Guideline Title
The role of endoscopy in the management of acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding.
Bibliographic Source(s)
Hwang JH, Fisher DA, Ben-Menachem T, Chandrasekhara V, Chathadi K, Decker GA, Early DS, Evans JA, Fanelli RD, Foley K, Fukami N, Jain R, Jue TL, Khan KM, Lightdale J, Malpas PM, Maple JT, Pasha S, Saltzman J, Sharaf R, Shergill AK, Dominitz JA, Cash BD. The role of endoscopy in the management of acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 2012 Jun;75(6):1132-8. [79 references] PubMed |
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
This guideline updates a previous version: Adler DG, Leighton JA, Davila RE, Hirota WK, Jacobson BC, Quereshi WA, Rajan E, Zuckerman MJ, Fanelli RD, Hambrick RD, Baron T, Faigel DO. ASGE guideline: the role of endoscopy in acute non-variceal upper-GI hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc 2004 Oct;60(4):497-504.
UMLS Concepts ( what's this?)
Click to view all guideline(s) indexed with these concepts
ICD9CM:
Acute peptic ulcer of unspecified site with hemorrhage, without mention of obstruction (533.00); Hemorrhage of gastrointestinal tract, unspecified (578.9); Hypovolemia (276.50); Hypovolemia (276.52); Shock, unspecified (785.50); Transfusion of platelets (99.05); Ulcer of esophagus with bleeding (530.21)
MSH:
Acute Disease; Argon Plasma Coagulation; Cyanoacrylates; Digestive System Fistula; Electrocoagulation; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Epinephrine; Erythrocyte Transfusion; Ethanol; Ethanolamine; Fibrin; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Hypovolemia; Intubation, Gastrointestinal; Laser Therapy; Lasers; Ligation; Medical History Taking; Peptic Ulcer; Platelet Transfusion; Polyethylene Glycols; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Resuscitation; Risk Assessment; Sclerosing Solutions; Shock; Sodium Chloride; Thrombin; Vascular Malformations
MTH:
crystalloid solutions; Electrocoagulation; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Epinephrine; Ethanol; ethanolamine; Fibrin; Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage; Gastrointestinal Neoplasms; Hypovolemia; Laser Therapy; Lasers; Ligation; Nasogastric tube; Peptic Ulcer; Polyethylene Glycols; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Resuscitation procedure; Shock; Sodium Chloride; Thrombin; Ulcer of esophagus; Vascular anomaly
PDQ:
ethanol; laser therapy; packed red blood cell transfusion; platelet transfusion; polyethylene glycol; therapeutic epinephrine
SNOMEDCT:
Acute disease (2704003); Acute peptic ulcer with hemorrhage (12274003); Bleeding ulcer of esophagus (57748001); Cyanoacrylate (79549001); Electrocoagulation (129397003); Electrocoagulation (129398008); Electrocoagulation (17590006); Electrocoagulation (257783000); Electrocoagulation (274071003); Electrocoagulation (307272003); Electrocoagulation (384708008); Electrocoagulation (73223003); Epinephrine (387362001); Epinephrine (65502005); Ethanolamine (115589000); Ethyl alcohol (398624005); Ethyl alcohol (419442005); Fibrin (113361004); Gastrointestinal hemorrhage (74474003); Gastrointestinal tract endoscopy (118155006); Hypovolemia (28560003); Injection of sclerosing agent (82579001); Intravenous blood transfusion of packed cells (180207008); Intravenous blood transfusion of packed cells (71493000); Intubation of gastrointestinal tract (235419001); Laser device (122456005); Ligation (129369009); Ligation (70751009); Nasogastric tube (17102003); Neoplasm of gastrointestinal tract (126768004); Peptic ulcer (13200003); Platelet transfusion (12719002); Platelet transfusion (180208003); Polyethylene glycol (356076006); Polyethylene glycol (8030004); Prokinetic Agent (116532005); Prokinetic Agent (373461004); Proton pump inhibitor (108665006); Proton pump inhibitor (372525000); Resuscitation (439569004); Review of medication (182836005); Risk assessment (225338004); Sclerosing agent (262130007); Sclerosing agent (372654003); Shock (27942005); Sodium chloride (387390002); Sodium chloride (70379000); Surgical clip (386010000); Thermal probe (257493008); Thrombin (36176003); Thrombin (415715002); Transfusion of red blood cells (116863004); Ulcer of esophagus (30811009)
SPN:
TUBE, NASOGASTRIC
UMD:
Clips, Surgical (21-299); Electrothermal Cautery Units (11-418); Heating Units, Thermal Probe (17-181); Lasers (12-296); Lasers, Nd:YAG, Surgical (16-943); Tubes, Nasogastric (14-221)
Hide...
