Varices: Esophageal, Gastric, and Rectal.

Gastrointestinal varices are associated with cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Variceal hemorrhage is a substantial cause of morbidity and mortality, with esophageal and gastric varices the most common source and rectal varices a much less common cause of severe gastrointestinal bleeding. The goals of managing variceal hemorrhage are control of active bleeding and prevention of rebleeding. This article focuses on reviewing the current management strategies, including optimal medical, endoscopic, and angiographic interventions and their clinical outcomes to achieve these goals. Evidence based discussion is used with current references as much as possible.

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).

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.

Capsule endoscopy is not as accurate as esophagogastroduodenoscopy in screening cirrhotic patients for varices.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is the standard technique for screening cirrhotic patients for high-risk varices and other significant upper gastrointestinal lesions (HRVLs). We investigated whether esophageal capsule endoscopy (ECE) is as convenient and accurate as EGD for the detection of HRVLs. METHODS: We analyzed data from 65 cirrhotic patients without prior upper gastrointestinal bleeding who were examined for varices and HRVLs by ECE and EGD (both procedures were performed on the same day). EGD was performed by 2 physicians (75% of patients were unsedated) who used standard grading for esophageal and gastric varices, portal hypertensive gastropathy, and HRVLs. Coded capsule tracings were read by 2 investigators, blinded to the EGD findings, using standard grading. RESULTS: The median procedure time for EGD (with or without biopsy collection) was 3 minutes, compared with 20 minutes for ECE. The overall accuracy for diagnosis of esophageal varices was 63.2% ± 5.9%; for detection of esophageal varices red marks was 68.8% ± 5.4%; and for diagnosis of other HRVLs was 51.5% ± 4.2%. The interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of esophageal varices was 90.8%; in the detection of esophageal varices red marks was 86.2%; and in the diagnosis of other HRVLs was 7.3%. CONCLUSIONS: ECE is not as accurate as EGD in the diagnosis of esophageal varices and red markings or in grading esophageal varices. Moreover, ECE had poor accuracy in grading portal hypertensive gastropathy and detecting ulcers, gastric varices, and other significant upper gastrointestinal lesions. It took significantly longer to perform ECE and interpret the results than for EGD. These findings do not support ECE as a preferred tool for screening esophageal varices and HRVLs.

Endoscopic therapy for severe ulcer bleeding.

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding secondary to ulcer disease occurs commonly and results in significant patient morbidity and medical expense. After initial resuscitation, carefully performed endoscopy provides an accurate diagnosis of the source of the UGI hemorrhage and can reliably identify those high-risk subgroups that may benefit most from endoscopic hemostasis. Effective endoscopic hemostasis of ulcer bleeding can significantly improve outcomes by reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirement, and need for surgery, as well as reduce the cost of medical care. This article discusses the important aspects of the diagnosis and treatment of bleeding from ulcers, with a focus on endoscopic therapy.

Ischemic colitis as a cause of severe hematochezia: risk factors and outcomes compared with other colon diagnoses.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors and outcomes of severe hematochezia from ischemic colitis compared with other colonic diagnoses have not been well studied. OBJECTIVE: Our purposes were (1) to compare demographics and outcomes of patients hospitalized with severe hematochezia from ischemic colitis compared with other colonic diagnoses, (2) to compare inpatient and outpatient start of bleeding from ischemic colitis, and (3) to describe potential risk factors. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary referral academic centers. PATIENTS: Patients referred for gastroenterology consultation for severe hematochezia. INTERVENTIONS: Colonoscopic therapy was provided as indicated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Rebleeding, surgery, and length of hospital stay after colonoscopy. RESULTS: Of 550 patients in the past 12 years with severe hematochezia from colonic sources, the cause in 65 patients (11.8%) was ischemia. Ischemic colitis was found more often in females, in patients taking anticoagulant agents, in patients with severe lung disease, those with higher creatinine levels, those with higher glucose levels, and those with more fresh frozen plasma transfusions. Five patients with focal lesions had colonoscopic hemostasis. Major 30-day outcomes of ischemic colitis patients were significantly worse than patients with other colonic diagnoses. Patients with inpatient (vs outpatient) ischemic colitis had significantly more and more severe comorbidities at baseline and significantly higher rates of rebleeding, surgery, and more days spent in hospital and in the intensive care unit. LIMITATIONS: Two-center study. CONCLUSIONS: Major 30-day outcomes in ischemic colitis patients were significantly worse than in patients with other colonic diagnoses. Comparing outpatient and inpatient start of ischemic colitis, inpatients had significantly worse outcomes.

