Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a complex problem with a multitude of etiologies requiring a multidisciplinary approach to treatment. There is varying data regarding the role of urgent endoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, CT, nuclear medicine tests, or conventional angiogram in the acute setting. This retrospective review was conducted to evaluate the effect of time to angiogram on angiographic outcomes. The RRSB at University of Rochester approved this retrospective cohort study. Visceral angiograms performed from Jan 2012 to Dec 2015 were evaluated. Index angiograms for GIB were identified. Exclusion criteria included recent abdominal surgery (30 days), empiric embolization, or incomplete arteriograms. Multiple factors were included in the analysis, age, gender, angiogram time, EGD, colonoscopy, anti platelet use, anticoagulant use, INR, CT, and Tc99m RBC scan (RBC Scan), among others. 118 angiograms were included in the final analysis. 44 angiograms resulted in identification and embolization of a bleed. (average age 67.4 yrs, 65% male) 74 angiograms failed to identify a bleed. 74 (average age 70.6yrs, 52% male) In cases with a positive RBC scan in the preceding 24 hours, successful identification and embolization was significantly statistically correlated with a shorter time to angiogram 4.6 hrs compared to 9.6 hrs for unsuccessful angiograms (p=.026). Patients with a bleed identified on EGD or colonoscopy prior to successful angiogram had a shorter time to angiogram 9.1 vs 10 hours for non-diagnostic angiograms, although not significant. CTA examinations were excluded due to low sample size. 92% of active bleeds seen on RBC scan and 93% of directly visualized bleeds corresponded to the embolized location. Visceral arteriography is a key tool in the identification and treatment of acute GI bleeding. Successful angiograms had a, statically significant, shorter time to angiogram from positive RBC scan compared to inconclusive angiograms. Angiography should be performed as soon as possible after a positive RBC scan. Successful embolization after EGD did not have a strong time dependence, likely owing to several factors.