|
Disease/Condition(s)
Acute non-variceal upper-gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) caused by:
- Peptic ulcer disease (PUD)
- Esophageal lesions
- Vascular malformations
- Aortoenteric fistulas
- Benign or malignant gastrointestinal tumors
Note: This guideline will not address obscure gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding or the role of endoscopy in the management of variceal bleeding, both of which are addressed in existing American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) practice guidelines. UGIB refers to GI blood loss having an origin proximal to the ligament of Treitz. Acute UGIB can manifest as hematemesis, "coffee ground" emesis, the return of red blood via a nasogastric tube, and/or melena with or without hemodynamic compromise. Hematochezia may occur in patients with extremely brisk UGIB.
Guideline Category
Diagnosis
Evaluation
Management
Treatment
Clinical Specialty
Gastroenterology
Intended Users
Physicians
Guideline Objective(s)
To describe the role of gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy in patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB)
Target Population
Patients with suspected acute non-variceal upper-gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB)
Interventions and Practices Considered
Diagnosis/Evaluation
- Patient history
- Review of medications (e.g., use of aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs])
- Signs and symptoms of hypovolemia and/or shock
- Use of Blatchford score for predicting patients at high risk for clinical intervention
Treatment/Management
- Resuscitation using crystalloid fluids and blood products (e.g., platelets, packed red blood cells)
- Nasogastric tube placement
- Before-procedure intravenous proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy
- Use of prokinetic agents before endoscopy
- Early endoscopy to assess need for inpatient management
- Injection therapy
- Normal saline solution
- Epinephrine (adrenaline)
- Sclerosants (ethanol, ethanolamine, and polidocanol)
- Thrombin
- Fibrin
- Cyanoacrylate glues
- Cautery devices
- Heat probes
- Neodymium-yttrium aluminum garnet lasers
- Argon plasma coagulation (APC)
- Electrocautery probes
- Mechanical therapy
- Endoscopic clips
- Endoscopic band ligation devices
- Use of repeat endoscopy
Major Outcomes Considered
- Mortality
- Rebleeding
- Progression to surgery
- Rates of high risk stigmata
- Need for initial or repeat endoscopic therapy
- Duration of hospitalization
- Need for blood transfusion
|
Methods Used to Collect/Select the Evidence
Hand-searches of Published Literature (Primary Sources)
Hand-searches of Published Literature (Secondary Sources)
Searches of Electronic Databases
Description of Methods Used to Collect/Select the Evidence
In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical literature was performed by using PubMed. Additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. The updated literature time frame is 1990 to 2011. When few or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts.
Number of Source Documents
Methods Used to Assess the Quality and Strength of the Evidence
Weighting According to a Rating Scheme (Scheme Given)
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Evidence
Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) System for Rating the Quality of Evidence for Guidelines
Quality of Evidence |
Definition |
Symbol |
High quality |
Further research is very unlikely to change confidence in the estimate of effect. |
++++ |
Moderate quality |
Further research is likely to have an important impact on confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. |
+++O |
Low quality |
Further research is very likely to have an important impact on confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. |
++OO |
Very low quality |
Any estimate of effect is very uncertain. |
+OOO |
Adapted from Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:924-6.
Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
Review of Published Meta-Analyses
Systematic Review
Description of the Methods Used to Analyze the Evidence
Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
Expert Consensus
Description of Methods Used to Formulate the Recommendations
Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus at the time that the guidelines are drafted.
