Long-Term Natural History of Presumptive Diverticular Hemorrhage.

INTRODUCTION: The natural history of patients with well-documented presumptive diverticular hemorrhage (TICH) is unknown. Our aims are to report (i) rebleeding rates and clinical outcomes of presumptive TICH patients with and without rebleeding, (ii) conversion to definitive TICH during long-term follow-up (F/U), and (iii) risk factors of presumptive diverticular (TIC) rebleeding. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected results of presumptive TICH patients from 1994 to 2023. Presumptive TICH was diagnosed for patients with TICs without stigmata of recent hemorrhage and no other cause of bleeding found on anoscopy, enteroscopy, capsule endoscopy, computed tomography angiography, or tagged red blood cell scan. Patients with ≤6 months of F/U were excluded. RESULTS: Of 139 patients with presumptive TICH, 104 were male and 35 female. The median age was 76 years. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics of rebleeders and non-rebleeders. During long-term median F/U of 73 months, 24.5% (34/139) rebled. A total of 56% (19/34) of rebleeders were diagnosed as definitive TICH, and they had significantly higher rates of readmission ( P < 0.001), reintervention ( P < 0.001), and surgery ( P < 0.001). During F/U, there were significantly higher rates of newly diagnosed hypertension and/or atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in rebleeders ( P = 0.033 from a logistic model). All-cause mortality was 42.8%, but none was from TICH. DISCUSSION: For presumptive TICH during long-term F/U, (i) 75.5% did not rebleed and 24.5% rebled. (ii) 56% of rebleeders were diagnosed as definitive TICH. (iii) New development of hypertension and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were risk factors of TIC rebleeding.

Patient Outcomes of Definitive Diverticular Hemorrhage After Colonoscopic, Medical, Surgical, or Embolization Treatment.

BACKGROUND: There are few reports of clinical outcomes or the natural history of definitive diverticular hemorrhage (DDH). AIMS: To describe 1-year clinical outcomes of patients with documented DDH treated with colonoscopic hemostasis, angioembolization, surgery, or medical treatment. METHODS: DDH was diagnosed when active bleeding or other stigmata of hemorrhage were found in a colonic diverticulum during urgent colonoscopy or extravasation on angiography or red blood cell (RBC) scanning. This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of DDH patients from two referral centers between 1993 and 2022. Outcomes were compared for the four treatment groups. The Kaplan-Meier analysis was for time-to-first diverticular rebleed. RESULTS: 162 patients with DDH were stratified based on their final treatment before discharge-104 colonoscopic hemostasis, 24 medical treatment alone, 19 colon surgery, and 15 angioembolization. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, except for a higher Glasgow-Blatchford score in the angioembolization group vs. the colonoscopic group. Post-treatment, the colonoscopic hemostasis group had the lowest rate of RBC transfusions and fewer hospital and ICU days compared to surgical and embolization groups. The medical group had significantly higher rates of rebleeding and reintervention. The surgical group had the highest postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Medically treated DDH patients had significantly higher 1-year rebleed and reintervention rates than the three other treatments. Those with colonoscopic hemostasis had significantly better clinical outcomes during the index hospitalization. Surgery and embolization are recommended as salvage therapies in case of failure of colonoscopic and medical treatments.

Severe Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Caused by Reflux Esophagitis.

BACKGROUND: There are few reports about reflux esophagitis (RE) as a cause of severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). AIMS: This study aims to evaluate (1) changes in its prevalence over the last three decades and (2) clinical and endoscopic characteristics and 30-day outcomes among RE patients with and without focal esophageal ulcers (EUs) and stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). METHODS: A retrospective study of prospectively collected data of esophagitis patients hospitalized with severe UGIB between 1992 and 2020. Descriptive analysis and statistical comparisons were performed. RESULTS: Of 114 RE patients, the mean age was 61.1 years and 76.3% were males. 38.6% had prior gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms; overall 36% were on acid suppressants. Over three consecutive decades, the prevalence of RE as a cause of severe UGIB increased significantly from 3.8 to 16.7%. 30-day rebleeding and all-cause mortality rates were 11.4% and 6.1%. RE patients with focal EUs and SRH (n = 23) had worse esophagitis than those with diffuse RE (n = 91) (p = 0.012). There were no differences in 30-day outcomes between RE patients with and without EUs and SRH. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with severe UGIB caused by RE, (1) the prevalence has increased significantly over the past three decades, (2) the reasons for this increase and preventive strategies warrant further study, (3) most patients lacked GERD symptoms and did not take acid suppressants, and (4) those with focal ulcers and SRH had more severe esophagitis and were treated endoscopically.

