Dataset Information

Weekend effect in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: Aim:To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the weekend effect on the mortality of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding(UGIB). Methods:The review protocol has been registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration number: CRD42017073313) and was written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We conducted a search of the PUBMED, COCHRANE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases from inception to August 2017. All observational studies comparing mortality between UGIB patients with weekend versus weekday admissions were included. Articles that were published only in abstract form or not published in a peer-reviewed journal were excluded. The quality of articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We pooled results from the articles using random-effect models. Heterogeneity was evaluated by the chi-square-based Q-test and I2 test. To address heterogeneity, we performed sensitivity and subgroup analyses. Potential publication bias was assessed via funnel plot. Results:Eighteen observational cohort studies involving 1,232,083 study patients were included. Weekend admission was associated with significantly higher 30-day or in-hospital mortality in all studies (OR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.07-1.17], P < 0.00001). Increased in-hospital mortality was also associated with weekend admission (OR = 1.12, 95% CI [1.08-1.17], P < 0.00001). No significant difference in in-hospital mortality was observed between patients admitted with variceal bleeding during the weekend or on weekdays (OR = 0.99, 95% CI [0.91-1.08], P = 0.82); however, weekend admission was associated with a 15% increase in in-hospital mortality for patients with non-variceal bleeding (OR = 1.15, 95% CI [1.09-1.21], P < 0.00001). The time to endoscopy for weekday admission was significantly less than that obtained for weekend admission (MD = -2.50, 95% CI [-4.08--0.92], P = 0.002). Conclusions:The weekend effect is associated with increased mortality of UGIB patients, particularly in non-variceal bleeding. The timing of endoscopic intervention might be a factor that influences mortality of UGIB patients.

SUBMITTER: Shih PC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5768163 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Weekend effect in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Shih Pei-Ching PC Liu Shu-Jung SJ Li Sung-Tse ST Chiu Ai-Chen AC Wang Po-Chuan PC Liu Lawrence Yu-Min LY

PeerJ 20180112

<h4>Aim</h4>To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the weekend effect on the mortality of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding(UGIB).<h4>Methods</h4>The review protocol has been registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration number: CRD42017073313) and was written according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We conducted a search of the PUBMED, COCHRANE, EMBASE and ...[more]

PMID: 29340247

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background:Patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) often require urgent or emergent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and are at risk of complications such as aspiration of gastric content or blood. The role of prophylactic endotracheal intubation (PEI) in the absence of usual respiratory status-related indications is not well established. Methods:We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library's Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and SCOPUS from inception through July 2017 without date or language of publication restriction. We included studies that compared PEI with usual care (UC) in patients with acute UGIB, and reported any of the following outcomes: aspiration, pneumonia, mortality and length of stay. We excluded studies in which majority of included patients required intubation due to respiratory failure or decreased level of consciousness. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome. Results:We did not identify any randomized trials on this topic. We included 10 observational studies (n = 6068). We were not able to perform any adjusted analyses. PEI was associated with a significant increase in aspiration (OR 3.85, 95% CI, 1.46, 10.25; P = 0.01; I2 = 56%; low-quality evidence), pneumonia (OR 4.17, 95% CI, 1.82, 9.57; P = 0.0007; I2 =52%; low-quality evidence) and hospital length of stay (mean difference 0.86 days, 95% CI 0.13, 1.59; P = 0.02; I2 = 0; low-quality evidence), without clear effect on mortality (OR 1.92, 95% CI, 0.71, 5.23; P = 0.2; I2 = 95%; very low-quality evidence). Conclusions:Low- to very low-quality evidence from observational studies suggests that PEI in the setting of UGIB may be associated with higher rates of respiratory complications and, less likely, with increased mortality. Although the results are alarming, the lack of higher quality evidence calls for randomized trials to inform practice.

Project description:Background: Several risk scores have attempted to risk stratify patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) who are at a lower risk of requiring hospital-based interventions or negative outcomes including death. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare predictive abilities of pre-endoscopic scores in prognosticating the absence of adverse events in patients with UGIB. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Central, and ISI Web of knowledge from inception to February 2023. All fully published studies assessing a pre-endoscopic score in patients with UGIB were included. The primary outcome was a composite score for the need of a hospital-based intervention (endoscopic therapy, surgery, angiography, or blood transfusion). Secondary outcomes included: mortality, rebleeding, or the individual endpoints of the composite outcome. Both proportional and comparative analyses were performed. Results: Thirty-eight studies were included from 2153 citations, (n = 36,215 patients). Few patients with a low Glasgow-Blatchford score (GBS) cutoff (0, ≤1 and ≤2) required hospital-based interventions (0.02 (0.01, 0.05), 0.04 (0.02, 0.09) and 0.03 (0.02, 0.07), respectively). The proportions of patients with clinical Rockall (CRS = 0) and ABC (≤3) scores requiring hospital-based intervention were 0.19 (0.15, 0.24) and 0.69 (0.62, 0.75), respectively. GBS (cutoffs 0, ≤1 and ≤2), CRS (cutoffs 0, ≤1 and ≤2), AIMS65 (cutoffs 0 and ≤1) and ABC (cutoffs ≤1 and ≤3) scores all were associated with few patients (0.01–0.04) dying. The proportion of patients suffering other secondary outcomes varied between scoring systems but, in general, was lowest for the GBS. GBS (using cutoffs 0, ≤1 and ≤2) showed excellent discriminative ability in predicting the need for hospital-based interventions (OR 0.02, (0.00, 0.16), 0.00 (0.00, 0.02) and 0.01 (0.00, 0.01), respectively). A CRS cutoff of 0 was less discriminative. For the other secondary outcomes, discriminative abilities varied between scores but, in general, the GBS (using cutoffs up to 2) was clinically useful for most outcomes. Conclusions: A GBS cut-off of one or less prognosticated low-risk patients the best. Expanding the GBS cut-off to 2 maintains prognostic accuracy while allowing more patients to be managed safely as outpatients. The evidence is limited by the number, homogeneity, quality, and generalizability of available data and subjectivity of deciding on clinical impact. Additional, comparative and, ideally, interventional studies are needed.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess whether corticosteroids are associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind, controlled trials comparing a corticosteroid to placebo for any medical condition or in healthy participants. Studies with steroids given either locally, as a single dose, or in crossover studies were excluded.Data sourcesLiterature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews between 1983 and 22 May 2013.Outcome measureOutcome measures were the occurrence of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation. Predefined subgroup analyses were carried out for disease severity, use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or gastroprotective drugs, and history of peptic ulcer.Results159 studies (N=33?253) were included. In total, 804 (2.4%) patients had a gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation (2.9% and 2.0% for corticosteroids and placebo). Corticosteroids increased the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation by 40% (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66). The risk was increased for hospitalised patients (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.66). For patients in ambulatory care, the increased risk was not statistically significant (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 6.34). Only 11 gastrointestinal bleeds or perforations occurred among 8651 patients in ambulatory care (0.13%). Increased risk was still present in subgroup analyses (studies with NSAID use excluded; OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.71, peptic ulcer as an exclusion criterion excluded; OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.78, and use of gastroprotective drugs excluded; OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.67).ConclusionsCorticosteroid use was associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation. The increased risk was statistically significant for hospitalised patients only. For patients in ambulatory care, the total occurrence of bleeding or perforation was very low, and the increased risk was not statistically significant.

Dataset Information

Weekend effect in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Publications

Weekend effect in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets