Risk factors for massive gastrointestinal bleeding occurrence and mortality: A prospective single-center study.

BACKGROUND: Massive gastrointestinal bleeding is a life-threatening condition without a well-established definition. We aimed to analyze the characteristics, risk factors, and outcomes of patients with massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding. METHODS: Our study analyzed a prospective registry of patients admitted between 2013 and 2020 with variceal and non-variceal causes. Severe bleeding was defined as ongoing bleeding requiring transfusion of more than 2 units of packed red blood cells within 24 hours, accompanied by signs of shock. The main outcomes were 30-day and 6-month mortality, rebleeding within 7 days, persistent bleeding, and severe complications during admission. RESULTS: Out of 1213 patients, 171 had massive gastrointestinal bleeding, with a predominance of males. The massive bleeding group had higher rates of chronic kidney disease, cirrhosis, in-patient status, disseminated malignancy, alcoholism, and ASA score ≥3. All major outcomes, including 30-day mortality, 6-month mortality, rebleeding, persistent bleeding, and severe complications, were more common in the massive bleeding group. Multivariate logistic regression identified inpatient status, systemic diseases, malignancy, active bleeding in endoscopy, and severe complications as risk factors for massive bleeding and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Inpatient status and comorbidities, especially systemic diseases, and malignancies, were associated with a higher risk of massive bleeding. Mortality was linked to chronic kidney disease, cirrhosis, severe comorbidities, and alcohol consumption. We observed increased 6-months mortality, probably related to a health status in which gastrointestinal bleeding heralded poor outcomes, some of them potentially preventable. Innovative healthcare interventions, such as Emergency Department-based intermediate care areas or Intensive Care Units, and multidisciplinary follow-up, could potentially improve survival.

Impact of an Evidence-Based Prioritization System and Electronic Consultation in Early Diagnosis of Colorectal Cancer.

(1) Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common causes of cancer. Timely diagnosis is critical, with even minor delays impacting prognosis. Primary care providers face obstacles in accessing specialist care. This study investigates the impact of implementing an electronic consultation (eConsult) system combined with a specific prioritization system on CRC diagnosis delay and tumor staging. (2) Methods: The study analyzes 245 CRC patients from November 2019 to February 2022, comparing those referred before and after the eConsult system's implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data on referral reasons, pathways, diagnosis delays, and staging were collected. Multivariate analysis aimed to identify independent risk factors for advanced staging at diagnosis. (3) Results: The eConsult system significantly reduced CRC diagnosis delay from 68 to 26 days. The majority of patients referred via eConsult presented with symptoms. Despite expedited diagnoses, no discernible difference in CRC staging emerged between eConsult and traditional referrals. Notably, patients from screening programs or with a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) experienced earlier-stage diagnoses. A positive FIT without symptoms and being a never-smoker emerged as protective factors against advanced-stage CRC. (4) Conclusions: This study highlights eConsult's role in reducing CRC diagnosis delay, improving diagnostic efficiency and prioritizing urgent cases, emphasizing FIT effectiveness.

Preoperative EUS vs. PET-CT Evaluation of Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophagogastric Cancer and Its Correlation with Survival.

BACKGROUND: The objective of our study was to investigate whether Endoscopic Ultrasonography (EUS) and Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) restaging can predict survival in upper gastrointestinal tract adenocarcinomas and to assess their accuracy when compared to pathology. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on all patients who underwent EUS for staging of gastric or esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2021. EUS and PET-CT were performed, and preoperative TNM restaging was conducted using both procedures within 21 days prior to surgery. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 185 patients (74.7% male) were included in the study. The accuracy of EUS for distinguishing between T1-T2 and T3-T4 tumors after neoadjuvant therapy was 66.7% (95% CI: 50.3-77.8%), and for N staging, the accuracy was 70.8% (95% CI: 51.8-81.8%). Regarding PET-CT, the accuracy for N positivity was 60.4% (95% CI: 46.3-73%). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant correlation between positive lymph nodes on restaging EUS and PET-CT with DFS. Multivariate COX regression analysis identified N restaging with EUS and PET-CT, as well as the Charlson comorbidity index, as correlated factors with DFS. Positive lymph nodes on EUS and PET-CT were predictors of OS. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the independent risk factors for OS were found to be the Charlson comorbidity index, T response by EUS, and male sex. CONCLUSION: Both EUS and PET-CT are valuable tools for determining the preoperative stage of esophago-gastric cancer. Both techniques can predict survival, with preoperative N staging and response to neoadjuvant therapy assessed by EUS being the main predictors.

