Trends in hospitalization, mortality, and timing of colonoscopy in patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Devani K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8159619 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Trends in hospitalization, mortality, and timing of colonoscopy in patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding.
Devani Kalpit K Radadiya Dhruvil D Charilaou Paris P Aasen Tyler T Reddy Chakradhar M CM Young Mark M Brahmbhatt Bhaumik B Rockey Don C DC
Endoscopy international open 20210527 6
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPerforming colonoscopy within 24 h of presentation to the hospital is the accepted standard of care for patients with an acute lower gastrointestinal bleed (LGIB). Previous studies have failed to demonstrate the benefit of early colonoscopy (EC) on mortality. In this study, we wanted to see if there was a change in inpatient deaths (primary outcome), length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization charges (TOTCHG) (secondary outcomes) with EC compared to previous studies.MethodsAdults diagnosed with LGIB were identified using the International Classification of Disease 10th Revision codes from the National Inpatient Sample database for 2016 to 2019. EC was defined as the procedure performed within 24 h of hospitalization. Delayed colonoscopy (DC) was defined as a procedure performed after 24 h of presentation. The patient population was divided into EC and DC groups, and the effects of several covariates on outcomes were measured using binary logistic and multivariate regression analysis. Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to adjust for confounding covariates.ResultsThere were 1,549,065 cases diagnosed with LGIB, of which 285,165 cases (18.4%) received a colonoscopy. A total of 107,045 (6.9%) patients received early colonoscopies. EC was associated with decreased inpatient deaths (0.9% in EC, and 1.4% in DC, P < 0.001). However, upon IPTW, this difference was not present. EC was associated with a decreased LOS (median 3 days vs. 5 days, P < 0.001) and TOTCHG (median $32,037 vs. $44,092, P < 0.001). Weekend admissions (WA) were associated with fewer EC (31.6% in WA, and 39.5% in non-WA, P < 0.001). WA did not affect inpatient deaths.ConclusionsEC was not associated with decreased inpatient deaths. There was no difference in endoscopic interventions in both EC and DC groups. The difference in inpatient deaths observed between the two groups was not evident upon adjusting the results for confounders. EC was associated with a decreased LOS, and TOTCHG in patients with LGIB.
| S-EPMC9451577 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere are limited data on the safety of colonoscopy in patients with lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). We examined the various adverse events associated with colonoscopy in acute LGIB compared with non-GIB patients.MethodsEmergency hospitalized LGIB patients (n = 161) and age- and gender-matched non-GIB controls (n = 161) were selected. Primary outcomes were any adverse events during preparation and colonoscopy procedure. Secondary outcomes were five bowel preparation-related adverse events--hypotension, systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg, volume overload, vomiting, aspiration pneumonia and loss of consciousness--and four colonoscopy-related adverse events--including hypotension, perforation, cerebrocardiovascular events and sepsis.ResultsDuring bowel preparation, 16 (9%) LGIB patients experienced an adverse event. None of the LGIB patients experienced volume overload, aspiration pneumonia or loss of consciousness; however, 12 (7%) had hypotension and 4 (2%) vomited. There were no significant differences in the five bowel preparation-related adverse events between LGIB and non-GIB patients. During colonoscopy, 25 (15%) LGIB patients experienced an adverse event. None LGIB patient had perforation or sepsis; however, 23 (14%) had hypotension and 2 (1%) experienced a cerebrocardiovascular event. There was no significant difference in the four colonoscopy-related adverse events between LGIB and non-GIB patients. In addition, no significant difference in any of the nine adverse events was found among subgroups: patients aged ≥65 years, those with comorbidities, and those with antithrombotic drug use.ConclusionsAdverse events in bowel preparation and colonoscopy among acute LGIB patients were low. No significant difference was found in adverse events between LGIB and non-GIB patients. These adverse events were also low in elderly LGIB patients, as well as in those with co-morbidities and antithrombotic drug use, suggesting that colonoscopy performed during acute LGIB did not increase adverse events.