Outcomes of patients with ischemic colitis causing severe hematochezia managed medically or surgically.

PURPOSE: To compare short- and long-term outcomes of hospitalized patients with ischemic colitis (IC) presenting with severe hematochezia and treated medically or colectomy and also those with inpatient vs. outpatient start of hematochezia. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data for IC patients hospitalized for severe hematochezia from two teaching hospitals was done from 1994 to 2020, with the diagnosis of IC made colonoscopically and confirmed histologically. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients initially all had medical management for IC. Seventy-two (74.2%) were stable and had no further bleeding; 17 (17.5%) had colon resection; and 8 were critically ill and not surgical candidates. Surgical patients and non-surgical candidate had higher comorbidity scores; received more red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (median (IQR) 5 (3-10) vs. 4.5 (3-6.5) vs. 1 (0-4) units, p < 0.001); had significantly longer hospital and ICU days; had higher severe complication rates (35.3% vs. 100%. vs. 5.6%, p < 0.001); and had higher 30-day all-cause mortality rates (23.5% vs. 87.5% vs. 0, p < 0.001). Inpatients developing IC hemorrhage had more RBC transfusions, more complications, longer hospital stays, and higher mortality than patients whose IC bleeding started as outpatients. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of IC patients hospitalized for severe hematochezia were successfully treated medically. Patients who were not surgical candidate had the highest rates of severe complications and mortality. Surgical patients and those who were not surgical candidate had worse outcomes than the medical group. Patients with inpatient start of bleeding from IC had significantly worse outcomes than those with outpatient start of bleeding.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Over-the-Scope Clip as Initial Treatment of Severe Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: No prior randomized controlled trial (RCT) has reported patient outcomes of large over-the-scope clip (OTSC) compared to standard hemostasis as initial endoscopic treatment of severe NVUGIB. This was our study aim. METHODS: Patients with bleeding ulcers or Dieulafoy's lesions and major stigmata of hemorrhage - SRH (active spurting bleeding, visible vessel, or clot) - or lesser SRH (oozing bleeding or flat spots - with arterial blood flow by Doppler probe) were randomized to OTSC or standard endoscopic hemostasis (with hemoclips or multipolar electrocoagulation - MPEC). Patients and their healthcare providers were blinded to treatments and made all post-randomization management decisions. Ulcer patients received high dose intravenous infusions of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) for 3 days, then 27 days of oral PPI. 30 day outcomes were prospectively recorded; data management was with SAS; and data analysis was by a statistician. RESULTS: 53 patients (25 OTSC, 28 Standard) were randomized, with similar baseline risk factors. However, there were significant differences in OTSC vs. Standard groups in rates of rebleeding (4% vs. 28.6%; p = .017; relative risk 0.10, 95% confidence intervals 0.01, 0.91; number needed to treat 4); severe complications (0 % vs. 14.3%); and post-randomization units of red cell transfusions (0.04 vs. 0.68). All rebleeds occurred in patients with major SRH and none with lesser SRH. CONCLUSION: 1. OTSC significantly reduced rates of rebleeding, severe complications, and post-randomization red cell transfusions. 2. Patients with major stigmata benefited significantly from hemostasis with OTSC, but those with lesser stigmata did not. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03065465).

Asia-Pacific working group consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an update 2018.

