Prior Gastrointestinal Bleeding Research Articles

Early Intensive Resuscitation of Patients With Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Decreases Mortality

Despite advances in diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy, the mortality of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) has remained relatively constant. Inadequate early resuscitation is believed to be a major factor in the persistently high mortality rate in patients with UGIB. In order to evaluate the role of intensive resuscitation in the outcome of patients with UGIB, we conducted the following prospective study. A consecutive series of patients with UGIB complicated by hemodynamic instability related to bleeding were enrolled in the study. An initial cohort of patients (Observation Group) was followed by a team of physicians to collect data. After recording demographic information, the time interval between presentation with UGIB and the correction of hemodynamic instability, hematocrit (HCT), and coagulopathy was prospectively recorded. Medical treatment, endoscopic intervention, and subsequent outcome were also prospectively recorded. A subsequent cohort of patients (Intensive Resuscitation Group) was then prospectively followed and similar demographic and outcome data were collected. However, in this cohort, the physicians involved in collecting the data also provided guidance to the health care team managing the patients. The goal for this group of patients was to allow a more rapid correction of hemodynamic instability, HCT, coagulopathy, and medical/endoscopic intervention. Seventy-two patients were included in the study, 36 males, 36 females, mean age 70 yr (range 21-94). Thirty-six patients were followed in the Observational Group, and 36 in the Intensive Resuscitation Group. There were no significant differences with regard to age, gender, number and type of comorbid diseases, history of prior gastrointestinal bleeding, or etiology of bleeding between the two groups. Patients treated in the Intensive Resuscitation Group had a significant decrease in the time interval from admission to the stabilization of hemodynamics and the correction of HCT. There were no significant differences in the time interval from admission to endoscopic intervention, length-of-stay (LOS), or the number of units of blood given. Fewer patients in the Intensive Resuscitation Group suffered myocardial infarction (p= 0.04). Mortality was lower in the Intensive Resuscitation Group (one death) compared to the Observational Group (four deaths), (p= 0.04). Early intensive resuscitation of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding significantly decreases mortality. Physicians involved in the care of patients with UGIB should focus on early and rapid correction of hemodynamics, HCT, and underlying coagulopathy.

Mesenteric angiography for lower gastrointestinal hemorrhage: are there predictors for a positive study?

Selective mesenteric angiography is an expensive, invasive, diagnostic, and therapeutic tool for lower gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Some institutions have required a positive nuclear medicine bleeding scan before angiography. We have attempted to determine if this is a valid screening test for mesenteric angiography. Are there any other factors to predict which patients are actively bleeding and who will benefit from angiography? All cases of mesenteric angiography for hemorrhage performed during a 12-year period were reviewed. A total of 131 angiograms were performed during a 12-year period with 45 patients demonstrating active bleeding; 54 patients had a bleeding scan before angiography. A positive bleeding scan did not increase the percentage of positive angiograms. A history of prior gastrointestinal bleeding, transfusions, orthostatic hypotension, or tachycardia were not predictors for a positive angiogram. This study could not identify any single useful predictor that will increase the likelihood of obtaining a positive angiogram. Nuclear medicine scans should not be used routinely as a screening test for angiography.

Prophylactic sclerotherapy: yes or no!

Controlled trials of endoscopic sclerotherapy for the prevention of the first variceal hemorrhage have given controversial results. We continued a previously reported study and randomly assigned 141 patients with esophageal varics and no prior gastrointestinal bleeding to either prophylactic sclerotherapy (n=70) or no treatment (n=71). Sclerotherapy was performed until complete eradication of the varices was achieved; recurrent varics were treated with repeat sclerotherapy. The groups were well balanced in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients in both groups who bled from varices received sclerotherapy whenever possible. During a median follow-up of 56 months, variceal bleeding occurred in 7% in sclerotherapy patients and 44% on control patients (p < 0.01). In the sclerotherapy group 59% died, and in the control group 51% (n.s.). In both groups, the mortality rate increased with the severity of liver function impairment. Sclerotherapy was not found to improve survival in patients, irrespective of the etiology of cirrhosis (alcoholic or nonalcoholic) or variceal size (low-grade or high-grade). We conclude that sclerotherapy is a suitable method to reduce the occurrence of the first variceal hemorrhage, but it does not appear to have an effect on survival.

Prophylactic Sclerotherapy for Esophageal Varices: Long-Term Results of a Prospective Study

Controlled trials of endoscopic sclerotherapy for the prevention of the first variceal hemorrhage have given controversial results. We continued a previously reported study and randomly assigned 141 patients with esophageal varices and no prior gastrointestinal bleeding to either prophylactic sclerotherapy (n = 70) or no treatment (n = 71). Sclerotherapy was performed until complete eradication of the varices was achieved; recurrent varices were treated with repeat sclerotherapy. The groups were well balanced in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients in both groups who bled from varices received sclerotherapy whenever possible. During a median follow-up of 56 months, variceal bleeding occurred in 7% in sclerotherapy patients and 44% of control patients (p < 0.01). In the sclerotherapy group 59% died, and in the control group 51% (n.s.). In both groups, the mortality rate increased with the severity of liver function impairment. Sclerotherapy was not found to improve survival in patients, irrespective of the etiology of cirrhosis (alcoholic or nonalcoholic) or variceal size (low-grade or high-grade). We conclude that sclerotherapy is a suitable method to reduce the occurrence of the first variceal hemorrhage, but it does not appear to have an effect on survival.

Anticoagulation in myocardial infarction: Modem approach to an old problem

The role of routine anticoagulation in acute myocardial infarction continues to be a source of controversy. There is currently strong evidence to suggest that conventional anticoagulation will prevent the formation of most deep vein thrombi and subsequent pulmonary embolization. Anticoagulant agents also appear to reduce the incidence of emboli from cardiac mural thrombi to peripheral arteries. Patients without a predisposition to bleeding are unlikely to have hemorrhagic complications in the hospital after usual doses of anticoagulant drugs. In patients with severe hypertension, prior gastrointestinal bleeding, carcinoma or advanced age, small dose heparin therapy appears to reduce the incidence of venous thrombosis and probably of pulmonary emboli as well. Its value in preventing peripheral arterial embolization has not been defined. Anticoagulation with standard “large” doses is an effective means of preventing the risks of pulmonary and peripheral emboli during the in-patient phase of acute myocardial infarction. Small dose heparin therapy provides an excellent alternative to conventional anticoagulation when there is more than a negligible risk of hemorrhage. There is little evidence at this time to support the use of long-term anticoagulation beyond the acute phase of myocardial infarction.