Literature DB >> 18684171

Systematic review of the predictors of recurrent hemorrhage after endoscopic hemostatic therapy for bleeding peptic ulcers.

B Joseph Elmunzer1, Scott D Young, John M Inadomi, Philip Schoenfeld, Loren Laine.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An increased knowledge regarding the predictors of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers should improve clinical management and outcomes. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the strongest and most consistent predictors of rebleeding to assist in the development of tools to stratify and appropriately manage patients after endoscopic therapy.
METHODS: Bibliographic database searches for prospective studies assessing rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers were performed. Relevant studies were identified, and data were abstracted in a duplicate and independent fashion. The primary outcomes sought were significant independent predictors of rebleeding by multivariable analyses in > or =2 studies.
RESULTS: Ten articles met the prespecified inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy was 16.4%. The independent pre-endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were hemodynamic instability (significant in 5 of 5 studies; summary odds ratio [OR] 2.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.99-3.51) and comorbid illness (significant in 2 of 7 studies; insufficient data to calculate summary OR or report OR range). The independent endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were active bleeding at endoscopy (significant in 5 of 8 studies; summary OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.30-2.55), large ulcer size (significant in 4 of 5 studies; summary OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.21-2.80), posterior duodenal ulcer (significant in 2 of 3 studies; insufficient data to calculate summary OR or report OR range), and lesser gastric curvature ulcer (significant in 2 of 2 studies; insufficient data to calculate summary OR or report OR range).
CONCLUSIONS: The independent predictors of recurrent hemorrhage after endoscopic therapy, particularly those that are the strongest and most consistent in the literature, may be used to select patients who are most likely to benefit from aggressive post-hemostasis care, including intensive care unit (ICU) observation and second-look endoscopy. Prospective studies designed to formally assess the relative utilities of these factors in predicting rebleeding and dictating management are needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18684171     DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.02070.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  38 in total

1.  Risk Factors for Rebleeding in Peptic Ulcer Bleeding: A Second Look at Second-Look Endoscopy.

Authors:  Stig Borbjerg Laursen
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Ulcers: adjuvant PPIs to prevent major ulcer bleeds.

Authors:  Andreas Leodolter; Joachim Labenz
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 3.  Emergency ulcer surgery.

Authors:  Constance W Lee; George A Sarosi
Journal:  Surg Clin North Am       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 2.741

4.  The clinical and cost implications of failed endoscopic hemostasis in gastroduodenal ulcer bleeding.

Authors:  Ann Roy; Micheline Kim; Robert Hawes; Shyam Varadarajulu
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2016-08-02       Impact factor: 4.623

5.  Over-the-scope clips are cost-effective in recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding.

Authors:  Armin Kuellmer; Juliane Behn; Benjamin Meier; Andreas Wannhoff; Dominik Bettinger; Robert Thimme; Karel Caca; Arthur Schmidt
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2019-09-25       Impact factor: 4.623

6.  Weekend and nighttime effect on the prognosis of peptic ulcer bleeding.

Authors:  Young Hoon Youn; Yong Jin Park; Jae Hak Kim; Tae Joo Jeon; Jae Hee Cho; Hyojin Park
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-07-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 7.  Diagnosis and treatment of perforated or bleeding peptic ulcers: 2013 WSES position paper.

Authors:  Salomone Di Saverio; Marco Bassi; Nazareno Smerieri; Michele Masetti; Francesco Ferrara; Carlo Fabbri; Luca Ansaloni; Stefania Ghersi; Matteo Serenari; Federico Coccolini; Noel Naidoo; Massimo Sartelli; Gregorio Tugnoli; Fausto Catena; Vincenzo Cennamo; Elio Jovine
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-08-03       Impact factor: 5.469

8.  New endoscopic hemostasis methods.

Authors:  En-Ling Leung Ki; James Y W Lau
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2012-08-22

9.  Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for peptic ulcer disease 2015.

Authors:  Kiichi Satoh; Junji Yoshino; Taiji Akamatsu; Toshiyuki Itoh; Mototsugu Kato; Tomoari Kamada; Atsushi Takagi; Toshimi Chiba; Sachiyo Nomura; Yuji Mizokami; Kazunari Murakami; Choitsu Sakamoto; Hideyuki Hiraishi; Masao Ichinose; Naomi Uemura; Hidemi Goto; Takashi Joh; Hiroto Miwa; Kentaro Sugano; Tooru Shimosegawa
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 7.527

10.  Predictors of rebleeding and mortality in patients with high-risk bleeding peptic ulcers.

Authors:  Chi-Liang Cheng; Cheng-Hui Lin; Chia-Jung Kuo; Kai-Feng Sung; Ching-Song Lee; Nai-Jen Liu; Jui-Hsiang Tang; Hao-Tsai Cheng; Yin-Yi Chu; Yung-Kuan Tsou
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-01-22       Impact factor: 3.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.