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains an important emergency condition, leading to significant morbidity and mortality. As endoscopic therapy is the 'gold standard' of management, treatment of these patients can be considered in three stages: pre-endoscopic treatment, endoscopic haemostasis and post-endoscopic management. Since publication of the Asia-Pacific consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) 7 years ago, there have been significant advancements in the clinical management of patients in all three stages. These include pre-endoscopy risk stratification scores, blood and platelet transfusion, use of proton pump inhibitors; during endoscopy new haemostasis techniques (haemostatic powder spray and over-the-scope clips); and post-endoscopy management by second-look endoscopy and medication strategies. Emerging techniques, including capsule endoscopy and Doppler endoscopic probe in assessing adequacy of endoscopic therapy, and the pre-emptive use of angiographic embolisation, are attracting new attention. An emerging problem is the increasing use of dual antiplatelet agents and direct oral anticoagulants in patients with cardiac and cerebrovascular diseases. Guidelines on the discontinuation and then resumption of these agents in patients presenting with NVUGIB are very much needed. The Asia-Pacific Working Group examined recent evidence and recommends practical management guidelines in this updated consensus statement.

Doppler Endoscopic Probe Monitoring of Blood Flow Improves Risk Stratification and Outcomes of Patients With Severe Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: For 4 decades, stigmata of recent hemorrhage in patients with nonvariceal lesions have been used for risk stratification and endoscopic hemostasis. The arterial blood flow that underlies the stigmata rarely is monitored, but can be used to determine risk for rebleeding. We performed a randomized controlled trial to determine whether Doppler endoscopic probe monitoring of blood flow improves risk stratification and outcomes in patients with severe nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. METHODS: In a single-blind study performed at 2 referral centers we assigned 148 patients with severe nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (125 with ulcers, 19 with Dieulafoy's lesions, and 4 with Mallory Weiss tears) to groups that underwent standard, visually guided endoscopic hemostasis (control, n = 76), or endoscopic hemostasis assisted by Doppler monitoring of blood flow under the stigmata (n = 72). The primary outcome was the rate of rebleeding after 30 days; secondary outcomes were complications, death, and need for transfusions, surgery, or angiography. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in the rates of lesion rebleeding within 30 days of endoscopic hemostasis in the control group (26.3%) vs the Doppler group (11.1%) (P = .0214). The odds ratio for rebleeding with Doppler monitoring was 0.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.143-0.8565) and the number needed to treat was 7. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized controlled trial of patients with severe upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage from ulcers or other lesions, Doppler probe guided endoscopic hemostasis significantly reduced 30-day rates of rebleeding compared with standard, visually guided hemostasis. Guidelines for nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding should incorporate these results. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT00732212 (CLIN-013-07F).

Reassessment of Rebleeding Risk of Forrest IB (Oozing) Peptic Ulcer Bleeding in a Large International Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Our aims were to assess risks of early rebleeding after successful endoscopic hemostasis for Forrest oozing (FIB) peptic ulcer bleeding (PUBs) compared with other stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). METHODS: These were post hoc multivariable analyses of a large, international, double-blind study (NCT00251979) of patients randomized to high-dose intravenous (IV) esomeprazole (PPI) or placebo for 72 h. Rebleeding rates of patients with PUB SRH treated with either PPI or placebo after successful endoscopic hemostasis were also compared. RESULTS: For patients treated with placebo for 72 h after successful endoscopic hemostasis, rebleed rates by SRH were spurting arterial bleeding (FIA) 22.5%, adherent clot (FIIB) 17.6%, non-bleeding visible vessel (FIIA) 11.3%, and oozing bleeding (FIB) 4.9%. Compared with FIB patients, FIA, FIIB, and FIIA had significantly greater risks of rebleeding with odds ratios (95% CI's) from 2.61 (1.05, 6.52) for FIIA to 6.66 (2.19, 20.26) for FIA. After hemostasis, PUB rebleeding rates for FIB patients at 72 h were similar with esomeprazole (5.4%) and placebo (4.9%), whereas rebleed rates for all other major SRH (FIA, FIIA, FIIB) were lower for PPI than placebo, but the treatment by SRH interaction test was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: After successful endoscopic hemostasis, FIB patients had very low PUB rebleeding rates irrespective of PPI or placebo treatment. This implies that after successful endoscopic hemostasis the prognostic classification of FIB ulcers as a high-risk SRH and the recommendation to treat these with high-dose IV PPI's should be re-evaluated.

