Women in Gastroenterology: What Is the Current Situation? Results of an Italian National Survey.

BACKGROUND: Many women grow up dreaming of becoming doctors, preferring specialties that allow more focus on time outside the hospital and on family life. Nowadays, specialties, like gastroenterology, have still a significant gender gap. METHODS: Based on this known discrepancy, a web-based questionnaire was designed by the Young Component of the Scientific Committee of the Federation of Italian Scientific Societies of Digestive Diseases 2023 (FISMAD) to examine the current situation of female gastroenterologists in Italy. The survey, designed specifically for this study, was sent by email to all female gastroenterologists and residents gastroenterologists, members of the three major Italian societies of Gastroenterology. RESULTS: A total of 423 female physicians responded to the survey: 325 (76.8%) had full-time employment, and only a few had an academic career (7.2%). The main occupations were outpatient clinics (n = 288, 68%) and diagnostic endoscopy (n = 289, 68.3%); only 175 (41.3%) performed interventional endoscopy. One hundred and forty-seven (34.7%) had the chance to attend a master in advanced or interventional endoscopy, while 133 (31.4%) faced disadvantages that enabled them to attend. Of the 244 (58%) who reported feeling underappreciated, 194 (79.5%) said it was due to gender bias. We found that women doctors considered themselves disadvantaged compared with men doctors due to career opportunities (n = 338), salary negotiations (n = 64), and training opportunities (n = 144). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, gastroenterology still has a long way to go before approaching greater gender parity.

The carbon cost of inappropriate endoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Digestive endoscopy is a resource-intensive activity with a conspicuous carbon footprint and an estimated rate of inappropriateness. However, the carbon costs of inappropriate endoscopic procedures still remain obscure. Here we evaluated the environmental impact of inappropriate endoscopic examinations. METHODS: We calculated the carbon cost of a standard endoscopic procedure (EGD and colonoscopy [CLS]), taking into account the items (eg, disposable materials, personal protective equipment) and energy required for the endoscopy procedure itself and the cleaning process. The rates of inappropriateness and the mortality cost of carbon (MCC) of endoscopic examinations in different scenarios were calculated. RESULTS: EGD and CLS presented a carbon cost of 5.43 kg and 6.71 kg of CO2, respectively. Different scenarios were evaluated, according to the number of endoscopic procedures performed in Italy per 1000 inhabitants and the reported data on their inappropriateness. The carbon cost of inappropriate EGD and CLS in Italy was 4133 CO2 metric tons per year (MCC, .93), ranging from 3527 to 4749, and equivalent to 1,760,446 L of gasoline consumed. Applying the same data to the European population, the estimated carbon footprint of inappropriate digestive endoscopy in Europe was 30,804 metric tons. CONCLUSIONS: The environmental impact of inappropriate endoscopic procedures in Europe is remarkable. These results highlight the need to adopt novel strategies aimed at reducing both the carbon footprint of digestive endoscopy and the rate of inappropriate procedures.

The interaction of patients' physical status and time to endoscopy on mortality risk in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A national prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The correct time to perform an upper endoscopy is decisive in acutely GI bleeding patients. However, patients' physical status may affect mortality. We speculated that the physical status and procedural time could be the principal factors accountable for death-risk. The primary aim was to verify the interaction between physical status and time to endoscopy on mortality; the secondary aim was to verify the interaction of the physical status and time to endoscopy on the length of stay (LOS). METHODS: Consecutive patients admitted to 50 Italian hospitals were included. Clinical and endoscopic data were recorded. A multiple logistic regression analysis was performed and the interaction of adjusted clinical physical status and time to endoscopy on mortality was calculated. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 3.190 patients. The time frames did not interfere with outcomes but influenced LOS. Conversely, the ASA score correlated with mortality, LOS, need for transfusions and rebleeding risk. CONCLUSION: Endoscopy time should be tailored to the patient's physical. In our experience, ASA 1-2-3 patients can be safely submitted to endoscopy to reduce the LOS; on the contrary, keen attention should be paid to ASA4 patients, following the 'not too early-not too late' rule (12-24 h from admission).

Defining Time in Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: When Should We Start the Clock?