Performance of the New ABC and MAP(ASH) Scores in the Prediction of Relevant Outcomes in Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Background & Aims: Several risk scores have been proposed for risk-stratification of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. ABC score was found more accurate predicting mortality than AIMS65. MAP(ASH) is a simple, pre-endoscopy score with a great ability to predict intervention and mortality. The aim of this study was to compare ABC and MAP(ASH) discriminative ability for the prediction of mortality and intervention in UGIB. As a secondary aim we compared both scores with Glasgow-Blatchford score and AIMS65. Methods: Our study included patients admitted to the emergency room of Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital with UGIB (2017-2020). Information regarding clinical, biochemical tests and procedures was collected. Main outcomes were in-hospital mortality and a composite endpoint for intervention. Results: MAP(ASH) and ABC had similar AUROCs for mortality (0.79 vs. 0.80). For intervention, MAP(ASH) (AUROC = 0.75) and ABC (AUROC = 0.72) were also similar. Regarding rebleeding, AUROCs of MAP(ASH) and ABC were 0.67 and 0.61 respectively. No statistically differences were found in these outcomes. With a low threshold for MAP(ASH) ≤ 2, ABC and MAP(ASH) classified a similar proportion of patients as being at low risk of death (42% vs. 45.2%), with virtually no mortality under these thresholds. Conclusions: MAP(ASH) and ABC were similar for the prediction of relevant outcomes for UGIB, such as intervention, rebleeding and in-hospital mortality, with an accurate selection of low-risk patients. MAP(ASH) has the advantage of being easier to calculate even without the aid of electronic tools.

Accuracy in optical diagnosis for polyps between 5 and 15 mm and its implications on surveillance. A prospective, multicenter study. (POPS study).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyps histology and diameter up to 1 cm determine whether a patient needs a colonoscopy after 3 years or less, or far ahead. Endoscopists' and pathologists' size estimations can be imprecise. Our aim was to assess endoscopist ability to correctly recommend surveillance colonoscopies for patients with polyps around the 10 mm threshold, based on its endoscopic sizing and optical diagnosis by NBI. METHODS: NBI-assisted diagnosis and endoscopist estimation of polyp size were compared with reference standard, considering this as the post resection polyp measurements by the nurse assistant and the pathologic results, in a prospective, multicenter, real life study, that recruited adults undergoing colonoscopy in five hospitals. By comparing the endoscopic and pathologist size estimation, with polyps' measurement after resection, and optical and histological diagnoses in patients with polyps between 5 and 15 mm, sensitivity was assessed at the patient level by means of two characteristics: the presence of adenoma, and the surveillance interval. Surveillance intervals were established by the endoscopist, based on optical diagnosis, and by another gastroenterologist, grounded on the pathologic report. Determinants of accuracy were explored at the polyp level. RESULTS: 532 polyps were resected in 451 patients. Size estimation was more precise for the endoscopist. Endoscopist sensitivity for the presence of adenoma or carcinoma was 98.7%. Considering the presence of high-grade dysplasia or cancer, sensitivity was 82.6% for the endoscopic optical diagnosis. Sensitivity for a correct 3-year surveillance interval was 91.5%, specificity 82.3%, with a PPV of 93.2% and NPV of 78.5% for the endoscopist. 6.51% of patients would have had their follow-up colonoscopy delayed, whereas 22 (4.8%) would have it been performed earlier, had endoscopist recommendations been followed. CONCLUSION: Our study observes that NBI optical diagnosis can be recommended in routine practice to establish surveillance intervals for polyps between 5 and 15 mm. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04232176.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients 80 years old and over. A comparison with younger patients and risk factors analysis for in-hospital and delayed mortality.