What Does Lesion Blood Flow Tell Us About Risk Stratification and Successful Management of Non-variceal UGI Bleeding?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There has been a decline in mortality associated with upper gastrointestinal (UGI) hemorrhage as the use of urgent endoscopy has increased. This review will examine endoscopic risk stratification of non-variceal UGI bleeding (e.g., ulcers, Dieulafoy lesions, and Mallory-Weiss tears), including the use of the Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP). RECENT FINDINGS: Prospective studies evaluating the use of DEP in non-variceal UGI hemorrhage showed that lesions with high-risk stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) have a higher rate of a positive DEP signal compared to those with intermediate-risk SRH. Additionally, lesions with a persistently positive DEP signal after endoscopic hemostasis were seen with high-risk SRH and had a higher 30-day rebleeding rate. Residual arterial blood flow underneath ulcers is a significant risk factor for rebleeding. However, if more endoscopic treatment is applied, clinical outcomes for patients with severe non-variceal UGI hemorrhage are improved, as documented by a recent CURE Hemostasis randomized controlled trial (RCT).

Natural history of definitive diverticular hemorrhage based on stigmata of recent hemorrhage and colonoscopic Doppler blood flow monitoring for risk stratification and definitive hemostasis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Few prospective reports describe the short-term natural history of colon diverticular hemorrhage based on stigmata of recent hemorrhage, and none include blood flow detection for risk stratification or as a guide to definitive hemostasis. Our purposes were to report the 30-day natural history of definitive diverticular hemorrhage based on stigmata and to describe Doppler probe blood flow detection as a guide to definitive hemostasis. METHODS: Different cohorts of patients with severe diverticular bleeding and stigmata on urgent colonoscopy are reported. For 30-day natural history, patients were treated medically. If severe rebleeding occurred, they had surgical or angiographic treatment. We report natural history with major stigmata (active bleeding, visible vessel, or adherent clot) and no stigmata or flat spots after clots were washed away. We also report Doppler probe detection of arterial blood flow underneath stigmata before and after hemostasis in a recent cohort. RESULTS: For natural history, patients with major stigmata treated medically had 65.8% (25/38) rebleeding rates, and 44.7% (17/38) had intervention for hemostasis. Patients with spots or clean bases had no rebleeding. A Doppler probe detected arterial blood flow in 92% of major stigmata--none after hemostasis--and there was no rebleeding. CONCLUSIONS: (1) Patients with major stigmata treated medically had high rates of rebleeding and intervention for hemostasis. (2) Patients with clean diverticula or only flat spots had no rebleeding. (3) High rates of arterial blood flow were detected under major stigmata with a Doppler probe, but with obliteration by hemostasis no rebleeding occurred.

Doppler endoscopic probe as a guide to risk stratification and definitive hemostasis of peptic ulcer bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: For more than 4 decades endoscopists have relied on ulcer stigmata for risk stratification and as a guide to hemostasis. None used arterial blood flow underneath stigmata to predict outcomes. For patients with severe peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB), we used a Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP) for (1) detection of blood flow underlying stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH), (2) quantitating rates of residual arterial blood flow under SRH after visually directed standard endoscopic treatment, and (3) comparing risks of rebleeding and actual 30-day rebleed rates for spurting arterial bleeding (Forrest [F] IA) and oozing bleeding (F IB). METHODS: Prospective cohort study of 163 consecutive patients with severe PUB and different SRH. RESULTS: All blood flow detected by the DEP was arterial. Detection rates were 87.4% in major SRH-spurting arterial bleeding (F IA), non-bleeding visible vessel (F IIA), clot (F IIB)-and were significantly lower at 42.3% (P < .0001) for an intermediate group of oozing bleeding (F IB) or flat spot (F IIC). For spurting bleeding (F IA) versus oozing (F IB), baseline DEP arterial flow was 100% versus 46.7%, residual blood flow detected after endoscopic hemostasis was 35.7% versus 0%, and 30-day rebleed rates were 28.6% versus 0% (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: (1) For major SRH versus oozing or spot, the arterial blood flow detection rate by the DEP was significantly higher, indicating a higher rebleed risk. (2) Before and after endoscopic treatment, spurting (F IA) PUB had significantly higher rates of blood flow detection than oozing (F IB) PUB and a significantly higher 30-day rebleed rate. (3) The DEP is recommended as a new endoscopic guide with SRH to improve risk stratification and potentially definitive hemostasis for PUB.

