Search

Currently, large, nationwide, long-term follow-up data on acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) are scarce. We investigated long-term risks of recurrence after hospital discharge for ALGIB using a large multicenter dataset. We retrospectively analyzed 5048 patients who were urgently hospitalized for ALGIB at 49 hospitals across Japan (CODE BLUE-J study). Risk factors for the long-term recurrence of ALGIB were analyzed by using competing risk analysis, treating death without rebleeding as a competing risk. Rebleeding occurred in 1304 patients (25.8%) during a mean follow-up period of 31 months. The cumulative incidences of rebleeding at 1 and 5 years were 15.1% and 25.1%, respectively. The mortality risk was significantly higher in patients with out-of-hospital rebleeding episodes than in those without (hazard ratio, 1.42). Of the 30 factors, multivariate analysis showed that shock index ≥1 (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.25), blood transfusion (SHR, 1.26), in-hospital rebleeding (SHR, 1.26), colonic diverticular bleeding (SHR, 2.38), and thienopyridine use (SHR, 1.24) were significantly associated with increased rebleeding risk. Multivariate analysis of colonic diverticular bleeding patients showed that blood transfusion (SHR, 1.20), in-hospital rebleeding (SHR, 1.30), and thienopyridine use (SHR, 1.32) were significantly associated with increased rebleeding risk, whereas endoscopic hemostasis (SHR, 0.83) significantly decreased the risk. These large, nationwide follow-up data highlighted the importance of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment during hospitalization and the assessment of the need for ongoing thienopyridine use to reduce the risk of out-of-hospital rebleeding. This information also aids in the identification of patients at high risk of rebleeding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ligation therapy, including endoscopic detachable snare ligation (EDSL) and endoscopic band ligation (EBL), has emerged as an endoscopic treatment for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB); its comparative effectiveness and risk of recurrent bleeding remain unclear, however. Our goal was to compare the outcomes of EDSL and EBL in treating CDB and identify risk factors for recurrent bleeding after ligation therapy. We reviewed data of 518 patients with CDB who underwent EDSL (n = 77) or EBL (n = 441) in a multicenter cohort study named the Colonic Diverticular Bleeding Leaders Update Evidence From Multicenter Japanese Study (CODE BLUE-J Study). Outcomes were compared by using propensity score matching. Logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed for recurrent bleeding risk, and a competing risk analysis was used to treat death without recurrent bleeding as a competing risk. No significant differences were found between the 2 groups in terms of initial hemostasis, 30-day recurrent bleeding, interventional radiology or surgery requirements, 30-day mortality, blood transfusion volume, length of hospital stay, and adverse events. Sigmoid colon involvement was an independent risk factor for 30-day recurrent bleeding (odds ratio, 1.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.40; P =.042). History of acute lower GI bleeding (ALGIB) was a significant long-term recurrent bleeding risk factor on Cox regression analysis. A performance status score of 3/4 and history of ALGIB were long-term recurrent bleeding factors on competing risk regression analysis. There were no significant differences in outcomes between EDSL and EBL for CDB. After ligation therapy, careful follow-up is required, especially in the treatment of sigmoid diverticular bleeding during admission. History of ALGIB and performance status at admission are important risk factors for long-term recurrent bleeding after discharge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We aimed to determine the optimal timing of colonoscopy and factors that benefit patients who undergo early colonoscopy for acute lower GI bleeding. We identified 10,342 patients with acute hematochezia (CODE BLUE-J study) admitted to 49 hospitals in Japan. Of these, 6270 patients who underwent a colonoscopy within 120 hours were included in this study. The inverse probability of treatment weighting method was used to adjust for baseline characteristics among early (≤24 hours, n = 4133), elective (24-48 hours, n = 1137), and late (48-120 hours, n = 1000) colonoscopy. The average treatment effect was evaluated for outcomes. The primary outcome was 30-day rebleeding rate. The early group had a significantly higher rate of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) identification and a shorter length of stay than the elective and late groups. However, the 30-day rebleeding rate was