Rating Scheme for the Strength of the Recommendations
The strength of individual recommendations is based on both the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as "the Practice Committee suggests," whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as "the Practice Committee recommends."
Cost Analysis
A formal cost analysis was not performed and published cost analyses were not reviewed.
Method of Guideline Validation
Not stated
Description of Method of Guideline Validation
|
Major Recommendations
Definitions for the quality of the evidence (++++, +++O, ++OO, and +OOO) and for the strength of the recommendations ("recommends" or "suggests") are provided at the end of the "Major Recommendations" field.
- The Practice Committee recommends that patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) be adequately resuscitated before endoscopy. (+OOO)
- The Practice Committee recommends antisecretory therapy with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) for patients with bleeding caused by peptic ulcers or in those with suspected peptic ulcer bleeding awaiting endoscopy. (++++)
- The Practice Committee suggests prokinetic agents in patients with a high probability of having fresh blood or a clot in the stomach when undergoing endoscopy. (++OO)
- The Practice Committee recommends endoscopy to diagnose the etiology of acute UGIB. (+++O)
The timing of endoscopy should depend on clinical factors. Urgent endoscopy (within 24 hours of presentation) is recommended for patients with a history of malignancy or cirrhosis, presentation with hematemesis, and signs of hypovolemia including hypotension, tachycardia and shock, and a hemoglobin <8 g/dL.
- The Practice Committee recommends endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcers with high-risk stigmata (active spurting, visible vessel). (++++)
The management of peptic ulcer disease (PUD) with an adherent clot is controversial. Recommended endoscopic treatment modalities include injection (sclerosants, thrombin, fibrin, or cyanoacrylate glue), cautery, and mechanical therapies.
- The Practice Committee recommends against epinephrine injection alone for peptic ulcer bleeding. If epinephrine injection is performed, it should be combined with a second endoscopic treatment modality (e.g., cautery or clips). (++++)
- The Practice Committee recommends that patients with low-risk lesions be considered for outpatient management. (+++O)
- The Practice Committee recommends against routine second-look endoscopy in patients who have received adequate endoscopic therapy. (+OOO)
- The Practice Committee recommends repeat endoscopy for patients with evidence of recurrent bleeding. (+++O)
Definitions:
Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) System for Rating the Quality of Evidence for Guidelines
Quality of Evidence |
Definition |
Symbol |
High quality |
Further research is very unlikely to change confidence in the estimate of effect. |
++++ |
Moderate quality |
Further research is likely to have an important impact on confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. |
+++O |
Low quality |
Further research is very likely to have an important impact on confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. |
++OO |
Very low quality |
Any estimate of effect is very uncertain. |
+OOO |
Adapted from Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:924-6.
Recommendation Strength
The strength of individual recommendations is based on both the aggregate evidence quality and an assessment of the anticipated benefits and harms. Weaker recommendations are indicated by phrases such as "the Practice Committee suggests," whereas stronger recommendations are typically stated as "the Practice Committee recommends."
|
Evidence Supporting the Recommendations
Type of Evidence Supporting the Recommendations
The type of supporting evidence is identified and graded for each recommendation (see the "Major Recommendations" field).
|
Benefits/Harms of Implementing the Guideline Recommendations
Potential Benefits
- Appropriate management and use of endoscopy in patients with acute non-variceal upper-gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB)
- Reduced rates of recurrent bleeding
- Reduced rate of complications
Potential Harms
Procedure-related complications appear to be more common in the presence of benign or malignant tumors.
|
Qualifying Statements
- This guideline is intended to be an educational device to provide information that may assist endoscopists in providing care to patients. This guideline is not a rule and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a complex analysis of the patient's condition and available courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies from these guidelines.