INTRODUCTION: Outcomes in old patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) have been scarcely studied. Our aim was to compare very old individuals (>80 years old) with younger patients with UGIB, and to identify risk factors for the main outcomes. METHODS: A single-centre prospectively collected database was analysed. Descriptive, inferential and multivariate logistic regression models were performed. Main clinical outcomes were in-hospital and delayed 6-month mortality. RESULTS: 698 patients were included, 143 very old and 555 aged <80. Old patients differed from younger ones in comorbidities (85.9% vs. 62%, P < .0001), oral anticoagulants (32.3% vs. 12.7%; P < .0001), and antiplatelets intake (32.3% vs. 21.2%; P < .007). No differences were found in the need for endoscopic interventions, blood unit transfusions, hospital stay, in-hospital rebleeding and mortality. Among very old patients, creatinine levels were higher in those who died compared with the ones who survived (1.92 ± 1.46 vs. 1.25 ± 0.59 mg/dL; P = .002), they had lower haemoglobin levels (8.1 ± 1.4 vs. 9.1 ± 2.4 g/dL; P = .04) and longer hospital stays (17.75 ± 15.5 vs. 8.1 ± 8.4 days; P < .0001). Logistic regression showed creatinine levels (OR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.24-4.74; P = .01), cirrhosis (OR: 2.88, 95% CI: 1.88-17.34; P = .04) and being an impatient (OR: 3.90; 95% CI: 1.11-20; P = .035) were independent risk factors for mortality in older patients. They had an increased delayed 6-month mortality compared with younger patients (17.5% vs. 8%, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Creatinine levels, cirrhosis or the onset of UGIB while being an inpatient were independent risk factors for mortality in very old patients. Delayed mortality was higher among them, mostly caused by cardiovascular events and neoplasms, but not in-hospital mortality.

A Gastroenterologist' clinical experience in COVID 19 and in-hospital mortality and length of stay analysis.

OBJECTIVES: COVID19 pandemic has forced physicians from different specialties to assist cases overload. Our aim is to assess gastroenterologist's assistance in COVID-19 by assessing mortality, ICU admission, and length of stay, and seek for risk factors for in-hospital mortality and longer hospital stay. METHODS: A total of 41 COVID-19 patients assisted by gastroenterologist (GI cohort) and 137 assisted by pulmonologist, internal medicine practitioners, and infectious disease specialists (COVID expert cohort) during October-November 2020 were prospectively collected. Clinical, demographic, imaging, and laboratory markers were collected and compared between both cohorts. Bivariate analysis and logistic regression were performed to search for risk factors of mortality and longer hospital stays. RESULTS: A total of 27 patients died (15.1%), 11 were admitted to ICU (6.1%). There were no differences between cohorts in mortality (14.6% vs 15.4%;p = 0.90), ICU admission (12.1% vs 4%;p = 0.13), and length of stay (6.67 ± 4 vs 7.15 ± 4.5 days; p = 0.58). PaO2/FiO2 on admission (OR 0.991;CI95% 0.984-0.998) and age > 70 (OR 17.54;CI95% 3.93-78.22) were independently related to mortality. Age > 70, history of malignancy, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease were related to longer hospital stays (p < 0.001, p = 0.03, p = 0.04, p = 0.02 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 assistance was similar between gastroenterologist and COVID experts when assessing mortality, ICU admission, and length of stay. Age>70 and decreased PaO2/FiO2 on admission were independent risk factors of mortality. Age and several comorbidities were related to longer hospital stay.

