Clinical Trial Details
— Status: Completed
Administrative data
NCT number |
NCT05688501 |
Other study ID # |
GIB-ED |
Secondary ID |
|
Status |
Completed |
Phase |
|
First received |
|
Last updated |
|
Start date |
September 1, 2019 |
Est. completion date |
September 1, 2022 |
Study information
Verified date |
January 2023 |
Source |
Hôpital Universitaire Sahloul |
Contact |
n/a |
Is FDA regulated |
No |
Health authority |
|
Study type |
Observational
|
Clinical Trial Summary
Gastrointestinal bleeding is a frequent reason for consultation in the Emergency Department.
It is a real emergency associated with fairly significant morbidity and mortality.
The incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (HDH) has been reported to be 67-103 per
100,000 adults per year in the UK with mortality rates of 2%-8%.
While Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding (LBHB) has a lower incidence estimated at 33 per
100,000 adults per year. Additionally, compared to HDB, HDB appears to have less need for
hemostatic intervention and lower mortality.
Description:
Gastrointestinal bleeding is a frequent reason for consultation in the Emergency Department.
It is a real emergency associated with fairly significant morbidity and mortality.
The incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (HDH) has been reported to be 67-103 per
100,000 adults per year in the UK with mortality rates of 2%-8%.
While Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding (LBHB) has a lower incidence estimated at 33 per
100,000 adults per year. Additionally, compared to HDB, HDB appears to have less need for
hemostatic intervention and lower mortality.
Despite a decrease in incidence, the first cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains
peptic ulcer. That of lower digestive hemorrhage is diverticular hemorrhage, the incidence of
which increases with the aging of the population.
Over time, the overall management of these haemorrhages has improved, in particular with
better availability of endoscopic exploration from the emergency room consultation. However,
the average time for digestive endoscopy was reported at 16 hours in a North African study
published in 2012. Measures should be put in place to further improve access to endoscopy
services for these patients, being given that a fifth of them received this care with delays
exceeding 48 to 72 hours.
The indication of endoscopic exploration and its delay comes up against various practical
difficulties. Hence the assessment of severity and the progressive risk of aggravation is
essential for the emergency physician. Several prognostic or predictive clinical scores for
worsening have been proposed. These scores remain underused and rarely applied to support and
guide the therapeutic strategy.
These published prognostic scores aim to determine the risk of mortality, recurrence of
bleeding and to identify patients requiring hospital treatment (transfusion, endoscopic or
surgical treatment). Their interest lies in their ability to identify high-risk patients, for
whom aggressive management is required, as well as low-risk patients for whom management
could be delayed.
Indeed, in Tunisia, as for the vast majority of developing countries, one of the problems
posed by the management of HDH remains the hospitalization of a majority of patients for
monitoring, while only 1928% of between them will develop complications. These scores could
be of great help in supporting and guiding the therapeutic strategy.
Among the predictive scores, it was found that "The Glasgow-Blatchford score", which is
specific only to HDH and which aims to determine which patients are "low risk" and therefore
candidates for outpatient management. Another score, the Rockall score, stratifies the risk
of re-bleeding and death but requires endoscopic data provided by an emergency examination.
These data remain missing in most cases, at least during the first hours of patient care.
Regardless of the source of bleeding, early identification of patients at high risk of
mortality could allow targeted management, including specialist care and early interventions
that may improve outcomes. At the other end of the spectrum, patients identified as being at
very low risk of complications may benefit from less intensive management, which would help
target resources to the appropriate patients.
Recent international recommendations concerning the management of these patients recommend
the use of these scores in the emergency department for risk stratification.