Advances in endoscopic management of colonic diverticular bleeding.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review is focused on diagnostic and management strategies for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). It aims to present the current state of the field, highlighting the available techniques, and emphasizing findings that influence the choice of therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent guidelines recommend nonurgent colonoscopy (>24 h) for CDB. However, factors such as a shock index ≥1, which may warrant an urgent colonoscopy, remain under investigation.The standard approach to detecting the source of CDB requires a water-jet scope equipped with a cap. Innovative diagnostic techniques, such as the long-cap and tapered-cap, have proven effective in identifying stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). Furthermore, the water or gel immersion methods may aid in managing massive hemorrhage by improving the visualization and stabilization of the bleeding site for subsequent intervention. Innovations in endoscopic hemostasis have significantly improved the management of CDB. New therapeutic methods such as endoscopic band ligation and direct clipping have substantially diminished the incidence of recurrent bleeding. Recent reports also have demonstrated the efficacy of cutting-edge techniques such as over-the-scope clips, which have significantly improved outcomes in complex cases that have historically necessitated surgical intervention. SUMMARY: Currently available endoscopic diagnostic and hemostatic methods for CDB have evolved with improved outcomes. Further research is necessary to refine the criteria for urgent colonoscopy and to confirm the effectiveness of new endoscopic hemostasis techniques.

Timing of colonoscopy in acute lower GI bleeding: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: We aimed to determine the optimal timing of colonoscopy and factors that benefit patients who undergo early colonoscopy for acute lower GI bleeding. METHODS: We identified 10,342 patients with acute hematochezia (CODE BLUE-J study) admitted to 49 hospitals in Japan. Of these, 6270 patients who underwent a colonoscopy within 120 hours were included in this study. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method was used to adjust for baseline characteristics among early (≤24 hours, n = 4133), elective (24-48 hours, n = 1137), and late (48-120 hours, n = 1000) colonoscopy. The average treatment effect was evaluated for outcomes. The primary outcome was 30-day rebleeding rate. RESULTS: The early group had a significantly higher rate of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) identification and a shorter length of stay than the elective and late groups. However, the 30-day rebleeding rate was significantly higher in the early group than in the elective and late groups. Interventional radiology (IVR) or surgery requirement and 30-day mortality did not significantly differ among groups. The interaction with heterogeneity of effects was observed between early and late colonoscopy and shock index (shock index <1, odds ratio [OR], 2.097; shock index ≥1, OR, 1.095; P for interaction = .038) and performance status (0-2, OR, 2.481; ≥3, OR, .458; P for interaction = .022) for 30-day rebleeding. Early colonoscopy had a significantly lower IVR or surgery requirement in the shock index ≥1 cohort (OR, .267; 95% confidence interval, .099-.721) compared with late colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: Early colonoscopy increased the rate of SRH identification and shortened the length of stay but involved an increased risk of rebleeding and did not improve mortality and IVR or surgery requirement. Early colonoscopy particularly benefited patients with a shock index ≥1 or performance status ≥3 at presentation.

Utility of Under-Gel Endoscopic Mucosal Resection with Partial Submucosal Injection and Under-Gel Precutting Endoscopic Mucosal Resection for Difficult Colorectal Polyp Cases.

BACKGROUND: Here, we evaluated the utility of under-gel endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) with partial submucosal injection (PI) and under-gel precutting EMR for difficult-to-treat colorectal polyps. METHODS: A retrospective case series was conducted from April 1, 2020, to April 1, 2021, at St. Luke's International Hospital (Japan). We included all consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopy and subsequent under-gel EMR with PI and under-gel precutting EMR. Baseline and clinical data were obtained from electronic medical records. RESULTS: Under-gel EMR with PI was performed in 6 patients, treating a total of seven lesions. In this group, 50% (3/6) were women (mean age = 59.2 years). The mean procedure time and specimen size were 5.1 min and 12.1 mm, respectively, achieving a 100% (7/7) en bloc resection rate. Under-gel precutting EMR was performed in 8 patients. In this group, 50% (4/8) were women (mean age = 66.1 years). The mean procedure time and specimen size were 22.6 min and 23.0 mm, respectively; en bloc resection rate was 62.5% (5/8). Regarding lesions over 20 mm in diameter, the en bloc resection rate was 50% (3/6). No complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: PI is potentially useful for colorectal polyps where the distal end is not visible; when PI cannot be used, precutting EMR may constitute another troubleshooting method for difficult-to-treat colorectal polyps. The gel immersion method is also a viable option when the use of water causes rapid mixing of blood and residual stool, resulting in poor visibility.

