Characteristics of patients who underwent gastric electrical stimulation vs. surgical pyloric interventions for refractory gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: There has been recent debate comparing the efficacy of gastric electrical stimulation (GES) with pyloric intervention, but medical literature lacks clear indications for when to perform GES or pyloric intervention. This study aims to assess the effect of sociodemographic factors and hospital characteristics on the surgical technique chosen for the treatment of gastroparesis. METHODS: Data was extracted from the National Inpatient Sample between the years 2012 and 2014, using any discharge diagnosis of gastroparesis. For comparison of analysis between GES and pyloric surgical intervention, pyloroplasty, endoscopic pyloric dilation, and pyloromyotomy were considered to be pyloric interventions. The study population was divided into two groups, one which received GES and the other receiving pyloric intervention, to compare socioeconomic factors and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: In total, 737,930 hospitalizations had a discharge diagnosis of gastroparesis between 2012 and 2014. On weighted multivariant analysis of patients undergoing GES or pyloric intervention for gastroparesis, being female (odds ratio (OR) 1.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-1.78; P < 0.001), being Hispanic (OR 1.75, 95%CI; P < 0.001), being in urban teaching (OR 1.41, 95%CI 1.15-1.72; P < 0.001), and nonteaching hospitals (OR 2.93, 95%CI 2.4-3.58; P < 0.001), early satiety (OR 6.70, 95%CI 1.54-31.25; P = 0.01), and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.14, 95%CI 1.78-2.56; P < 0.001) were each statistically significantly correlated with receiving GES intervention compared to pyloric intervention. CONCLUSION: The racial difference, payer source, and hospital location affected the surgical intervention (GES or pyloric intervention) that patients with gastroparesis would receive.

Management of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding by an Internist.

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) carries high morbidity and mortality, which can be lowered by timely evaluation and management. This article presents a comprehensive literature review and current guidelines for the management of nonvariceal UGIB by an internist. Pre-endoscopic management includes optimal resuscitation, and making a decision about holding the anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy versus continuation due to risk of thrombosis. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are beneficial for both ulcer and nonulcer diseases as they reduce the risk of re-bleeding by clot stabilization. Endoscopy should only be performed after hemodynamic stability has been achieved and should not be delayed by more than 24 hours. Resumption of anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy is based on endoscopic findings and thromboembolic risk. The patient should be discharged on PPIs and should be followed up by a primary care physician.