INTRODUCTION: The execution of upper endoscopy at the proper time is key to correctly managing patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). Nonetheless, the definition of "time" for endoscopic examinations in UGIB patients is imprecise. The primary aim of this study was to verify whether the different definitions of "time" (i.e., the symptoms-to-endoscopy and presentation-to-endoscopy timeframes) impact mortality. The secondary purpose of this study was to evaluate the similarity between the two timeframes. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis was performed on a prospective multicenter cohort study, which included UGIB patients admitted to 50 Italian hospitals. We collected the timings from symptoms and presentation to endoscopy, together with other demographic, organizational and clinical data and outcomes. RESULTS: Out of the 3324 patients in the cohort, complete time data were available for 3166 patients. A significant difference of 9.2 h (p < 0.001) was found between the symptoms-to-endoscopy vs. presentation-to-endoscopy timeframes. The symptoms-to-endoscopy timeframe demonstrated (1) a different death risk profile and (2) a statistically significant improvement in the prediction of mortality risk compared to the presentation-to-endoscopy timeframe (p < 0.0002). The similarity between the two different timeframes was moderate (K = 0.42 ± 0.01; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The symptoms-to-endoscopy and presentation-to-endoscopy timeframes referred to different timings during the management of upper endoscopy in bleeding patients, with the former being more accurate in correctly identifying the mortality risk of these patients. We suggest that further studies be conducted to validate our observations, and, if confirmed, a different definition of time should be adopted in endoscopy.

An Italian prospective multicenter study on colonoscopy practice and quality: What has changed in the last 10 years.

BACKGROUND: A relevant number of adenomas can be missed during colonoscopy. AIMS: Assess the current status of colonoscopy procedures in Italian centers. METHODS: A prospective observational study involving 17 hospitals (34 endoscopists) included consecutive patients undergoing standard colonoscopy. In the first phase, endoscopists performed consecutive colonoscopies. In the second phase, retraining via an online learning platform was planned, while in the third phase data were collected analogously to phase 1. RESULTS: A total of 3,504 patients were enrolled. Overall, a BBPS score ≥6 was obtained in 95.6% of cases (94.8% and 96.9% in the pre- and post-training phases, respectively). 88.4% of colonoscopies had a withdrawal time ≥6 min (88.2% and 88.7% in the pre- and post-training phases). Median adenoma detection rate (ADR) was 39.1%, with no significant differences between the pre- and post-training phases (40.1% vs 36.9%; P = 0.83). In total, 81% of endoscopists had a ADR performance above the 25% threshold. CONCLUSION: High colonoscopy quality standards are achieved by the Italian hospitals involved. Quality improvement initiatives and repeated module-based colonoscopy-training have been promoted in Italy during the last decade, which appear to have had a significant impact on quality colonoscopy metrics together with the activation of colorectal cancer screening programs.

Comparison of assessment tools in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Which one at which time point?

BACKGROUND: Decisions on managing bleeders remain a critical issue due to the high death risk. The Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) correctly identifies low-risk patients but none of the existing scores precisely assess the high risk patients. AIMS: To evaluate bleeding scores' prognostic performances in predicting mortality risk. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: To compare the scores in low and high-risk patients and identify the "best performing cut-off" (if different from the standard one) in discriminating survivors from deceased. METHODS: prospective multicenter cohort study including consecutive UGIB patients admitted to 50 Italian hospitals. We collected information to calculate Rockall, PNED, AIMS65, GB, and ABC scores, together with demographic and clinical data, and outcomes. RESULTS: for low-risk patients, the GB and the ABC are the best performing scores; for high-risk patients, all scores showed weak results, with the PNED score having the higher PPV. Searching for the "best performing cut-off", we found different points that determined a relevant numerical gain in terms of patients correctly assessed. CONCLUSIONS: we suggest using the GBS and the ABC score at admission, while the PNED appears to be more useful for high-risk. We also suggest using a new decisional cut-offs that, if validated, may increase the accuracy of current scores.