Intestinal intussusception in an adult diagnosed by colonoscopy, an uncommon way to discover this entity.

Intestinal intussusception is a condition usually observed in pediatric patients and is rare in adults. It has been described as idiopathic or secondary to several etiologies. Intussusception occurring in the large bowel is more likely to have a malignant etiology. Abdominal computed tomography is the normal diagnostic modality. Colonoscopy may be helpful to distinguish benign from malignant lesions, prior to deciding an appropriate management. An endoscopy approach can be attempted in patients in whom a benign mass is suspected. However, surgery remains the mainstay in adult intussusception, especially when a malignant etiology cannot be ruled out. We present a rare case of colo-colonic intestinal intussusception in an adult diagnosed by outpatient colonoscopy, which is an uncommon way to discover this entity.

MAP(ASH): A new scoring system for the prediction of intervention and mortality in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Risk stratification for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is recommended. However, scoring system accuracy is suboptimal, and score calculation can be complex. Our aim was to develop a new score, the MAP(ASH) score, with information available in the emergency room and to validate it. METHODS: The score was built from a prospective database of patients with UGIB and validated in an international database of 3012 patients from six hospitals. Outcomes were 30-day mortality, endoscopic intervention, any intervention (red blood transfusion, endoscopic treatment, interventional radiology, surgery, or death), and rebleeding. Accuracy to predict outcomes was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). RESULTS: Five hundred forty-seven patients were included in the development cohort. Impaired mental status, albumin < 2.5 g/dL, pulse > 100, American Society of Anesthesiologists score > 2, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg, and hemoglobin < 10 g/dL were included in the score. The model had a good predictive accuracy for intervention (AUROC = 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.88) and fair for mortality (AUROC = 0.74; 95% CI: 0.68-0.81). Regarding endoscopic intervention, AUROC was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.56-0.66) in the original cohort and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.66-0.71) in the validation cohort, showing a poor performance, similar to other scores. For rebleeding, the MAP(ASH) (AUROC 0.73; 95% CI: 0.69-0.77) was similar to Glasgow Blatchford score (AUROC = 0.72; 95% CI: 0.67-0.76) but superior to AIMS65 (AUROC = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.59-0.68). CONCLUSION: MAP(ASH) is a simple pre-endoscopy risk score to predict intervention after UGIB, with fair discrimination at predicting mortality. Because of its applicability, it could be an option in clinical practice.

Hemophagocytic syndrome, a diagnostic challenge in Gastroenterology.

Hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis is a syndrome of severe immune activation with macrophage and T- cell infiltration resulting in multi organ damage. We report the case of a patient successfully treated for a haemophagocytic syndrome triggered by a metastatic neoplasm of the rectum. A 57 years old man is initially presented with fever without focus. Despite of wide spectrum antibiotics he developed a multi-organ dysfunction. A bone marrow aspirate showed histiocytes that had phagocytosed hematic cells. Hemophagocytic syndrome was suspected and specific treatment was administered. The patient's condition improved remarkably and he was discharged. Nevertheles, finally, the patient died due to a bad response to chemotherapy. Malignancies are a well known triggering of hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis being hematological the most commun malignancy associated. However, solid tumors are anecdotic and, to our knowledge, this case is the first one documented due only to rectal carcinoma.

The first reported case of colonic infection caused by Candida glabrata.

Lower gastrointestinal tract infection caused by Candida species are rarely reported and, Candida albicans and tropicalis have been the only pathogens identified. We present the first documented case of candida colitis caused by Candida Glabrata in a 56-year-old man with a personal history of morbid obesity and bariatric surgery. The presenting symptoms were diarrhea, rectal bleeding and septic shock. Diagnosis was obtained by histological and microbiological study of the colonoscopy biopsies. Gastroenterologists should be aware of Candida as a cause of colonic infection. Fungal culture is the key to identify specific Candida species and lead to an appropriate antifungal therapy.

Analysis of rebleeding in cases of an upper gastrointestinal bleed in a single center series.