Vonoprazan versus proton pump inhibitors for postendoscopic submucosal dissection bleeding in the stomach: a multicenter population-based comparative study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The effectiveness of vonoprazan relative to that of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is unclear. Although previous studies used post-ESD ulcer healing as the outcome measure, post-ESD bleeding rate is the most objective and appropriate outcome measure because it has less ascertainment bias. We aimed to compare the post-ESD bleeding rates between vonoprazan and PPIs. METHODS: This nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study was conducted between 2014 and 2018 and involved 9 hospitals. After 2 days of intravenous PPI administration, either vonoprazan or PPI was administrated from postoperative day 2 to 30. RESULTS: Overall, data of 1715 patients (627 patient pairs) were analyzed through propensity score matching. The vonoprazan group had significantly lower post-ESD bleeding rates than the PPI group (overall, 11.9% vs 17.2%, P = .008; bleeding between days 2 and 30, 7.8% vs 11.8%, P = .015). The readmission rate because of post-ESD bleeding was lower in the vonoprazan group (2.4% vs 4.1%, P = .081). Blood transfusion (2.1% vs 3.0%, P = .15) and additional surgery because of delayed perforation (.5% vs 1.0%, P = .32) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. No deaths within 30 days occurred in both groups. On Cox regression analysis, vonoprazan use, lesion location (antrum), aspirin use, direct oral anticoagulant use, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (≥2) were associated with an increased risk of post-ESD bleeding within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Vonoprazan has a lower post-ESD bleeding rate than PPIs. Further prospective studies are required to confirm these results.

Doppler probe method to reduce delayed bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection in the stomach: a propensity-score matched study (with video).

BACKGROUND: Prophylactic coagulation after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) decreases the rate of delayed bleeding; however, it cannot prevent bleeding completely, and delayed bleeding may occur from non-exposed vessels that were not detected immediately after ESD or where prophylactic coagulation was inadequate. Doppler monitoring systems which can evaluate vascular flow have been recently introduced in the endoscopic field. We developed the Doppler probe method (DOP) using the novel system and conducted a comparative study. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected at a tertiary hospital between January 2017 and May 2021. Patients who underwent DOP were matched to those who did not (no-DOP, 1:3 ratio). After successful ESD, DOP was performed, and coagulation was additionally performed as necessary. The primary outcome was the rate of 30-day delayed bleeding. RESULTS: Fifty DOP patients were matched to 151 no-DOP patients. Although the differences were not statistically significant, the DOP group had lower rates of delayed bleeding (2.0% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.11; risk differences, 6.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-12.1%), readmission due to bleeding (0% vs. 2.7%), and blood transfusion (2.0% vs. 3.3%) compared to the no-DOP group. In the whole study population (n = 245), the log-rank test revealed that DOP was correlated to a lower incidence of delayed bleeding (P = 0.036). The Cox regression model revealed a marginally significant effect on delayed bleeding (hazard ratio = 0.17, 95% CI 0.022-1.26, P = 0.082). No procedure-related adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION: DOP is safe and may reduce delayed bleeding; however, further prospective studies are required to validate our findings.

Evaluation and management of esophageal varices by through-the-scope endoscopic Doppler probe method.

OBJECTIVES: Objective assessments of esophageal varices (EVs) are inadequate. The recurrence of variceal bleeding after endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is associated with residual blood flow underlying EVL or incomplete treatment of a perforating vein by EVL. We aimed to assess our novel through-the-scope endoscopic Doppler probe method (DOP) for the evaluation and management of EVs. METHODS: This study included 20 patients (54 varices) with a history of esophageal variceal rupture from June 2019 to May 2021 who underwent DOP at a tertiary hospital. Variceal velocities were compared based on the size and endoscopic variceal findings. Additionally, we performed EVL assisted by DOP (EVL + DOP) in nine patients. RESULTS: Doppler imaging of EVs was observed in all 20 patients. The velocity of varices was significantly higher in EVs with a larger size, greater form, blue color, and red color sign positive. Perforating veins connecting to the EVs were identified in six out of nine patients who underwent EVL + DOP. Eight out of nine patients underwent repeat EVL. Repeat EVL was performed until the variceal velocity reached absent. No recurrence of variceal bleeding occurred during the follow-up period (mean 8.7 ± 3.2 months). No adverse events associated with DOP were observed. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of EVs using DOP is feasible and accurate. EV velocities are related to the variceal size, form, blue color, and red color sign. EVL + DOP may be a more reliable treatment for EVs. Further large-scale, long-term comparative studies are warranted.

