Prevalence, management, and outcomes of patients with coagulopathy after acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Coagulopathy after major hemorrhage has been found to be an independent risk factor for mortality after traumatic bleeding. It is unclear whether similar associations are present in other causes of major hemorrhage. We describe the prevalence, use of plasma, and outcomes of patients with coagulopathy after acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This study was a multicenter UK national audit. Data were collected prospectively on consecutive admissions with upper gastrointestinal bleeding over a 2-month period to 212 UK hospitals. Coagulopathy was defined as an international normalized ratio (INR) of at least 1.5. Logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between coagulopathy and patient-related outcome measures of mortality, rebleeding, and need for surgery and/or radiologic intervention. RESULTS: A total of 4478 patients were included in the study. Coagulopathy was present in 16.4% (444/2709) of patients in whom an INR was recorded. Patients with coagulopathy were more likely to present with hemodynamic shock (45% vs. 36%), have a higher clinical Rockall score (4 vs. 2), receive red blood cell transfusion (79% vs. 48%) and have high-risk stigmata of hemorrhage at endoscopy (34% vs. 25%). After adjustment for confounders the presence of a coagulopathy was associated with a fivefold increased in the odds of mortality (odds ratio, 5.63; 95% confidence interval, 3.09-10.27; p < 0.001). Only 35% of patients with coagulopathy received fresh-frozen plasma transfusion. CONCLUSIONS: Coagulopathy was prevalent in 16% of patients after NVUGIB and independently associated with more than a fivefold increase in the odds of in-hospital mortality. Wide variation in plasma use exists indicates clinical uncertainty regarding optimal practice.

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the UK: patient characteristics, diagnoses and outcomes in the 2007 UK audit.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the patient characteristics, diagnoses and clinical outcomes of patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) in the 2007 UK Audit. DESIGN: Multi-centre survey. SETTING: All UK hospitals admitting patients with AUGIB. PARTICIPANTS: All adults (>16 years) presenting in or to UK hospitals with AUGIB between 1 May and 30 June 2007. RESULTS: Data on 6750 patients (median age 68 years) was collected from 208 participating hospitals. New admissions (n=5550) were younger (median age 65 years) than inpatients (n=1107, median age 71 years), with less co-morbidity (any co-morbidity 46% vs 71%, respectively). At presentation 9% (599/6750) had known cirrhosis, 26% a history of alcohol excess, 11% were taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and 28% aspirin. Peptic ulcer disease accounted for 36% of AUGIB and bleeding varices 11%. In 13% there was evidence of further bleeding after the first endoscopy. 1.9% underwent surgery and 1.2% interventional radiology for AUGIB. Median length of stay was 5 days. Overall mortality in hospital was 10% (675/6750, 95% CI 9.3 to 10.7), 7% in new admissions and 26% among inpatients. Mortality was highest in those with variceal bleeding (15%) and with malignancy (17%). CONCLUSIONS: AUGIB continues to result in substantial mortality although it appears to be lower than in 1993. Mortality is particularly high among inpatients and those bleeding from varices or upper gastrointestinal malignancy. Surgical or radiological interventions are little used currently.