| S-EPMC4569066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The study aimed to identify prognostic factors for patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding and to develop a high-accuracy prediction tool. The analysis included 8254 cases of acute hematochezia patients who were admitted urgently based on the judgment of emergency physicians or gastroenterology consultants (from the CODE BLUE J-study). Patients were randomly assigned to a derivation cohort and a validation cohort in a 2:1 ratio using a random number table. Assuming that factors present at the time of admission are involved in mortality within 30 days of admission, and adding management factors during hospitalization to the factors at the time of admission for mortality within 1 year, prognostic factors were established. Multivariate analysis was conducted, and scores were assigned to each factor using regression coefficients, summing these to measure the score. The newly created score (CACHEXIA score) became a tool capable of measuring both mortality within 30 days (ROC-AUC 0.93) and within 1 year (C-index, 0.88). The 1-year mortality rates for patients classified as low, medium, and high risk by the CACHEXIA score were 1.0%, 13.4%, and 54.3% respectively (all P < 0.001). After discharge, patients identified as high risk using our unique predictive score require ongoing observation.
| S-EPMC10912311 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Early colonoscopy (within 8–24 h) is recommended in different guidelines for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Despite this recommendation, evidence for its effectiveness are conflicting, and early colonoscopy is often not performed. Objectives: We aimed to evaluate the utility of early colonoscopy by examining the findings during the procedure, and by comparing in-hospital and long-term outcomes between patients who did and did not undergo early colonoscopy. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study based on the electronic medical records of a large tertiary hospital in Israel. Methods: All patients hospitalized with acute LGIB to acute wards between 2012 and 2022 were included. First, structured and free-text procedure notes from patients who did undergo early colonoscopy were examined. Second, we compared in-hospital and long-term outcomes between patients who did and did not undergo early colonoscopy while adjusting for possible confounders using multivariable regression of the type appropriate for each outcome. Results: Overall, 953 patients were included, of which 90 underwent early colonoscopy. The majority (54%) were found insufficiently prepared. Common findings were diverticulosis (38%) and colon polyps (20%). The procedure was effective for hemostasis in only 13% of the cases. Early colonoscopy was not significantly associated with increased survival (exponentiated coefficient = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.76, 1.87), decreased length of hospitalization (exponentiated coefficient = 1.08, 95% CI: 0.97, 1.21), or increased blood hemoglobin at discharge (coefficient =−0.27, 95% CI: −0.58, 0.03). Conclusions: Early colonoscopy was often not effective and was not associated with significantly improved outcomes.
| S-EPMC9837264 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe use of early colonoscopy in the management of acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is controversial, with disparate evidence. We aim to formally characterize the utility of early colonoscopy (within 24 h) in managing acute LGIB.DesignA systematic literature search to August 2016 identified fully published and abstracts of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies assessing early colonoscopy in acute LGIB. Single-arm studies were also included to define incidence. Primary outcomes were overall rebleeding rates and time to rebleeding. Secondary outcomes included mortality, surgery, length of stay (LOS), definite cause of bleeding and adverse events (AEs). Odds ratios (OR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated.ResultsOf 897 citations, 10 single-arm, 9 observational studies, and 2 RCTS were included (25,781 patients). Rebleeding was no different between patients undergoing early colonoscopy and controls (seven studies, OR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.49-1.62), or RCT data only (OR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.52-1.62). Early colonoscopy detected more definitive sources of bleeding (OR = 4.12, 95% CI 2.00-8.49), and was associated with shorter LOS colonoscopy (WMD = -1.52, 95% CI -2.54 to -0.50 days). No other differences were noted between early and late colonoscopy. AEs occurred in 4.0%, (95% CI 2.9%; 5.4%) of early colonoscopies. Included studies were of low quality, with significant heterogeneity for some outcomes.ConclusionEarly colonoscopy in acute LGIB does not decrease rebleeding, mortality or need for surgery, but is associated with increased detection of definitive sources of bleeding, shorter LOS, with low complication incidence. However, the quality of evidence is low, highlighting the need for additional high-level studies.