Efficacy and Safety of Early vs Elective Colonoscopy for Acute Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: We performed a large, multicenter, randomized controlled trial to determine the efficacy and safety of early colonoscopy on outcomes of patients with acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB). METHODS: We performed an open-label study at 15 hospitals in Japan of 170 patients with ALGIB randomly assigned (1:1) to groups that underwent early colonoscopy (within 24 hours of initial visit to the hospital) or elective colonoscopy (24-96 hours after hospital admission). The primary outcome was identification of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). Secondary outcomes were rebleeding within 30 days, endoscopic treatment success, need for transfusion, length of stay, thrombotic events within 30 days, death within 30 days, and adverse events. RESULTS: SRH were identified in 17 of 79 patients (21.5%) in the early colonoscopy group vs 17 of 80 patients (21.3%) in the elective colonoscopy group (difference, 0.3; 95% confidence interval, -12.5 to 13.0; P = .967). Rebleeding within 30 days of hospital admission occurred in 15.3% of patients in the early colonoscopy group and 6.7% of patients in the elective colonoscopy group (difference, 8.6; 95% confidence interval, -1.4 to 18.7); there were no significant differences between groups in successful endoscopic treatment rate, transfusion rate, length of stay, thrombotic events, or death within 30 days. The adverse event of hemorrhagic shock occurred during bowel preparation in no patient in the early group vs 2 patients (2.5%) in the elective colonoscopy group. CONCLUSIONS: In a randomized controlled study, we found that colonoscopy within 24 hours after hospital admission did not increase SRH or reduce rebleeding compared with colonoscopy at 24-96 hours in patients with ALGIB. ClinicalTrials.gov, Numbers: UMIN000021129 and NCT03098173.

Safety and Effectiveness of Endoscopic Band Ligation for Colonic Diverticular Bleeding in Elderly Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Colonic diverticulosis increases with age, leading to a higher risk of colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) in the elderly. As life expectancy continues to increase, the need for endoscopic hemostasis for CDB in the elderly can also be expected to increase. However, there have been no reports to date on the feasibility of endoscopic hemostasis for elderly CDB patients. Several recent studies have addressed the effectiveness of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) for CDB. In this study, we evaluate the safety and effectiveness of EBL in elderly CDB patients compared to younger CDB patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of consecutive patients treated with EBL for the first time at a tertiary referral center between March 2011 and November 2017. Patients were grouped according to age into those at least 75 years old (the Elderly) and those <75 years old (the Nonelderly). Patient characteristics, technical success, and complications were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: EBL was performed in 153 patients during the study period (49 Elderly patients and 104 Nonelderly patients). Elderly patients were less likely to be male (p < 0.001) and had lower hemoglobin levels on admission (p < 0.001). Bleeding on the right side of the splenic flexure was observed more frequently in the Nonelderly (p = 0.002). Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and use of antithrombotic agents were significantly higher in the Elderly (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Active bleeding tended to be observed more frequently in the Elderly (p = 0.054), while the difference was not significant. There were no significant differences in the shock index, procedure time, or units of packed red blood cells transfused between the 2 groups. No significant differences in the technical success rate (97.1 vs. 98%, p = 0.76), early rebleeding rate (10.2 vs. 14.4%, p = 0.47), or other complications (2 vs. 1%, p = 0.58) were observed. Perforation and abscess formation were not observed in either group. Female gender, left-sidedness, higher CCI, and lower hemoglobin level were all significantly more frequently observed in the Elderly on multiple logistic regression analysis. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: EBL may be similarly safe and effective for the treatment of CDB in the elderly as in the nonelderly.