Gastric acid inhibition in the treatment of peptic ulcer hemorrhage.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding from peptic ulcer disease is a common clinical event, resulting in considerable patient morbidity and significant health care costs. Inhibiting gastric acid secretion is a key component in improving clinical outcomes, including reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirements, and surgery. Raising intragastric pH promotes clot stability and reduces the influences of gastric acid and pepsin. Patients with high-risk stigmata for ulcer bleeding (arterial bleeding, nonbleeding visible vessels, and adherent clots) benefit significantly from and should receive high-dose intravenous proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) after successful endoscopic hemostasis. For patients with low-risk stigmata (flat spots or clean ulcer base), oral PPI therapy alone is sufficient. For oozing bleeding (an intermediate risk finding), successful endoscopic hemostasis and oral PPI are recommended. Using intravenous PPIs before endoscopy appears to reduce the frequency of finding high-risk stigmata on later endoscopy, but has not been shown to improve clinical outcomes. High-dose oral PPIs may be as effective as intravenous infusion in achieving positive clinical outcomes, but this has not been documented by randomized studies and its cost-effectiveness is unclear.

Management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to ulcer disease is common and results in substantial patient morbidity and medical expense. After initial resuscitation to stabilize the patient, carefully performed endoscopy provides an accurate diagnosis and identifies high-risk ulcer patients who are likely to rebleed with medical therapy alone and will benefit most from endoscopic hemostasis. For patients with major stigmata of ulcer hemorrhage--active arterial bleeding, nonbleeding visible vessel, and adherent clot--combination therapy with epinephrine injection and either thermal coagulation (multipolar or heater probe) or endoclips is recommended. High-dose intravenous proton pump inhibitors are recommended as concomitant therapy after successful endoscopic hemostasis. Patients with minor stigmata or clean-based ulcers will not benefit from endoscopic treatment and should receive high-dose oral proton pump inhibitor therapy. Effective medical and endoscopic management of ulcer hemorrhage can significantly improve outcomes and decrease the cost of medical care by reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirements, and the need for surgery.

The short-term medical management of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding occurs frequently and results in substantial patient morbidity, mortality and medical expense. After initial resuscitation to stabilize the patient, carefully performed endoscopy provides an accurate diagnosis and can identify high-risk subgroups in ulcer patients who are likely to rebleed with medical therapy alone and would benefit most from endoscopic haemostasis. Several different pharmacological therapies have been used for patients with bleeding ulcers, including intravenous histamine H(2)-receptor antagonists, proton pump inhibitors, somatostatin and octreotide, and tranexamic acid. The results of several studies and meta-analyses favour high-dose, intravenous proton pump inhibitors, such as omeprazole or pantoprazole, after successful endoscopic haemostasis.For patients with ulcer bleeding and low-risk endoscopic stigmata, high-dose oral proton pump inhibitor therapy is suggested. Medical management with proton pump inhibitors is not a substitute for appropriate endoscopic therapy for patients with UGI bleeding and high-risk ulcer stigmata.

Endoscopic treatment of ulcer bleeding.

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding secondary to ulcer disease occurs commonly and results in significant patient morbidity and medical expense. After initial resuscitation, carefully performed endoscopy provides an accurate diagnosis of the source of the UGI hemorrhage and can reliably identify those high-risk subgroups that may benefit most from endoscopic hemostasis. Large-channel therapeutic endoscopes are recommended. Endoscopists should be very experienced in management of patients with UGI hemorrhage, including the use of various hemostatic devices. For patients with major stigmata of ulcer hemorrhage--active arterial bleeding, nonbleeding visible vessel, and adherent clot--combination therapy with epinephrine injection and either thermal coaptive coagulation (with multipolar or heater probe) or endoclips is recommended. High-dose intravenous proton-pump inhibitors are recommended as concomitant therapy with endoscopic hemostasis of major stigmata. Patients with minor stigmata or clean-based ulcers will not benefit from endoscopic therapy and should be triaged to less intensive care and be considered for early discharge. Effective endoscopic hemostasis of ulcer bleeding can significantly improve outcomes by reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirement, and need for surgery, as well as reduce cost of medical care.

Small Bowel Bleeding.

The management of patients with small bowel bleeding remains a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. In most gastrointestinal bleeding episodes, the source of hemorrhage is localized to either the upper gastrointestinal tract or colon; however, in about 5% of cases, upper endoscopy and colonoscopy are nondiagnostic, and the small intestine is the site of bleeding. Patients with suspected small bowel source of bleeding may present with either occult blood loss or recurrent overt gastrointestinal hemorrhage requiring frequent blood transfusions and hospitalizations. Knowing the etiology and site of hemorrhage is essential prior to initiating appropriate therapy. The most common causes of small bowel bleeding are vascular ectasia, tumors, ulcerative diseases, and Meckel's diverticula. For patients with severe obscure bleeding, push enteroscopy with a 220- to 250-cm enteroscope is strongly recommended. This procedure provides not only a thorough examination for diagnosis, but also allows for biopsy, tattooing, and hemostasis of lesions. If enteroscopy is nondiagnostic, capsule endoscopy is recommended. A diagnostic capsule endoscopy will direct appropriate medical, endoscopic, or surgical intervention, depending on whether the lesion is single or multiple, and whether the patient is a surgical candidate for intraoperative enteroscopy. Intraoperative enteroscopy should be strongly considered in patients with recurrent bleeding and a nondiagnostic evaluation. Laparoscopy and intraoperative enteroscopy is highly recommended in young patients (< 50 years of age) because there is an increased frequency of small bowel tumors and Meckel's diverticulum which are amenable to surgical therapy.

