BACKGROUND: Determining the risk of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) may be useful for establishing additional haemostatic measures in very high-risk patients. AIM: To identify predictors of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy. METHODS: Bibliographic database searches were performed to identify studies assessing rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for PUB. All searches and data abstraction were performed in duplicate. A parameter was considered to be an independent predictor of rebleeding when it was detected as prognostic by multivariate analyses in ≥2 studies. Pooled odds ratios (pOR) were calculated for prognostic variables. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met the prespecified inclusion criteria. Pre-endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were: (i) Haemodynamic instability: significant in 9 of 13 studies evaluating the variable (pOR: 3.30, 95% CI: 2.57-4.24); (ii) Haemoglobin value: significant in 2 of 10 (pOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.14-2.62) and (iii) Transfusion: significant in two of six (pOR not calculable). Endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were: (i) Active bleeding: significant in 6 of 12 studies (pOR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.31-2.22); (ii) Large ulcer size: significant in 8 of 12 studies (pOR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.98-4.00); (iii) Posterior duodenal ulcer location: significant in four of eight studies (pOR: 3.83, 95% CI: 1.38-10.66) and (iv) High lesser gastric curvature ulcer location: significant in three of eight studies (pOR: 2.86; 95% CI: 1.69-4.86). CONCLUSIONS: Major predictors for rebleeding in patients receiving endoscopic therapy are haemodynamic instability, active bleeding at endoscopy, large ulcer size, ulcer location, haemoglobin value and the need for transfusion. These risk factors may be useful for guiding clinical management in patients with PUB.
BACKGROUND: Determining the risk of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) may be useful for establishing additional haemostatic measures in very high-risk patients. AIM: To identify predictors of rebleeding after endoscopic therapy. METHODS: Bibliographic database searches were performed to identify studies assessing rebleeding after endoscopic therapy for PUB. All searches and data abstraction were performed in duplicate. A parameter was considered to be an independent predictor of rebleeding when it was detected as prognostic by multivariate analyses in ≥2 studies. Pooled odds ratios (pOR) were calculated for prognostic variables. RESULTS: Fourteen studies met the prespecified inclusion criteria. Pre-endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were: (i) Haemodynamic instability: significant in 9 of 13 studies evaluating the variable (pOR: 3.30, 95% CI: 2.57-4.24); (ii) Haemoglobin value: significant in 2 of 10 (pOR: 1.73, 95% CI: 1.14-2.62) and (iii) Transfusion: significant in two of six (pOR not calculable). Endoscopic predictors of rebleeding were: (i) Active bleeding: significant in 6 of 12 studies (pOR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.31-2.22); (ii) Large ulcer size: significant in 8 of 12 studies (pOR: 2.81, 95% CI: 1.98-4.00); (iii) Posterior duodenal ulcer location: significant in four of eight studies (pOR: 3.83, 95% CI: 1.38-10.66) and (iv) High lesser gastric curvature ulcer location: significant in three of eight studies (pOR: 2.86; 95% CI: 1.69-4.86). CONCLUSIONS: Major predictors for rebleeding in patients receiving endoscopic therapy are haemodynamic instability, active bleeding at endoscopy, large ulcer size, ulcer location, haemoglobin value and the need for transfusion. These risk factors may be useful for guiding clinical management in patients with PUB.
Authors: Nl de Groot; Mgh van Oijen; K Kessels; M Hemmink; Blam Weusten; R Timmer; Wl Hazen; N van Lelyveld; Wl Curvers; Lc Baak; R Verburg; Jh Bosman; Lrh de Wijkerslooth; J de Rooij; Ng Venneman; M Pennings; K van Hee; Rch Scheffer; Rl van Eijk; R Meiland; Pd Siersema; Aj Bredenoord Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.623
Authors: Kang Hun Koh; Kang Kim; Dae Hun Kwon; Bum Su Chung; Ji Youn Sohn; Dae Seon Ahn; Byung Jun Jeon; Seong Hun Kim; In Hee Kim; Sang Wook Kim; Seung Ok Lee; Soo Teik Lee; Dae Ghon Kim Journal: Gastric Cancer Date: 2012-10-05 Impact factor: 7.370