View clinical trials related to Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.
Filter by:The rationale for using somatostatin (octreotide0 is that it has been shown to inhibit the secretion of various gastrointestinal hormones, including gastrin and secretin, which can contribute to the development of non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (NVGIB). Somatostatin has also been found to reduce splanchnic blood flow, which can decrease the risk of rebleeding in patients with NVGIB. Previous studies have suggested that somatostatin may be effective in reducing the risk of rebleeding in patients with NVGIB, but there is a lack of high-quality randomized controlled trials evaluating its efficacy. Therefore, this study aims to provide more rigorous evidence regarding the use of somatostatin in the management of NVGIB. Aim of the study: To evaluate the efficacy of medical treatment with somatostatin analogue (octreotide) combined with PPI in the treatment of non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding in comparison to PPI alone a randomized.
The GI-FLX Registry is intended to create a registry of patients with a history of Atrial Fibrillation (AF) and Gastrointestinal (GI) bleed who will receive Left Atrial Appendage Closure (LAAC) with WATCHMAN FLX device and compare to patients with AF and GI bleed who do not have LAAC. The GI-FLX Registry will be a multi-center, non-randomized registry. Approximately 250 prospective patients will be enrolled at all 4 sites. Historical cohort of 250 patients after propensity score matching with WATCHMAN-FLX arm will be included in the final analysis.
Small bowel capsule endoscopy is the main diagnostic standard for small bowel bleeding. This study investigates the detection rate of small bowel bleeding in capsule endoscopy and further endoscopic treatment in a prospective and retrospective cohort.
Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency with significant morbidity and mortality. Treating physicians are urged to perform rapid diagnosis, careful risk assessment, and effective resuscitation to improve outcomes and limit the risk of complications . Several prognostic scoring systems have been developed to identify high- and low-risk patients presenting with UGIB and are commonly used in emergency departments to classify patients. Identifying low-risk patients who can be treated electively or on an outpatient basis can reduce the burden on physicians, patients, and the healthcare system (Rout et al., 2019). On the other hand, identifying high-risk patients who require immediate hospitalization and intervention can help avoid delays in treatment, thereby reducing morbidity and mortality. By using appropriate risk assessment tools, it is possible not only to predict which patients are at risk of adverse events such as rebleeding or death, but also to make management decisions such as the timing of endoscopy, length of hospital stay, and level of care . Several pre-endoscopy scoring systems have been developed to predict the need for hospital-based intervention (transfusion, endoscopic treatment, radiological embolization, or surgery) and 30-day mortality risk. The pre-endoscopic Rockall score (pRS), the Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS), and the AIMS65 score are the most widely used scoring systems in clinical practice . The GBS was established as a tool for assessing the need for medical interventions (e.g., blood transfusion, therapeutic endoscopy, or surgery). The pRS and AIMS65 have been shown to predict mortality most accurately among patients with UGIB. In addition, AIMS65 is a simple risk score consisting of easily accessible parameters that was created to improve adherence to risk stratification and facilitate early triage and targeted therapy. However, there are limitations in these scoring systems. The GBS is difficult to calculate in routine clinical practice due to its complex nature . Moreover, the discriminative performance of existing scores for the prediction of mortality is relatively poor . Two new relatively simple scores were developed to predict the outcome in patients presenting with UGIB, the Horibe gastrointestinal bleeding (HARBINGER) score (Horibe et al., 2016), and the Age, Blood tests, and Comorbidities (ABC) score (Laursen et al., 2021). The Horibe score was developed primarily to triage patients presented with UGIB (need for hospital admission, endoscopic intervention), while the ABC score was developed to predict 30-day mortality in patients presenting with UGIB. Both scores demonstrated good performance in studies conducted for their validation and may be superior to the existing pre-endoscopy scores .
This study is designed as a multicenter prospective data recording study to document the performance of the DAT clip as part of standard medical care of patients. No experimental interventions will be performed.
The purpose of this research study is to measure the effect on of a large language model interface on the usability, attitudes, and provider trust when using a machine learning algorithm-based clinical decision support system in the setting of bleeding from the upper gastrointestinal tract (upper GIB). Specifically, the investigators are looking to assess the optimal implementation of such machine learning algorithms in simulation scenarios to best engender trust and improve usability. Participants will be randomized to either machine learning algorithm alone or algorithm with a large language model interface and exposed to simulation cases of upper GIB.
Prognostic Value of AIMS65 Score to predict outcome in patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Emerging studies have evaluated POCUS (Point of Care Ultrasound) for assessing of gastric content prior to anesthesia to reduce the risk of aspiration and demonstrated that POCUS can accurately identify presence of gastric food or fluid. Despite accumulating studies evaluating POCUS as a diagnostic modality to evaluate for gastric food content prior to anesthesia, there is no study to date that has evaluated the role of POCUS prior to endoscopy among patients with upper GI bleeding. Therefore, this study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of POCUS for retained gastric content prior to endoscopy among patient hospitalized/admitted with upper GI bleeding. This study would take place at Loma Linda University Medical Center. Subjects will be any one who has upper GI bleed required EGD and age of greater than 18 years old. The study will plan for 1 year or reach 50 patients (whichever one comes first). In addition, subjects will be recruited from ED, ICU, Medicine ward by the PI, SubPI, and Collaborators. Subject will received ultrasound up to 6 hours prior the start of endoscopy. The location of Ultrasound would either take place at GI lab prior to scope or at the ward prior to transportation to GI lab or at ICU prior to endoscopy. The ultrasound would focus upper abdomen area and look for antrum. the result will be immediately read before endoscopy and fill out on the sheet before the endoscopy. Patient then proceed with endoscopy. At the end of the scope, the researcher will ask the endoscopist questions regarding how well they could see each part of the stomach in order to complete the study. Both results are compared between US and Endoscopy. Endoscopist is blinded in this study.
The goal of this clinical trial is to test if metoclopramide can improve effectiveness of endoscopic intervention in upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeds. The main questions the investigators hope to answer is Does metoclopramide lessen the need for repeat endoscopy, interventional radiology intervention or surgery in cases of upper GI bleed? Does metoclopramide improve visibility of the GI walls in cases of upper GI bleed?
Commonly employed medications used in critically ill patients requiring life support include proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). These medications are thought to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding from stress-induced ulceration. Despite their widespread use, they do hold some risks which include infection in the form of pneumonia and diarrheal illnesses such as Clostridioides difficile infection (C. difficile). Emerging high-quality studies suggest PPI usage does not influence susceptibility to COVID-19 infection, however some studies suggest PPI use leads to poor outcomes in this population, including prolonged time on life-support and death. While we can appreciate the negative effects of PPI may be magnified in the sickest of patients, namely hospitalized patients with COVID-19, the beneficial or potentially harmful role they play in this population remains unclear. We aim to build a clinical profile to further describe critically ill patients with COVID-19 in Ontario using the infrastructure of an ongoing multicenter clinical trial of acid suppression. We will identify characteristics that predict poor outcomes among sick COVID patients, examining the impact of PPIs on this population.