for death within 30 days (OR = 2.03; 95% CI, 1.17-3.52; P = 0.012) on multivariate logistic regression after adjusting for patients' characteristics. Mediation effects were not observed, except for rebleeding within 30 days in high-volume hospitals through early colonoscopy. However, the direct effect of high-volume hospitals on rebleeding was not significant. High-volume hospitals did not improve the outcomes of acute hematochezia patients.
Subject(s)
Colonoscopy , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage , Hospitals, High-Volume , Hospitals, Low-Volume , Acute Disease , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/therapy , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The bleeding source of hematochezia is unknown without performing colonoscopy. We sought to identify whether colonoscopy is a risk-stratifying tool to identify etiology and predict outcomes and whether presenting symptoms can differentiate the etiologies in patients with hematochezia. METHODS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study conducted at 49 hospitals across Japan analyzed 10,342 patients admitted for outpatient-onset acute hematochezia. RESULTS: Patients were mostly elderly population, and 29.5% had hemodynamic instability. Computed tomography was performed in 69.1% and colonoscopy in 87.7%. Diagnostic yield of colonoscopy reached 94.9%, most frequently diverticular bleeding. Thirty-day rebleeding rates were significantly higher with diverticulosis and small bowel bleeding than with other etiologies. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher with angioectasia, malignancy, rectal ulcer, and upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Colonoscopic treatment rates were significantly higher with diverticulosis, radiation colitis, angioectasia, rectal ulcer, and postendoscopy bleeding. More interventional radiology procedures were needed for diverticulosis and small bowel bleeding. Etiologies with favorable outcomes and low procedure rates were ischemic colitis and infectious colitis. Higher rates of painless hematochezia at presentation were significantly associated with multiple diseases, such as rectal ulcer, hemorrhoids, angioectasia, radiation colitis, and diverticulosis. The same was true in cases of hematochezia with diarrhea, fever, and hemodynamic instability. DISCUSSION: This nationwide data set of acute hematochezia highlights the importance of colonoscopy in accurately detecting bleeding etiologies that stratify patients at high or low risk of adverse outcomes and those who will likely require more procedures. Predicting different bleeding etiologies based on initial presentation would be challenging.