Lansoprazole in the treatment of functional dyspepsia: two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of proton pump inhibitor therapy for symptom resolution in patients with functional dyspepsia remains controversial. This study was designed to compare the efficacy of lansoprazole with placebo in relieving upper abdominal discomfort in patients with functional dyspepsia. METHODS: We enrolled 921 patients with functional dyspepsia (defined as persistent or recurrent upper abdominal discomfort during the prior 3 months) and moderate upper abdominal discomfort on at least 30% of screening days; none of the patients had predominant symptoms suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux or endoscopic evidence of erosive or ulcerative esophagitis, or gastric or duodenal ulcer or erosion. Patients were assigned randomly to receive lansoprazole 15 mg (n = 305), lansoprazole 30 mg (n = 308), or placebo (n = 308) daily for 8 weeks. Patients recorded the frequency and severity of symptoms in daily diaries. RESULTS: At week 8, significantly (P <0.001) greater mean reductions in the percentage of days with upper abdominal discomfort were reported in patients treated with lansoprazole 15 mg (35%) or 30 mg (34%) compared with those treated with placebo (19%). Similarly, more patients treated with lansoprazole 15 mg (44%) or 30 mg (44%) reported complete symptom resolution (defined as no episodes of upper abdominal discomfort in the 3 days before the study visit) at 8 weeks than did placebo-treated patients (29%, P <0.001). Improvement of upper abdominal discomfort, however, was seen only in patients who had at least some symptoms of heartburn at enrollment. CONCLUSION: Lansoprazole, at a daily dose of 15 mg or 30 mg, is significantly better than placebo in reducing symptoms of persistent or recurrent upper abdominal discomfort accompanied by at least some symptoms of heartburn.

Major stigmata of recent hemorrhage on rectal ulcers in patients with severe hematochezia: Endoscopic diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of hematochezia caused by rectal ulcers is poorly described. METHODS: Consecutive patients hospitalized with severe hematochezia underwent urgent colonoscopy after purge. Those with rectal ulcers were divided into 2 groups based on the absence or presence of major stigmata of recent hemorrhage: active bleeding, visible vessel, or adherent clot. Major stigmata were treated with epinephrine injection and coagulation with a bipolar probe. The primary outcome endpoint was recurrent bleeding within 4 weeks of diagnosis. RESULTS: Rectal ulcers were identified in 23 of 285 (8%) patients. Twelve of 23 patients had major stigmata; these patients had an arithmetically greater decrease in hematocrit and required more blood transfusions than patients without major stigmata. Initial hemostasis was achieved in all, but bleeding recurred in 5 with stigmata. Four patients died of comorbid conditions. There was no recurrent bleeding or death in those without stigmata. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with rectal ulcers harboring major stigmata are at high risk for severe bleeding, recurrent bleeding, and death. For ulcers with major stigmata, endoscopic hemostasis is feasible but rates of recurrent bleeding are high.

Randomized trial of medical or endoscopic therapy to prevent recurrent ulcer hemorrhage in patients with adherent clots.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Treatment of high-risk patients with nonbleeding adherent clots on ulcers is controversial. In a previous randomized trial, there was no benefit to endoscopic therapies compared with medical therapy for prevention of ulcer rebleeding. Our purpose was to test the hypothesis that patients treated with combination endoscopic therapy would have significantly lower rebleeding rates than those treated with medical therapy. METHODS: In this randomized, controlled trial, 32 high-risk patients with severe ulcer hemorrhage and nonbleeding adherent clots resistant to target irrigation were randomized to medical therapy or to combination endoscopic therapy (with epinephrine injection, shaving down the clot with cold guillotining, and bipolar coagulation on the underlying stigmata). Physicians blinded to the endoscopic therapy managed all patients. RESULTS: Patients were similar at study entry, except for older age in the medical group and lower platelet count in the endoscopic group. By hospital discharge, significantly more medically treated patients (6/17; 35.3%) than endoscopically treated patients (0/15; 0%) rebled (P = 0.011). There were no complications of endoscopic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Combination endoscopic therapy of nonbleeding adherent clots significantly reduced early ulcer rebleeding rates in high-risk patients compared with medical therapy alone. This endoscopic treatment was safe.

Recent advances in the endoscopic diagnosis and therapy of upper gastrointestinal, small intestinal, and colonic bleeding.

Endoscopy has become the first and primary diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the management of patients with severe gastrointestinal bleeding. Panendoscopy, push enteroscopy, and colonoscopy provide the diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic elements to improve patient outcomes and to reduce morbidity and mortality from severe GI hemorrhage. Recent improvements in endoscopic hemostatic techniques and in imaging modalities using wireless capsule endoscopy suggest that diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy will be even more important in determining patient outcomes in the future.