BACKGROUND: upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is one of the main causes of hospital admission in gastroenterology departments and is associated with a significant morbidity and mortality. Rebleeding after initial endoscopic therapy occurs in 10-20% of cases and therefore, there is a need to define predictive factors for rebleeding. AIM: the aim of our study was to analyze risk factors and outcomes in a population of patients who suffered a rebleed. METHODS: five hundred and seven patients with gastrointestinal bleeding were included. Clinical and biochemical data, as well as procedures and outcome six months after admission, were all collected. Documented clinical outcome included in-hospital and six-month delayed mortality, rebleeding and six-month delayed hemorrhagic and cardiovascular events. RESULTS: according to a logistic regression analysis, high creatinine levels were independent risk factors for rebleeding of non-variceal and variceal UGIB. In non-variceal UGIB, tachycardia was an independent risk factor, whereas albumin levels were an independent protective factor. Rebleeding was associated with in-hospital mortality (29.5% vs 5.5%; p < 0.0001). In contrast, rebleeding was not related to six-month delayed mortality or delayed cardiovascular and hemorrhagic events. CONCLUSIONS: tachycardia and high creatinine and albumin levels were independent factors associated with rebleeding, suggestive of a potential predictive role of these parameters. The incorporation of these variables into predictive scores may provide improved results for patients with UGIB. Further validation in prospective studies is required.

Inhospital and delayed mortality after upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an analysis of risk factors in a prospective series.

BACKGROUND: Detailed analyses of mortality after upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding are lacking. Follow-up rarely extends beyond 30 days. AIMS: Our aim was to analyze in-hospital and delayed 6-months mortality, identifying risk factors. METHODS: This was a prospective study on patients with upper GI bleeding over 36 months. Clinical outcomes were in-hospital and delayed-6 month-mortality. RESULTS: Four hundred and forty-none patients were included. Overall inpatient mortality was 9.8% but mortality directly related to bleeding was 5.1%. Patients who died presented lower systolic blood pressures, platelet recounts, prothrombin times and lower levels of hemoglobin, calcium, albumin, urea, creatinine and total proteins. Cirrhosis and neoplasms determined a higher in-hospital mortality. Albumin levels were protective, whereas creatinine and an active bleeding were risk factors for in-hospital death in multivariate analysis. Up to 12.6% of patients discharged died in the first 6 months. Neoplasms, chronic kidney disease, coronary disease and esophageal varices were related to delayed mortality. Coronary disease and neoplasms were independent risk factors for mortality, but albumin levels were protective in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Comorbidities were risk factors for delayed mortality, whereas albumin levels were a protective factor for in-hospital and delayed deaths. Six months mortality is proportionately as important as in-hospital mortality. Half of the delayed deaths might be preventable.

Endoscopic ultrasound in gastric cancer staging before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. A comparison with PET-CT in a clinical series.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of gastric cancer is based on accurate staging. Emerging methods, such as PET-CT, are increasingly being used for this purpose. Our aim was to analyze the results of EUS and PET-CT in staging and restaging our patients with gastric cancer, comparing both of them with the histological results. METHODS: Patients with confirmed gastric cancer were prospectively enrolled. Inclusion criteria for the final analysis included only patients who finally received a surgical resection. All patients underwent preoperative TNM staging by means of EUS and PET-CT within 21 days prior to the surgical treatment. RESULTS: A total of 256 patients were included. The overall EUS accuracy for T staging was 78% and 80.2% in restaging. EUS showed its best accuracy when distinguishing T1-T2 tumors vs. T3-T4, with an increased accuracy in restaging. Regarding N staging, the overall accuracy of EUS was 76.2%, and 72.5% for PET-CT (p = 0.02). With regards to restaging, accuracy of EUS and PET-CT for N staging was 88.5% and 69%, respectively, with significant differences (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: EUS performed better than PET-CT in gastric cancer N staging and restaging. EUS accuracy in this setting is still suboptimal and probably more than one single diagnostic procedure should be used.