Improved Survival for Patients With Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding While on Antithrombotic Therapy: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

GOALS: Aim of the study was to determine if patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) while on antithrombotic agents (ATs) are at higher risk for worse outcomes. BACKGROUND: ATs are risk factors of AUGIB, but their impact on clinical outcomes is uncertain. STUDY: Patients with AUGIB (nonvariceal, NV-AUGIB or variceal, V-AUGIB) in 50 Italian hospitals were prospectively enrolled from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015. Clinical data, laboratory tests, comorbidities, prognostic scores, received therapies, and outcomes (death, rebleeding, surgery/radiology, transfusions, length of hospitalization) were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 3324 patients (2764 NV-AUGIB, 83.2% and 560 V-AUGIB, 16.8%) were enrolled, 1399 (42.1%) on ATs. Patients taking ATs were older (75.4 vs. 62.8 y, P <0.001), had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), Rockall and Glasgow-Blatchford scores ( P <0.001). At multivariate analysis considering comorbidities, ATs use resulted an independent protective factor against death [odds ratio (OR): 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.45-0.87, P =0.006]. Rebleeding (5.5% vs. 5.8%, P =0.71) and need for salvage surgery/radiology (4.2% vs. 4.8%, P =0.41) were similar in the 2 groups. Considering specific ATs, low-dose aspirin was the most powerful factor lowering the death risk (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.81, P =0.004). While the generic use of AT therapy did not emerge as a statistically significant independent protective factor considering separately NV-AUGIB (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.56-1.13, P =0.21) and V-AUGIB (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.15-1.07, P =0.068), the protective effect of low-dose aspirin was confirmed for NV-AUGIB (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.41-0.94, P =0.025). CONCLUSIONS: ATs use is an independent protective factor against death in AUGIB. The protective effect is mainly derived from low-dose aspirin.

Enteroscopy in diagnosis and treatment of small bowel bleeding: A Delphi expert consensus.

BACKGROUND: Enteroscopy plays an important role in the management of small bowel bleeding. However, current guidelines are not specifically designed for small bowel bleeding and recommendations from different international societies do not always align. Consequently, there is heterogeneity in the definitions of clinical entities, clinical practice policies, and adherence to guidelines among clinicians. This represents an obstacle to providing the best patient care and to obtain homogeneous data for clinical research. AIMS: The aims of the study were to establish a consensus on the definitions of bleeding entities and on the role of enteroscopy in the management of small bowel bleeding using a Delphi process. METHODS: A core group of eight experts in enteroscopy identified five main topics of small bowel bleeding management and drafted statements on each topic. An expert panel of nine gastroenterologists participated in three rounds of the Delphi process, together with the core group. RESULTS: A total of 33 statements were approved after three rounds of Delphi voting. CONCLUSION: This Delphi consensus proposes clear definitions and a unifying strategy to standardize the management of small bowel bleeding. Furthermore, it provides a useful guide in daily practice for both clinical and technical issues of enteroscopy.

Derivation and validation of Re.Co.De death score risk in patients with acute nonvariceal upper GI bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Scores in upper GI bleeding (UGIB) are used to stratify death risk and need for hospitalization at admission, but a tool that incorporates dynamic changes during the hospital stay is lacking. We aimed to develop a death risk score that considers changes in clinical status during hospitalization and compare its performance with existing ones. METHODS: A multicenter cohort study enrolling patients with UGIB in 50 Italian hospitals from January 2014 to December 2015 was conducted. Data were collected and used to develop a risk score using logistic regression analyses. Performance curves (area under the receiver-operating characteristic [AUROC] curves), sensitivities, specificities, positive and negative predictive values, and outcomes classified as low, intermediate, and high death risk were calculated. The score's performance was externally validated and then compared with other scores. RESULTS: We included 1852 patients with nonvariceal UGIB in the development cohort and 912 in the validation cohorts. The new score, which we named the Re.Co.De (rebleeding-comorbidities-deteriorating) score, included 10 variables depicting the changes in clinical conditions while in the hospital. The mortality AUROC curves were .93 (95% confidence interval, .91-.96) in the derivation cohort and .94 (95% confidence interval, .91-.98) in validation cohort. In a comparison of AUROC curves with other scores, the new score showed a significant performance compared with pre- and postendoscopy scores. Patients with low and high scores had 30-day mortality rates of .001% and 48.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Re.Co.De score has a higher performance for predicting mortality in patients with UGIB compared with other scores, correctly identifying patients at low and high death risk while in the hospital through a dynamic re-evaluation of clinical status.

No evidence of "weekend effect" in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in Italy: data from a nationwide prospective registry.