significantly higher in the early group than in the elective and late groups. Interventional radiology (IVR) or surgery requirement and 30-day mortality did not significantly differ among groups. The interaction with heterogeneity of effects was observed between early and late colonoscopy and shock index (shock index <1, odds ratio [OR], 2.097; shock index ≥1, OR, 1.095; P for interaction =.038) and performance status (0-2, OR, 2.481; ≥3, OR,.458; P for interaction =.022) for 30-day rebleeding. Early colonoscopy had a significantly lower IVR or surgery requirement in the shock index ≥1 cohort (OR,.267; 95% confidence interval,.099-.721) compared with late colonoscopy. Early colonoscopy increased the rate of SRH identification and shortened the length of stay but involved an increased risk of rebleeding and did not improve mortality and IVR or surgery requirement. Early colonoscopy particularly benefited patients with a shock index ≥1 or performance status ≥3 at presentation. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Treatment strategies for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB) based on stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) remain unstandardized, and no large studies have evaluated their effectiveness. We sought to identify the best strategy among combinations of SRH identification and endoscopic treatment strategies. We retrospectively analyzed 5823 CDB patients who underwent colonoscopy at 49 hospitals throughout Japan (CODE-BLUE J-Study). Three strategies were compared: find SRH (definitive CDB) and treat endoscopically, find SRH (definitive CDB) and treat conservatively, and without finding SRH (presumptive CDB) treat conservatively. In conducting pairwise comparisons of outcomes in these groups, we used propensity score–matching analysis to balance baseline characteristics between the groups being compared. Both early and late recurrent bleeding rates were significantly lower in patients with definitive CDB treated endoscopically than in those with presumptive CDB treated conservatively (<30 days, 19.6% vs 26.0% [ P <.001]; <365 days, 33.7% vs 41.6% [ P <.001], respectively). In patients with definitive CDB, the early recurrent bleeding rate was significantly lower in those treated endoscopically than in those treated conservatively (17.4% vs 26.7% [ P =.038] for a single test of hypothesis; however, correction for multiple testing of data removed this significance). The late recurrent bleeding rate was also lower, but not significantly, in those treated endoscopically (32.0% vs 36.1%, P =.426). Definitive CDB treated endoscopically showed significantly lower early and late recurrent bleeding rates than when treated conservatively in cases of SRH with active bleeding, nonactive bleeding, and in the right-sided colon but not left-sided colon. Treating definitive CDB endoscopically was most effective in reducing recurrent bleeding over the short and long term, compared with not treating definitive CDB or presumptive CDB. Physicians should endeavor to find and treat SRH for suspected CDB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A higher adenoma detection rate (ADR) has been shown to be related to a lower incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer. We analyzed the efficacy of linked color imaging (LCI) by assessing the detection, miss, and visibility of various featured adenomas as compared with white light imaging (WLI). This was a prospective, randomized, tandem trial. The participants were randomly assigned to 2 groups: first observation by LCI, then second observation by WLI (LCI group); or both observations by WLI (WLI group). Suspected neoplastic lesions were resected after magnifying image-enhanced endoscopy. The primary outcome was to compare the ADR during the first observation. Secondary outcomes included evaluation of adenoma miss rate (AMR) and visibility score. A total of 780 patients were randomized, 700 of whom were included in the final analysis. The ADR was 69.6% and 63.2% in the LCI and WLI groups, respectively, with no significant difference. However, LCI improved the average ADR in low-detectors compared with high-detectors (76.0% vs 55.1%; P <.001). Total AMR was 20.6% in the LCI group, which was significantly lower than that in the WLI group (31.1%) (P <.001). AMR in the LCI group was significantly lower, especially for diminutive adenomas (23.4% vs 35.1%; P <.001) and nonpolypoid lesions (25.6% vs 37.9%; P <.001) compared with the WLI group. Although both methods provided a similar ADR, LCI had a lower AMR than WLI. LCI could benefit endoscopists with lower ADR, an observation that warrants additional study. (UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, Number: UMIN000026359). [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]