Comparison of Three Risk Scores to Predict Outcomes of Severe Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Improved medical decisions by using a score at the initial patient triage level may lead to improvements in patient management, outcomes, and resource utilization. There is no validated score for management of lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) unlike for upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The aim of our study was to compare the accuracies of 3 different prognostic scores [Center for Ulcer Research and Education Hemostasis prognosis score, Charlson index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score] for the prediction of 30-day rebleeding, surgery, and death in severe LGIB. METHODS: Data on consecutive patients hospitalized with severe gastrointestinal bleeding from January 2006 to October 2011 in our 2 tertiary academic referral centers were prospectively collected. Sensitivities, specificities, accuracies, and area under the receiver operator characteristic curve were computed for 3 scores for predictions of rebleeding, surgery, and mortality at 30 days. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-five consecutive patients with LGIB were included between 2006 and 2011. Twenty-three percent of patients rebled, 6% had surgery, and 7.7% of patients died. The accuracies of each score never reached 70% for predicting rebleeding or surgery in either. The ASA score had a highest accuracy for predicting mortality within 30 days (83.5%), whereas the Center for Ulcer Research and Education Hemostasis prognosis score and the Charlson index both had accuracies <75% for the prediction of death within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: ASA score could be useful to predict death within 30 days. However, a new score is still warranted to predict all 30 days outcomes (rebleeding, surgery, and death) in LGIB.

Origin, Clinical Characteristics and 30-Day Outcomes of Severe Hematochezia in Cirrhotics and Non-cirrhotics.

BACKGROUND: The sites of origin, causes and outcomes of severe hematochezia have not been compared between cirrhotics and non-cirrhotics. In cirrhotics versus non-cirrhotics presenting with severe hematochezia, we aimed at (1) identifying the site and etiology of gastro-intestinal bleeding and independent predictors of bleeding from the upper gastrointestinal tract versus small bowel or the colon, (2) comparing 30-day clinical outcomes, and (3) proposing an algorithm for management of severe hematochezia. METHODS: In this cohort study from two university-based medical centers, 860 consecutive patients with severe hematochezia admitted from 1995 to 2011 were prospectively enrolled with 160 (18.6 %) cirrhotics. We studied (a) general clinical and laboratory characteristics of cirrhotics versus non-cirrhotics, (b) predictors of bleeding sites in each patient group by multiple variable regression analysis, and compared (c) 30-day outcomes, including rebleeding, surgery and deaths. RESULTS: Cirrhosis independently predicted an upper gastrointestinal source of bleeding (OR 3.47; 95 % CI 2.01-5.96) as well as history of hematemesis, melena in the past 30 days, positive nasogastric aspirate, prior upper gastrointestinal bleeding or use of aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory. The most prevalent diagnoses were esophageal varices (20 %) in cirrhotics and colon diverticular bleeding (27.1 %) in non-cirrhotics. Thirty-day rates of rebleeding, surgical interventions and deaths were 23.1 versus 15 % (P = 0.01), 14.4 versus 6.4 % (P < 0.001), and 17.5 versus 4.1 % (P < 0.001), in cirrhotics versus non-cirrhotics, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cirrhosis predicted an upper gastrointestinal site of bleeding in patients presenting with severe hematochezia. The 30-day rates of rebleeding, surgery, and death were significantly higher in cirrhotics than in non-cirrhotics.

Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Colonic Diverticular Bleeding.

This is a description and critical analysis of current diagnosis and treatment of diverticular hemorrhage. The focus is on colonoscopy for identification and treatment of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) in diverticula. A classification of definitive, presumptive, and incidental diverticular hemorrhage is reviewed and recommended. The approach to definitive diagnosis with urgent colonoscopy is put into perspective of other management strategies including angiography (of different types), nuclear medicine scans, surgery, and medical treatment. Advancements in diagnosis, risk stratification, and colonoscopic hemostasis are described including those that obliterate arterial blood flow underneath SRH and prevent diverticular rebleeding. Recent innovations are discussed.