OBJECTIVES: The literature offers conflicting information about 'weekend effect' in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB). Aim of our study was to compare clinical outcomes of patients admitted for AUGIB during the weekend or on weekdays in Italy. METHODS: We analyzed data from a prospective registry of AUGIB (either nonvariceal, NV-AUGIB or variceal, V-AUGIB) from 50 Italian hospitals from January 2014 to December 2015. Mortality, rebleeding, need for salvage procedures and length of hospitalization were compared among patients admitted during the weekend or on weekdays. RESULTS: In total 2599 patients (mean age 67.4 ± 15.0 years, 69.2% males) were included, 2119 (81.5%) with NV-AUGIB and 480 (18.5%) with V-AUGIB. Totally 494 patients with NV-AUGIB (23.3%) and 129 patients with V-AUGIB (20.7%) were admitted during the weekend. The two study groups were similar in terms of physical status (American Society of Anesthesiologists score, comorbidities) and bleeding-specific prognostic scores. We did not find differences in terms of mortality (5.6 vs. 4.9%; P = 0.48), rebleeding (5.9 vs. 5.1%; P = 0.39), need for salvage procedures (4.0 vs. 3.6%; P = 0.67) or duration of hospitalization (8.5 ± 6.9 vs. 8.3 ± 7.2 days; P = 0.58) between patients admitted during weekend or weekdays. Considering separately NV-AUGIB and V-AUGIB, the only difference found in clinical outcomes was a higher rebleeding risk in patients with V-AUGIB admitted during the weekend (13.2 vs. 7.4%; P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Data from our large, prospective multicenter registry shows that in Italy there is no significant 'weekend effect' for either NV- or V-AUGIB. Our results show that the Italian hospital network is efficient and able to provide adequate care and an effective therapeutic endoscopy even during the weekend.

Comparison of assessment tools in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: which one for which decision.

BACKGROUND: Upper GI bleeding (UGIB) remains a common emergency with significant mortality. Scores help triage patients, but it is still unclear which score should be used in the different decision-making moments to identify patients at high or low death risk. We aimed to compare the overall performances of the most validated scores and their cut-off performance to identify patients at low and high death risk. The secondary outcome was to compare the scores' performance for predicting therapeutic endoscopy, the need for transfusion(s), rebleeding, and surgery/interventional radiology. METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study, including consecutive UGIB patients admitted to 50 Italian hospitals. We collected information to calculate the Rockall, the Progetto Nazionale Endoscopia Digestiva (PNED), the AIMS65, the Glasgow-Blatchford (GBS), and the Age, Blood tests, Comorbidities (ABC) scores, together with demographic figures, clinical data, and outcomes. RESULTS: We obtained complete data of 2307 outpatients, including 1887 non-variceal and 420 variceal bleeders. Our cohort's mean age was 67.5 years, with a prevalence of male gender (69%). The GBS has the best overall performance (ROC 0.74) compared to the other scores in identifying low-risk patients (p < .001). At the cut-off 0-1, both GBS and ABC scores provide the highest PPV (100%) for low-risk patients. ABC and PNED scores are the most useful ones (for AUC >80) to assess the high-risk patients for mortality. CONCLUSIONS: At admission, GBS and ABC scores identify low-risk patients suitable for outpatient management, while PNED and ABC scores identify high-risk patients. During hospitalization, the PNED score should be used to re-assess the mortality risk if a modification of clinical status occurs.

Clinical outcomes in cirrhotics with variceal or nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective, multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is associated with a distinct mortality in cirrhotics. We evaluated whether the rate of mortality and other outcomes differs between variceal and nonvariceal UGIB. METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, cohort study on UGIB cirrhotics observed in 50 hospitals. Variceal or nonvariceal UGIB were diagnosed at endoscopy. The 6-week mortality rate, need of blood transfusion, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, radiologic or surgical intervention, rebleeding rate, and length of stay in hospital were the main clinical outcomes compared. Data were analyzed at univariate and multivariate analysis, and odds ratio (OR) with their 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. RESULTS: The study enrolled 706 cirrhotics, including 516 (73%) variceal and 190 (27%) nonvariceal UGIB. There were 78 (11%; 95% CI = 8.7-13.4) deceases, without any difference between variceal (11.0%) and nonvariceal (11.0%) groups. Child-Pugh score C (OR: 6.99; 95% CI = 2.58-18.95), and development of either hepatorenal syndrome (OR: 16.5; 95% CI = 7.02-38.9) or hepatic encephalopathy (OR: 2.38; 95% CI = 1.25-4.5) were independent predictors of mortality. Transfusions and onset of hepatic encephalopathy were significantly more frequent in variceal, whereas ICU admission rate was higher in nonvariceal bleedings. Overall, antibiotic prophylaxis was eventually administered in only 392 (55.5%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Data found that the overall mortality rate in cirrhotics with UGIB seems to be reducing and that the value did not differ between variceal and nonvariceal types. Prevention of both hepatorenal syndrome and hepatic encephalopathy and implementation of antibiotic prophylaxis could improve survival in these patients.