Effectiveness of risk scoring systems in predicting endoscopic treatment in colonic diverticular bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The identification of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) in colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) enables an endoscopic treatment and can improve the clinical outcome. However, SRH identification rate remains low. This study aims to investigate whether NOBLADS and Strate scoring systems are useful for predicting SRH identification rate of CDB pre-procedurally via colonoscopy. METHODS: In this single-center retrospective observational study, 302 patients who experienced their first episode of CDB from April 2008 to March 2018 were included. Patients were classified into SRH-positive and SRH-negative groups. The primary outcome was SRH identification rate. The secondary outcomes were active bleeding in SRH and early rebleeding rates. The usefulness of the NOBLADS and Strate scores as predicted values of SRH identification was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: There were 126 and 176 patients in the SRH-positive and SRH-negative groups, respectively. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for SRH identification using the NOBLADS score was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.80) and that using the Strate score was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.79). Active bleeding and early rebleeding rates increased according to each score. By setting the cut-off of the NOBLADS score to four points, treatment was possible in 70.2% (66/94) patients. Addition of extravasation at computed tomography to a NOBLADS score of ≧ 4 points allowed treatment of all patients (24/24). CONCLUSIONS: Severity scoring in acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding was effective for predicting SRH identification in CDB. We suggest that combination of these scorings and CT findings could offer a new therapeutic strategy.

Performance status is a predictive factor of dysphagia improvement after esophageal stenting in patients with malignant esophageal strictures and fistulas.

BACKGROUND: Malignant strictures and fistulas of the esophagus adversely affect quality of life (QOL) and prognosis, and stenting is considered a useful therapy for improving QOL. However, the predictive factors for improving dysphagia after esophageal stenting are unclear. This retrospective cohort study aimed to evaluate patients with esophageal malignant strictures and fistulas who underwent stenting and investigate the factors for dysphagia improvement after stenting. METHODS: Twenty-four patients with malignant esophageal strictures and fistulas were treated with a self-expandable metallic stent over a period of 5 years and 6 months. The main outcome was improvement in the dysphagia score. We divided the patients into dysphagia improved and non-improved groups after esophageal stenting. Sex, age, cause of stenting (primary or non-primary esophageal cancers), prior treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiation, type of esophageal stents (covered or non-covered), dysphagia score before stenting, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of the patients before stenting were evaluated. Student's t test and Fisher's exact test were used for continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Factors with a P value < 0.2, age, and sex were included and evaluated using a multiple logistic regression model. Statistical significance was defined as a P value < 0.05. RESULTS: Stent placements succeeded in all cases without fatal complications. The dysphagia score improved in 15 patients. Twelve patients had primary lesions, and another 12 had non-primary lesions. The reasons for stenting were malignant strictures in 20 patients and esophageal fistulas in 4 patients. There were no significant differences in any factors, except PS before stenting (P = 0.003), between the improved and non-improved groups. Multiple logistic regression analysis results demonstrated that improvement in the dysphagia score was significantly associated with PS before stenting (adjusted odds ratio = 0.035, 95% CI 0.003-0.44, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal stenting is safe and effective in patients with malignant esophageal strictures and fistulas. PS is an independent factor for dysphagia improvement after stenting.

Risk factors of early rebleeding in the endoscopic management of colonic diverticular bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The risk factors for early rebleeding following the management of colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) are unclear. This study aimed to determine the risk factors for early rebleeding following initial colonoscopy. METHODS: Overall, 370 patients with CDB were divided as having presumptive (229) or definite CDB with stigmata of recent hemorrhage (141) on the basis of initial colonoscopy. Definite CDB cases were treated by either endoscopic clipping (EC) or endoscopic band ligation (EBL) as a first-line treatment. Time-to-event analysis for early rebleeding was performed by Kaplan-Meier methods with log-rank test between the three groups (presumptive, EC, and EBL). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify risk factors for early rebleeding. RESULTS: There were 38 and 103 patients in the EC and EBL groups, respectively. Early rebleeding developed in 61 cases (16.5%). The cumulative incidence rates of early rebleeding at 1, 5, and 30 days were 7.7%, 16.4%, and 17.9% in the presumptive group; 1.9%, 7.0%, and 9.5% in the EBL group; and 2.6%, 34.9%, and 37.7% in the EC group, respectively (log-rank test, P = 0.00059). Moreover, 90.2% of early rebleeding occurred within 5 days. Adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was marginally lower in the presumptive group (HR = 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.01; P = 0.052) and significantly lower in the EBL-treated group than in the EC group (HR = 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.09-0.50; P = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: Most early rebleeding occurred within 5 days after initial colonoscopy. EC was less effective than EBL in terms of early rebleeding.