BISAP, RANSON, lactate and others biomarkers in prediction of severe acute pancreatitis in a European cohort.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The study aims to assess and compare the predicting ability of some scores and biomarkers in acute pancreatitis. METHODS: We prospectively collected data from 269 patients diagnosed of acute pancreatitis, admitted to Virgen de las Nieves University Hospital between June 2010 and June 2012. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN), C-reactive protein, and creatinine were measured on admission and after 48 h, lactate and bedside index for severity acute pancreatitis (BISAP) only on admission and RANSON within the first 48 h. Definitions from 2012 Atlanta Classification were used. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated for each scoring system for predicting severe acute pancreatitis (SAP), mortality, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission, obtaining optimal cut-off values from the receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Eight (3%) patients died, 17 (6.3%) were classified as SAP, and 10 (3.7%) were admitted in ICU. BISAP was the best predictor on admission for SAP, mortality, and ICU admission with an AUC of 0.9 (95% CI 0.83-0.97); 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.99); and 0.89 (95% CI 0.79-0.99), respectively. After 48 h, BUN 48 h was the best predictor of SAP (AUC = 0.96 CI: 0.92-0.99); BUN 48 h and BISAP were the best predictors for mortality (AUC = 0.97 CI: 0.95-0.99) and creatinine 48 h for ICU admission (AUC = 0.96 CI: 0.92-0.99). Lactate showed an AUC of 0.79 (CI: 0.71-0.88), 0.87 (CI: 0.78-0.96), and 0.77 (CI: 0.67-0.87) for SAP, mortality, and ICU admission, respectively. All parameters were predictors for SAP, mortality, and ICU admission, but C-reactive protein on admission was only a significant predictor of SAP. CONCLUSION: Bedside index for severity acute pancreatitis is a good predictive system for SAP, mortality, and ICU admission, being useful for triaging patients for ICU management. Lactate could be useful for developing new scores.

Comparison of AIMS65, Glasgow-Blatchford score, and Rockall score in a European series of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: performance when predicting in-hospital and delayed mortality.

OBJECTIVE: AIMS65 is a score designed to predict in-hospital mortality, length of stay, and costs of gastrointestinal bleeding. Our aims were to revalidate AIMS65 as predictor of inpatient mortality and to compare AIMS65's performance with that of Glasgow-Blatchford (GBS) and Rockall scores (RS) with regard to mortality, and the secondary outcomes of a composite endpoint of severity, transfusion requirements, rebleeding, delayed (6-month) mortality, and length of stay. METHODS: The study included 309 patients. Clinical and biochemical data, transfusion requirements, endoscopic, surgical, or radiological treatments, and outcomes for 6 months after admission were collected. Clinical outcomes were in-hospital mortality, delayed mortality, rebleeding, composite endpoint, blood transfusions, and length of stay. RESULTS: In receiver-operating characteristic curve analyses, AIMS65, GBS, and RS were similar when predicting inpatient mortality (0.76 vs. 0.78 vs. 0.78). Regarding endoscopic intervention, AIMS65 and GBS were identical (0.62 vs. 0.62). AIMS65 was useless when predicting rebleeding compared to GBS or RS (0.56 vs. 0.70 vs. 0.71). GBS was better at predicting the need for transfusions. No patient with AIMS65 = 0, GBS ≤ 6, or RS ≤ 4 died. Considering the composite endpoint, an AIMS65 of 0 did not exclude high risk patients, but a GBS ≤ 1 or RS ≤ 2 did. The three scores were similar in predicting prolonged in-hospital stay. Delayed mortality was better predicted by AIMS65. CONCLUSION: AIMS65 is comparable to GBS and RS in essential endpoints such as inpatient mortality, the need for endoscopic intervention and length of stay. GBS is a better score predicting rebleeding and the need for transfusion, but AIMS65 shows a better performance predicting delayed mortality.