- Further controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify aspects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new data, or other aspects of clinical practice.
|
Implementation of the Guideline
Description of Implementation Strategy
An implementation strategy was not provided.
|
Institute of Medicine (IOM) National Healthcare Quality Report Categories
IOM Care Need
Getting Better
IOM Domain
Effectiveness
Timeliness
|
Identifying Information and Availability
Bibliographic Source(s)
Hwang JH, Fisher DA, Ben-Menachem T, Chandrasekhara V, Chathadi K, Decker GA, Early DS, Evans JA, Fanelli RD, Foley K, Fukami N, Jain R, Jue TL, Khan KM, Lightdale J, Malpas PM, Maple JT, Pasha S, Saltzman J, Sharaf R, Shergill AK, Dominitz JA, Cash BD. The role of endoscopy in the management of acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 2012 Jun;75(6):1132-8. [79 references] PubMed |
Adaptation
Not applicable: The guideline was not adapted from another source.
Date Released
2004 Oct (revised 2012 Jun)
Guideline Developer(s)
American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy - Medical Specialty Society
Source(s) of Funding
American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
Guideline Committee
Standards of Practice Committee
Composition of Group That Authored the Guideline
Committee Members: Joo Ha Hwang, MD, PhD; Deborah A. Fisher, MD, MHS; Tamir Ben-Menachem, MD; Vinay Chandrasekhara, MD; Krishnavel Chathadi, MD; G. Anton Decker, MD; Dayna S. Early, MD; John A. Evans, MD; Robert D. Fanelli, MD, SAGES Representative; Kimberly Foley, RN, BSN, CGRN, SGNA Representative; Norio Fukami, MD; Rajeev Jain, MD; Terry L. Jue, MD; Kahlid M. Khan, MD; Jenifer Lightdale, MD, MPH; Phyllis M. Malpas, RN, SGNA Representative; John T. Maple, DO; Shabana Pasha, MD; John Saltzman, MD; Ravi Sharaf, MD; Amandeep K. Shergill, MD; Jason A. Dominitz, MD, MHS (Prior Chair); Brooks D. Cash, MD (Chair)
Financial Disclosures/Conflicts of Interest
T. Ben-Menachem is a consultant for Boston Scientific. D. Fisher is a consultant for Epigenomics, Inc. K. Chathadi is a speaker for Boston Scientific. Rajeev Jain is a consultant for Boston Scientific and does research for Barxx. J. Saltzman is a consultant for Hemoclip Development and has a relationship with Cook Endoscopy. No other financial relationships relevant to this publication were disclosed.
Guideline Status
This is the current release of the guideline.
This guideline updates a previous version: Adler DG, Leighton JA, Davila RE, Hirota WK, Jacobson BC, Quereshi WA, Rajan E, Zuckerman MJ, Fanelli RD, Hambrick RD, Baron T, Faigel DO. ASGE guideline: the role of endoscopy in acute non-variceal upper-GI hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc 2004 Oct;60(4):497-504.
Availability of Companion Documents
NGC Status
This NGC summary was completed by ECRI on March 23, 2005. The information was verified by the guideline developer on March 31, 2005. This NGC summary was updated by ECRI Institute on July 31, 2012.
Copyright Statement
This NGC summary is based on the original guideline, which is subject to the guideline developer's copyright restrictions.
|
NGC Disclaimer
The National Guideline Clearinghouseâ„¢ (NGC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the guidelines represented on this site. Read full disclaimer...The National Guideline Clearinghouseâ„¢ (NGC) does not develop, produce, approve, or endorse the guidelines represented on this site.
All guidelines summarized by NGC and hosted on our site are produced under the auspices of medical specialty societies, relevant professional associations, public or private organizations, other government agencies, health care organizations or plans, and similar entities.
Guidelines represented on the NGC Web site are submitted by guideline developers, and are screened solely to determine that they meet the NGC Inclusion Criteria which may be found at http://www.guideline.gov/about/inclusion-criteria.aspx.
NGC, AHRQ, and its contractor ECRI Institute make no warranties concerning the content or clinical efficacy or effectiveness of the clinical practice guidelines and related materials represented on this site. Moreover, the views and opinions of developers or authors of guidelines represented on this site do not necessarily state or reflect those of NGC, AHRQ, or its contractor ECRI Institute, and inclusion or hosting of guidelines in NGC may not be used for advertising or commercial endorsement purposes.
Readers with questions regarding guideline content are directed to contact the guideline developer. Hide...
|