| S-EPMC5821297 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceEpidemiological data on lower gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in the general population are sparse.ObjectiveTo describe the incidence, recurrence, mortality, and case fatality rates of major upper GIB and lower GIB in the general population of Finland between 1987 and 2016.Design, setting, and participantsThis prospective cohort study used data from the 1987 to the 2012 cycles of the National FINRISK Study, a health examination survey that was conducted every 5 years in Finland. Survey participants were adults aged 25 to 74 years who were recruited from a population register by random sampling; those with a history of hospitalization for GIB were excluded. Participants were followed up from survey enrollment to onset of GIB that led to hospitalization, death from any cause, or study end (December 31, 2016). Follow-up was performed through linkage with national electronic health registers. Data were analyzed from February 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020.Main outcomes and measuresIncidence, recurrence, mortality, and case fatality rates for all, upper, lower, and unspecified GIB. Outcome measures were stratified by sex and age group.ResultsAmong the 39 054 participants included in the study, 494 (1.3%) experienced upper GIB (321 men [65.0%]; mean [SD] age, 52.8 [12.1] years) and 645 (1.7%) had lower GIB (371 men [57.5%]; mean [SD] age, 54.0 [11.7] years). The age-standardized incidence rate was 0.94 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 0.85-1.04) for upper GIB and 1.26 per 1000 person-years (95% CI, 1.15-1.38) for lower GIB; the incidence was higher in men than in women. Between 1987 and 2016 the incidence rate of upper GIB remained mostly stable, ranging from 0.40 to 0.66 per 1000 person-years, whereas constant increases occurred in the incidence of lower GIB until the rate stabilized. The proportion of recurrent GIB events showed an increasing trend from 1987 to 2016. The upper GIB-specific mortality was higher (0.07 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 0.04-0.09) than the lower GIB-specific mortality (0.01 per 1000 person-years; 95% CI, 0.001-0.03). Case fatality was high for those with upper GIB (7.0%; 95% CI, 4.7-10.1) compared with those with lower GIB (0.4%; 95% CI, 0.1-1.3). Case fatality remained stable over the years but was higher in men (between 5% and 10%) than women (<2%) with GIB.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found that the overall incidence rate of upper GIB was lower than the incidence of lower GIB, but the recurrence, mortality, and 28-day case fatality were higher in participants with upper GIB. These data can serve as a reference when putting into context the rates of drug-associated GIB and can inform efforts to improve GIB care and outcome and to prevent rebleeding or death for patients with major GIB.
| S-EPMC7547368 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimClinical guidelines for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) recommend non-endoscopic treatment when endoscopic treatment is difficult or the patient is hemodynamically unstable. The aim of this study was to investigate whether angiography should be prioritized as initial treatment for severe LGIB patients over colonoscopy.MethodsWe undertook a retrospective cohort study using the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination inpatient database. We compared adult patients who underwent colonoscopy or angiography within 1 day of admission for severe LGIB from 2010 to 2017. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included surgery carried out within 1 day after admission and surgery carried out between 2 and 7 days of admission. Propensity score-matched analyses were undertaken to adjust for confounders.ResultsWe identified 6,546 eligible patients. The patients were divided into the colonoscopy group (n = 5,737) and angiography group (n = 809). After one-to-four propensity score matching, we compared 3,220 and 805 patients who underwent colonoscopy and angiography, respectively. The angiography group was not significantly associated with reduced in-hospital mortality compared with the colonoscopy group. In contrast, the number of patients who underwent surgery within 1 day of admission was significantly lower in the angiography group than in the colonoscopy group.ConclusionsThe present study revealed that in-hospital mortality did not significantly differ between colonoscopy and angiography, even in severe LGIB patients. Although this study was unable to identify which subgroups should undergo angiography for primary hemostasis, angiography might be a better option than colonoscopy for initial hemostasis in more severe cases of LGIB.
