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.

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.

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.