Outcomes of Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients With Cirrhosis: A National Analysis.

GOALS: We sought to evaluate hospital outcomes of cirrhosis patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). BACKGROUND: NVUGIB is common in patients with cirrhosis. However, national outcome studies of these patients are lacking. STUDY: We utilized the 2014 Nationwide Readmission Database to evaluate NVUGIB in patients with cirrhosis, further stratified as no cirrhosis (NC), compensated cirrhosis (CC), or decompensated cirrhosis (DC). Validated International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes captured diagnoses and interventions. Outcomes included 30-day readmission rates, index admission mortality rates, health care utilization, and predictors of readmission and mortality using multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 13,701 patients with cirrhosis were admitted with NVUGIB. The 30-day readmission rate was 20.8%. Patients with CC were more likely to undergo an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) within 1 calendar day of admission (74.1%) than patients with DC (67.9%) or NC (69.4%). Patients with DC had longer hospitalizations (4.1 d) and higher costs of care ($11,834). The index admission mortality rate was higher in patients with DC (6.2%) than in patients with CC (1.7%, P <0.001) or NC (1.4%, P <0.001). Predictors of 30-day readmission included performing an EGD >1 calendar day from admission (OR: 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.46) and DC (OR: 1.78; 95% CI, 1.54 to 2.06). DC was a predictor of index admission mortality (OR: 3.68; 95% CI, 2.67 to 5.05). CONCLUSIONS: NVUGIB among patients with DC is associated with higher readmission rates, mortality rates, and health care utilization compared with patients with CC and NC. Early EGD is a modifiable variable associated with reduced readmission rates. Early identification of high-risk patients and adherence to guidelines may improve clinical outcomes.

Postoperative Hospital Outcomes of Elective Surgery for Nonmalignant Colorectal Polyps: Does the Burden Justify the Indication?

INTRODUCTION: Despite the increasing availability of advanced endoscopic resections and its favorable safety profile, surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps has continually increased. We sought to evaluate readmission rates and outcomes of elective surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps on a national level in the United States. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2010-2014 [International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision] and 2016-2018 [International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision]) was used to identify all adult subjects (age ≥18 years) who underwent elective surgical resection of nonmalignant colorectal polyps. Multivariable analyses were performed for predictors of postoperative morbidity and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Elective surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps was performed in 108,468 subjects from 2010 to 2014 and in 54,956 subjects from 2016 to 2018, most of whom were laparoscopic. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day readmission rates were 20.5% and 8.5% from 2010 to 2014, and 13.0% and 7.6% from 2016 to 2018, respectively. Index admission mortality rates were 0.3-0.4%; mortality rates were higher in those with postoperative morbidity. Multivariable analyses revealed that male sex, ≥3 comorbidities, insurance status, and open surgery predicted an increased risk of both postoperative morbidity and 30-day readmission. In addition, postoperative morbidity (2010-2014 [odds ratio 1.58; 95% confidence interval 1.44-1.74] and 2016-2018 [odds ratio 1.55; 95% confidence interval 1.37-1.75]) predicted early readmission. DISCUSSION: In this investigation of national practices, elective surgery for nonmalignant colorectal polyps remains common. There is considerable risk of adverse postoperative outcomes, which highlights the importance of increasing awareness of the range of endoscopic resections and referring subjects to expert endoscopy centers.

Physical activity during video capsule endoscopy correlates with shorter bowel transit time.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM: Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is limited by reliance on bowel motility for propulsion, and lack of physical activity has been proposed as a cause of incomplete studies. Our aim was to prospectively investigate the association between physical activity and VCE bowel transit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ambulatory outpatients receiving VCE were eligible for the study. A pedometer was attached at the time of VCE ingestion and step count was recorded at the end of the procedure. VCE completion was assessed by logistic regression models, which included step count (500 steps as one unit). Total transit time was analyzed by Cox proportional hazards models. The hazard ratios (HR) with 95 % confidence interval (CI) indicated the "hazard" of completion, such that HRs > 1 indicated a reduced transit time. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were included. VCE was completed in 93 patients (93 %). The median step count was 2782 steps. Step count was not significantly associated with VCE completion (odds ratio 1.45, 95 %CI 0.84, 2.49). Pedometer step count was significantly associated with shorter total, gastric, and small-bowel transit times (HR 1.09, 95 %CI 1.03, 1.16; HR 1.05, 95 %CI 1.00, 1.11; HR 1.07, 95 %CI 1.01, 1.14, respectively). Higher body mass index (BMI) was significantly associated with VCE completion (HR 1.87, 95 %CI 1.18, 2.97) and shorter bowel transit times (HR 1.05, 95 %CI 1.02, 1.08). CONCLUSIONS: Increased physical activity during outpatient VCE was associated with shorter bowel transit times but not with study completion. In addition, BMI was a previously unreported clinical characteristic associated with VCE completion and should be included as a variable of interest in future studies.

Video capsule endoscopy completion and total transit times are similar with oral or endoscopic delivery.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Video capsule endoscopy (VCE) is limited by incomplete procedures. There are also contraindications to the standard ingestion of the capsule that require endoscopic placement. Our aim was to compare the study completion rate of VCE after oral ingestion and endoscopic deployment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a review of all VCE from April 2010 through March 2013. Inpatient and outpatient cohorts grouped by the method of capsule delivery were formed and compared. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was utilized adjusting for variables with a P value ≤ 0.1 in group comparisons. Log-rank analysis was used to compare transit times. RESULTS: A total of 687 VCE were performed, including 316 inpatient (36 endoscopic deployment, 280 oral ingestion) and 371 outpatient (20 endoscopic deployment, 351 oral ingestion). For VCE on hospitalized patients, the completion rates were similar after endoscopic deployment and oral ingestion (72 % vs 73 %, P = 0.94). The completion rates were also similar for ambulatory patients (90 % vs 87 %, P = 0.69). There remained no difference after multivariable modeling for inpatients (P = 0.71) and outpatients (P = 0.46). Total transit times were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: VCE completion rates and total transit times are similar after oral or endoscopic deployment for both hospitalized and ambulatory patients. Endoscopic placement is effective in patients with contraindications to standard oral ingestion, but should otherwise be avoided to limit unnecessary procedural risks and costs.

Video capsule endoscopy after bariatric and gastric surgery: oral ingestion is associated with satisfactory completion rate.

GOALS: To investigate the outcomes of video capsule endoscopy (VCE) performed on patients after bariatric and gastric surgery with a focus on delivery method (oral ingestion or endoscopic placement). BACKGROUND: There is minimal published data regarding the use of VCE in patients after bariatric and gastric surgery and the optimal delivery method is unknown. METHODS: Retrospective case series of patients with bariatric or gastric surgery undergoing VCE in a tertiary care center over 3 years. Outcomes of interest were completion of the procedure and bowel transit times. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients met study criteria. They underwent 24 VCE in the study period, with 13/16 (81.3%; 95% CI, 54%-96%) completed to the colon after oral ingestion and 5/8 (62.5%; 95% CI, 24%-91%) completed after endoscopic deployment. The median gastric transit time after oral ingestion was <1 minute (IQR, <1 to 99). Median total transit time after oral ingestion was 291 minutes (IQR, 213 to 434) and after endoscopic deployment was 364 minutes (IQR, 233 to >440) (P=0.48). There were no instances of capsule retention. CONCLUSIONS: Oral ingestion of VCE resulted in a satisfactory completion rate with rapid gastric transit after bariatric and gastric surgery. There were no capsule retention events. Given this and the favorable risk and cost profile, oral ingestion should be favored over endoscopic placement in this patient population.