AIM: To calculate the proportion of potentially preventable hospitalizations due to peptic ulcer disease (PUD), erosive gastritis (EG) or duodenitis (ED). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using ICD-10 codes to identify all patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage secondary to endoscopically proven PUD, EG or ED during the period from March 2007 to October 2010 in three major metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Patients were divided into "high risk" (those who would benefit from gastroprotection) and "not high risk" groups as defined by established guidelines. Mean Rockall score, transfusion requirement, length of stay, rebleeding rates, need for surgery and in-hospital mortality was compared between "high risk" and "not high risk" groups. Within the "high risk" group, those on gastroprotection and those with no gastroprotection were also compared. RESULTS: Five hundred and seven patients were included for analysis of which 174 were classified as high risk. Median values of complete Rockall Score (5 vs 4, P = 0.002) and length of stay (5 d vs 4 d, P = 0.04) were higher in the high risk group but in-hospital mortality was lower (0.6% vs 3.9%, P = 0.03). 130 out of the 174 patients in the high risk group were not taking recommended gastroprotective therapy prior to hospitalization. Past history of PUD (OR = 3.7, P = 0.006) and clopidogrel use (OR = 3.2, P = 0.007) significantly predicted prescription of gastroprotective therapy. Using proton pump inhibitor protection rates of 50%-85% from published studies, an estimation of 13% to 22% of the total number of the hospitalizations due to PUD or EG/ED related bleeding may have been preventable. CONCLUSION: Up to one fifth of all hospitalizations for bleeding secondary to PUD or EG/ED are potentially preventable.
AIM: To calculate the proportion of potentially preventable hospitalizations due to peptic ulcer disease (PUD), erosive gastritis (EG) or duodenitis (ED). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study using ICD-10 codes to identify all patients with upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage secondary to endoscopically proven PUD, EG or ED during the period from March 2007 to October 2010 in three major metropolitan hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. Patients were divided into "high risk" (those who would benefit from gastroprotection) and "not high risk" groups as defined by established guidelines. Mean Rockall score, transfusion requirement, length of stay, rebleeding rates, need for surgery and in-hospital mortality was compared between "high risk" and "not high risk" groups. Within the "high risk" group, those on gastroprotection and those with no gastroprotection were also compared. RESULTS: Five hundred and seven patients were included for analysis of which 174 were classified as high risk. Median values of complete Rockall Score (5 vs 4, P = 0.002) and length of stay (5 d vs 4 d, P = 0.04) were higher in the high risk group but in-hospital mortality was lower (0.6% vs 3.9%, P = 0.03). 130 out of the 174 patients in the high risk group were not taking recommended gastroprotective therapy prior to hospitalization. Past history of PUD (OR = 3.7, P = 0.006) and clopidogrel use (OR = 3.2, P = 0.007) significantly predicted prescription of gastroprotective therapy. Using proton pump inhibitor protection rates of 50%-85% from published studies, an estimation of 13% to 22% of the total number of the hospitalizations due to PUD or EG/ED related bleeding may have been preventable. CONCLUSION: Up to one fifth of all hospitalizations for bleeding secondary to PUD or EG/ED are potentially preventable.
Authors: Michiel W Van der Linden; Sabine Gaugris; Ernst J Kuipers; Bart J F Van den Bemt; Myrthe P P van Herk-Sukel; Ron M C Herings Journal: Curr Med Res Opin Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 2.580
Authors: Deepak L Bhatt; James Scheiman; Neena S Abraham; Elliott M Antman; Francis K L Chan; Curt D Furberg; David A Johnson; Kenneth W Mahaffey; Eamonn M Quigley; Robert A Harrington; Eric R Bates; Charles R Bridges; Mark J Eisenberg; Victor A Ferrari; Mark A Hlatky; Sanjay Kaul; Jonathan R Lindner; David J Moliterno; Debabrata Mukherjee; Richard S Schofield; Robert S Rosenson; James H Stein; Howard H Weitz; Deborah J Wesley Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-10-28 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Wayne A Ray; Katherine T Murray; Marie R Griffin; Cecilia P Chung; Walter E Smalley; Kathi Hall; James R Daugherty; Lisa A Kaltenbach; C Michael Stein Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2010-03-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Angel Lanas; Luis A García-Rodríguez; Mónica Polo-Tomás; Marta Ponce; Inmaculada Alonso-Abreu; Maria Angeles Perez-Aisa; Javier Perez-Gisbert; Luis Bujanda; Manuel Castro; Maria Muñoz; Luis Rodrigo; Xavier Calvet; Dolores Del-Pino; Santiago Garcia Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Harald E Vonkeman; Louise M A Braakman-Jansen; Rogier M Klok; Maarten J Postma; Jacobus R B J Brouwers; Mart A F J van de Laar Journal: Arthritis Res Ther Date: 2008-12-16 Impact factor: 5.156
Authors: S Dango; T Beißbarth; E Weiss; A Seif Amir Hosseini; D Raddatz; V Ellenrieder; J Lotz; B M Ghadimi; A Beham Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2017-01-14 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Jayeshkumar Patel; Amit Ladani; Nethra Sambamoorthi; Traci LeMasters; Nilanjana Dwibedi; Usha Sambamoorthi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Benjamin Cherng Hann Yip; Hossain Sayeed Sajjad; Jie-Xun Wang; Constantinos P Anastassiades Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2020-02-16