Improving primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding by adapting therapy to the clinical stage of cirrhosis. A competing-risk meta-analysis of individual participant data.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Non-selective ß-blockers (NSBBs) and endoscopic variceal-ligation (EVL) have similar efficacy preventing first variceal bleeding. Compensated and decompensated cirrhosis are markedly different stages, which may impact treatment outcomes. We aimed to assess the efficacy of NSBBs vs EVL on survival in patients with high-risk varices without previous bleeding, stratifying risk according to compensated/decompensated stage of cirrhosis. METHODS: By systematic review, we identified RCTs comparing NSBBs vs EVL, in monotherapy or combined, for primary bleeding prevention. We performed a competing-risk, time-to-event meta-analysis, using individual patient data (IPD) obtained from principal investigators of RCTs. Analyses were stratified according to previous decompensation of cirrhosis. RESULTS: Of 25 RCTs eligible, 14 failed to provide IPD and 11 were included, comprising 1400 patients (656 compensated, 744 decompensated), treated with NSBBs (N = 625), EVL (N = 546) or NSBB+EVL (N = 229). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Overall, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs (subdistribution hazard-ratio (sHR) = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.75-1.49) and with EVL + NSBBs vs either monotherapy, with low heterogeneity (I2 = 28.7%). In compensated patients, mortality risk was higher with EVL vs NSBBs (sHR = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.11-2.77) and not significantly lower with NSBBs+EVL vs NSBBs, without heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). In decompensated patients, mortality risk was similar with EVL vs. NSBBs and with NSBBs+EVL vs. either monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with compensated cirrhosis and high-risk varices on primary prophylaxis, NSBBs significantly improved survival vs EVL, with no additional benefit noted adding EVL to NSBBs. In decompensated patients, survival was similar with both therapies. The study suggests that NSBBs are preferable when advising preventive therapy in compensated patients.

Lower GI bleeding: epidemiology and management.

Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding from the colon is a common reason for hospitalization and is becoming more common in the elderly. While most cases will cease spontaneously, patients with ongoing bleeding or major stigmata of hemorrhage require urgent diagnosis and intervention to achieve definitive hemostasis. Colonoscopy is the primary modality for establishing a diagnosis, risk stratification, and treating some of the most common causes of colonic bleeding, including diverticular hemorrhage which is the etiology in 30% of cases. Other interventions, including angiography and surgery, are usually reserved for instances of bleeding that cannot be stabilized or allow for adequate bowel preparation for colonoscopy. We discuss the colonoscopic diagnosis, risk stratification, and definitive treatment of colonic hemorrhage in patients presenting with severe hematochezia.

The Importance of Arterial Blood Flow Detection for Risk Stratification and Eradication to Achieve Definitive Hemostasis of Severe Non-Variceal UGI Hemorrhage.

BACKGROUND: Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is a common medical problem worldwide. Independent endoscopic risk factors for rebleeding and mortality of NVUGIB that are treatable are stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) and arterial blood flow underneath SRH. The specific aims of this paper are to describe the importance of arterial blood flow detection for risk stratification and as a guide to definitive hemostasis of severe NVUGIB. METHODS: This is a review of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort study methodologies and results which utilized a Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP) for the detection of arterial blood underneath SRH, for risk stratification, and as a guide to definitive hemostasis. The results are compared to visually guided hemostasis based upon SRH. RESULTS: Although SRH have been utilized to guide endoscopic hemostasis of NVUGIB for 50 years, when most visually guided treatments are applied to lesions with major SRH, arterial blood flow underneath SRH is not obliterated in 25-30% of patients and results in rebleeding. Definitive hemostasis, significantly lower rebleeding rates, and improvements in other clinical outcomes resulted when DEP was used for risk stratification and as a guide to obliteration of arterial blood flow underneath SRH. CONCLUSIONS: DEP-guided endoscopic hemostasis is a very effective and safe new method to improve patient outcomes for NVUGIB.