The "Hub and Spoke" model has no effect on mortality in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: the lack of standardized pathways for patients with gastrointestinal bleeding may have led to differences in their management and inequity to medical care access. The "Hub & Spoke" model was adopted to fill this gap in many disciplines, but, to our knowledge, no data exist on its efficacy on mortality in GI bleeding. We aimed to evaluate if the "Hub & Spoke" organizational model has an impact on mortality risk from UGIB. METHODS: from January 2014 to December 2015, 3324 consecutive patients admitted for UGIB in 50 Italian hospitals were enrolled (1977 patients in hospitals within the "Hub & Spoke" network for digestive hemorrhagic emergency and 1347 in hospitals outside the "Hub & Spoke" network). Clinical, endoscopic and organizational data were recorded. RESULTS: we observed no differences in mortality between patients admitted to hospitals included or not included in the "Hub & Spoke" network (5.2% vs 6.1%, p = 0.3). On multivariate analysis, admission in gastroenterology wards (OR 0.61, p = 0.001) or an academic hospital (OR 0.65, p < 0.056) were independent protective factors while being in "Hub & Spoke" organization system did not affect mortality (OR 1.09, p = 0.57). CONCLUSION: the "Hub & Spoke" model per sé does not impact on mortality while being treated in academic hospital or gastroenterology wards improved survival.

Safety and protection in endoscopic services during phase II of COVID-19 pandemic: a national survey.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires appropriate measures for containing infection spreading. Endoscopic procedures are considered at increased risk of infection transmission. We evaluated organizational aspects and personal behaviours in Italian Endoscopic Units during phase II of the pandemic. METHODS: A questionnaire on organizational aspects and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) were e-mailed to gastroenterologists working in Endoscopic Units. Data were analysed accordingly to the National Health Institute and Gastroenterology Societies recommendations. RESULTS: Data of 117 centres were collected, and different shortcomings emerged. Specific protocols for containing infection and training programs for operators were lacking in 20 and 30% of centres, respectively, and telephone triage 24-72 h before the endoscopy was not implemented in 25% of hospitals. In 30% of centres, the slot time for endoscopies and between examinations was not prolonged. PPE, masks, shirts and gloves were universally adopted, although with some differences. In 20% of centres, a FFPE-FFP3 mask was not adopted during endoscopic examinations. Postendoscopy patient tracking/contact was completed in only one-third of centres. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey provides information on organizational and medical behaviours during COVID-19 phase II in Italy, which could be useful for adopting appropriate measures for containing COVID-19 spread during phase II.

Quality performance measures for small capsule endoscopy: Are the ESGE quality standards met?

Background and study aims The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) recently issued a quality performance measures document for small bowel capsule endoscopy (SBCE). The aim of this nationwide survey was to explore SBCE practice with ESGE quality measures as a benchmark. Patients and methods A dedicated per-center semi-quantitative questionnaire based on ESGE performance measures for SBCE was created by a group of SBCE experts. One-hundred-eighty-one centers were invited to participate and were asked to calculate performance measures for SBCE performed in 2018. Data were compared with 10 ESGE quality standards for both key and minor performance measures. Results Ninety-one centers (50.3 %) participated in the data collection. Overall in the last 5 years (2014-2018), 26,615 SBCEs were performed, 5917 of which were done in 2018. Eighty percent or more of the participating centers reached the minimum standard established by the ESGE Small Bowel Working Group (ESBWG) for four performance measures (indications for SBCE, complete small bowel evaluation, diagnostic yield and retention rate). Conversely, compliance with six minimum standards established by ESBWG concerning adequate bowel preparation, patient selection, timing of SBCE in overt bleeding, appropriate reporting, reading protocols and referral to device-assisted enteroscopy was met by only 15.5 %, 10.9 %, 31.1 %, 67.7 %, 53.4 %, and 32.2 % of centers, respectively. Conclusions The present survey shows significant variability across SBCE centers; only four (4/10: 40 %) SBCE procedural minimum standards were met by a relevant proportion of the centers ( ≥ 80 %). Our data should help in identifying target areas for quality improvement programs in SBCE.