| S-EPMC7326725 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Impaired kidney function is a risk factor for upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, an event associated with poor outcomes. The burden of upper GI bleeding and its effect on patients with ESRD are not well described. Using data from the US Renal Data System, we quantified the rates of occurrence of and associated 30-day mortality from acute, nonvariceal upper GI bleeding in patients undergoing dialysis; we used medical claims and previously validated algorithms where available. Overall, 948,345 patients contributed 2,296,323 patient-years for study. The occurrence rates for upper GI bleeding were 57 and 328 episodes per 1000 person-years according to stringent and lenient definitions of acute, nonvariceal upper GI bleeding, respectively. Unadjusted occurrence rates remained flat (stringent) or increased (lenient) from 1997 to 2008; after adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics and comorbid conditions, however, we found a significant decline for both definitions (linear approximation, 2.7% and 1.5% per year, respectively; P<0.001). In more recent years, patients had higher hematocrit levels before upper GI bleeding episodes and were more likely to receive blood transfusions during an episode. Overall 30-day mortality was 11.8%, which declined significantly over time (relative declines of 2.3% or 2.8% per year for the stringent and lenient definitions, respectively). In summary, despite declining trends worldwide, crude rates of acute, nonvariceal upper GI bleeding among patients undergoing dialysis have not decreased in the past 10 years. Although 30-day mortality related to upper GI bleeding declined, perhaps reflecting improvements in medical care, the burden on the ESRD population remains substantial.
| S-EPMC3294302 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background & aimsGuidelines recommend colonoscopy evaluation within 24 hours of presentation or admission in patients with high-risk or severe acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB). Meta-analyses of the timing of colonoscopy have relied primarily on observational studies that had major potential for bias. We performed a systematic review of randomized trials to determine optimal timing of colonoscopy for patients hospitalized with acute LGIB.MethodsWe searched publication databases through July 2019 and abstracts from gastroenterology meetings through November 2019 for randomized trials of patients with acute LGIB or hematochezia. We searched for studies that compared early colonoscopy (within 24 hours) with elective colonoscopy beyond 24 hours and/or other diagnostic tests. Our primary outcome was further bleeding, defined as persistent or recurrent bleeding after index examination. Secondary outcomes included mortality, diagnostic yield (identifying source of bleeding), endoscopic intervention, and any primary hemostatic intervention (endoscopic, surgical, or interventional radiologic). We performed dual independent review, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments. We performed the meta-analysis using a random-effects model.ResultsOur final analysis included data from 4 randomized trials. Further bleeding was not decreased among patients who received early vs later, elective colonoscopy (relative risk [RR] for further bleeding with early colonoscopy, 1.57; 95% CI. 0.74-3.31). We did not find significant differences in the secondary outcomes of mortality (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.05-17.21), diagnostic yield (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.99-1.21), endoscopic intervention (RR, 1.53; 95% CI, 0.67-3.48), or any primary hemostatic intervention (RR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.92-1.92).ConclusionsIn a meta-analysis of randomized trials, we found that colonoscopy within 24 hours does not reduce further bleeding or mortality in patients hospitalized with acute LGIB. Based on these findings, patients hospitalized with acute LGIB do not generally require early colonoscopy.
| S-EPMC7292779 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The optimal timing of endoscopy in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains controversial. In this study, we investigated the clinical outcomes of urgent endoscopy in patients with UGIB compared with elective endoscopy. From January 2016 to December 2018, consecutive patients who visited the emergency department and underwent endoscopy for clinical manifestations of acute UGIB, including variceal bleeding, were eligible. Urgent endoscopy (within 6 h) and elective endoscopy (after 6 h) were defined as the time taken to perform endoscopy after presentation to the emergency department. The primary outcome was mortality rate within 30 days. A total of 572 patients were included in the analysis. Urgent endoscopy was performed in 490 patients (85.7%). The 30-day mortality rate did not differ between the urgent and elective endoscopy groups (5.3% and 6.1%, p = 0.791). There was no difference regarding the recurrent bleeding rate, total amount of transfusion, or length of hospital between the groups. In multivariate analysis, age and the amount of transfusion were associated with mortality. Urgent endoscopy was not associated with a lower 30-day mortality rate compared with elective endoscopy in patients with acute UGIB.
| S-EPMC9046398 | biostudies-literature