Use of endoscopy for management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the UK: results of a nationwide audit.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the use of endoscopy in the UK for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) and compare with published standards. To assess the organisation of endoscopy services for AUGIB in the UK. To examine the relationship between outcomes and out of hours (OOH) service provision. DESIGN: Multi-centre cross sectional clinical audit. SETTING: All UK hospitals accepting admissions with AUGIB. PATIENTS: All adults (>or=16 yrs) presenting with AUGIB between 1st May and 30th June 2007. DATA: Collection A custom designed web-based reporting tool was used to collect data on patient characteristics, comorbidity and haemodynamic status at presentation to calculate the Rockall score, use and timing of endoscopy, treatment including endoscopic, rebleeding and in-hospital mortality. A mailed questionnaire was used to collect data on facilities and service organisation. RESULTS: Data on 6750 patients (median age 68 years) were analysed from 208 hospitals. 74% underwent inpatient endoscopy; of these 50% took place within 24 h of presentation, 82% during normal working hours and 3% between midnight and 8 am. Of patients deemed high-risk (pre-endoscopy Rockall score >or=5) only 55% were endoscoped within 24 h and 14% waited >or=72 h for endoscopy. Lesions with a high risk of rebleeding were present in 28% of patients of whom 74% received endoscopic therapy. Further bleeding was evident in 13% and mortality in those endoscoped was 7.4% (95% CI 6.7% to 8.1%). In 52% of hospitals a consultant led out of hours (OOH) endoscopy rota existed; in these hospitals 20% of first endoscopies were performed OOH compared with 13% in those with no OOH rota and endoscopic therapy was more likely to be administered (25% vs 21% in hospitals with no OOH rota). The risk adjusted mortality ratio was higher (1.21, p=0.10, (95%CI 0.96 to 1.51)) in hospitals without such rotas. CONCLUSIONS: This audit has found continuing delays in performing endoscopy after AUGIB and underutilisation of standard endoscopic therapy particularly for variceal bleeding. In hospitals with a formal OOH endoscopy rota patients received earlier endoscopy, were more likely to receive endoscopic therapy and may have a lower mortality.

Endoscopists attitudes on the publication of "quality" data for endoscopic procedures: a cross-sectional survey.

BACKGROUND: Whilst the public now have access to mortality & morbidity data for cardiothoracic surgeons, such "quality" data for endoscopy are not generally available. We studied endoscopists' attitudes to and the practicality of this data being published. METHODS: We sent a questionnaire to all consultant gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons, physicians and medical GI specialist registrars in the Northern region who currently perform GI endoscopic procedures (n = 132). We recorded endoscopist demographics, experience and current data collection practice. We also assessed the acceptability and utility of nine items describing endoscopic "quality" (e.g. mortality, complication & completion rates). RESULTS: 103 (78%) doctors responded of whom 79 were consultants (77%). 61 (59%) respondents were physicians. 77 (75%) collect any "quality" data. The most frequently collected item was colonoscopic completion rate. Data were most commonly collected for appraisal, audit or clinical governance. The majority of doctors (54%) kept these data only available to themselves, and just one allowed the public to access this. The most acceptable data item was annual number of endoscopies and the least was crude upper GI bleeding mortality. Surgeons rated information less acceptable and less useful than physicians. Acceptability and utility scores were not related to gender, length of experience or current activity levels. Only two respondents thought all items totally unacceptable and useless. CONCLUSION: The majority of endoscopists currently collect "quality" data for their practice although these are not widely available. The endoscopists in this study consider the publication of their outcome data to be "fairly unacceptable/not very useful" to "neutral" (score 2-3). If these data were made available to patients, consideration must be given to both its value and its acceptability.

Critical intestinal ischaemia in a patient with patent mesenteric vasculature.

We present a case of a 62-year-old man with known coeliac disease who was admitted for investigation of abdominal pain and weight loss. He underwent multiple biochemical, haematological, radiological and endoscopic investigations (which were all normal) and also had a normal laparoscopy. Abdominal computerized tomography angiography, however, suggested significant mesenteric stenosis. Mesenteric angiography confirmed superior mesenteric artery stenosis and reproduced the patient's abdominal pain when the catheter crossed the lesion. Balloon angioplasty successfully dilated the stenosis, and since then the patient has gained 19 kg in weight (returning his body mass index from 17 to 23) and has been symptom free. Symptomatic single vessel mesenteric ischaemia (other than coeliac artery stenosis in median arcuate syndrome) is not previously well described. The symptom reproduction on catheterization highlights how useful angiography can be in diagnosis of disease significance. Symptom resolution after angioplasty demonstrated clearly how even single vessel disease can cause significant compromise to the mesenteric circulation.