IL-1 Receptor Antagonist Anakinra in the Treatment of COVID-19 Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: A Retrospective, Observational Study.

The IL-1 receptor antagonist, anakinra, may represent a therapeutic option for acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In this study, COVID-19 ARDS patients admitted to the Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale of Lecco, Italy, between March 5th to April 15th, 2020, and who had received anakinra off-label were retrospectively evaluated and compared with a cohort of matched controls who did not receive immunomodulatory treatment. The primary end point was survival at day 28. The population consisted of 112 patients (56 treated with anakinra and 56 controls). Survival at day 28 was obtained in 69 patients (61.6%) and was significantly higher in anakinra-treated patients than in the controls (75.0 versus 48.2%, p = 0.007). When stratified by continuous positive airway pressure support at baseline, anakinra-treated patients' survival was also significant compared with the controls (p = 0.008). Univariate analysis identified anakinra usage (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-7.17) as a significant survival predictor. This was not supported by multivariate modeling. The rate of infectious-related adverse events was similar between groups. In conclusion, anakinra improved overall survival and invasive ventilation-free survival and was well tolerated in patients with ARDS associated with COVID-19.

ABC score: a new risk score that accurately predicts mortality in acute upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding: an international multicentre study.

OBJECTIVES: Existing scores are not accurate at predicting mortality in upper (UGIB) and lower (LGIB) gastrointestinal bleeding. We aimed to develop and validate a new pre-endoscopy score for predicting mortality in both UGIB and LGIB. DESIGN AND SETTING: International cohort study. Patients presenting to hospital with UGIB at six international centres were used to develop a risk score for predicting mortality using regression analyses. The score's performance in UGIB and LGIB was externally validated and compared with existing scores using four international datasets. We calculated areas under receiver operating characteristics curves (AUROCs), sensitivities, specificities and outcome among patients classified as low risk and high risk. PARTICIPANTS AND RESULTS: We included 3012 UGIB patients in the development cohort, and 4019 UGIB and 2336 LGIB patients in the validation cohorts. Age, Blood tests and Comorbidities (ABC) score was closer associated with mortality in UGIB and LGIB (AUROCs: 0.81-84) than existing scores (AUROCs: 0.65-0.75; p≤0.02). In UGIB, patients with low ABC score (≤3), medium ABC score (4-7) and high ABC score (≥8) had 30-day mortality rates of 1.0%, 7.0% and 25%, respectively. Patients classified low risk using ABC score had lower mortality than those classified low risk with AIMS65 (threshold ≤1) (1.0 vs 4.5%; p<0.001). In LGIB, patients with low, medium and high ABC scores had in-hospital mortality rates of 0.6%, 6.3% and 18%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous scores, ABC score has good performance for predicting mortality in both UGIB and LGIB, allowing early identification and targeted management of patients at high or low risk of death.

Pre-endoscopic intravenous proton pump inhibitors therapy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective, multicentre study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The indiscriminate use of high-dose, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) infusion in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) patients to reduce the rate of peptic ulcers with high-risk stigmata (HRS) has been questioned. We evaluated the prevalence of HRS on peptic ulcer and non-ulcer lesions in patients receiving or not receiving pre-endoscopic PPI therapy. METHODS: Data of consecutive UGIB patients observed in 50 Italian centres were analysed. The prevalence of both HRS on peptic ulcers and active bleeding on non-ulcer lesions between patients treated or not treated with PPI were compared. Multivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 1,792 (69.8%) out of 2,566 patients received PPI therapy. Prevalence of HRS on ulcers was 51.8% and 53.4% (P = 0.58) in treated and not treated patients, respectively, and the rate of endoscopic therapy did not differ between groups. Prevalence of non-ulcer bleeding lesions was higher in patients treated than in those not treated with PPI (18.7% vs 10.6%; P = 0.023). At multivariate analysis, PPI therapy (OR: 1.16, 95% CI = 0.82-1.64; P = 0.4) was not an independent factor affecting HRS prevalence, which was inversely correlated with timing to endoscopy (OR: 0.85, 95% CI = 0.76-0.95; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Our data failed to detect a significant role of pre-endoscopic PPI therapy in decreasing prevalence of HRS and need for endoscopic treatment in bleeding patients with either peptic ulcer or non-ulcer lesions.