Comorbidities Affect Risk of Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Unit, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals National Health Service Trust, Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK. Electronic address: .
Gastroenterology (Impact Factor: 16.72). 06/2013; 144(7):1384–1393.e2. DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.02.040


Background & Aims
The incidence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) has not been reduced despite the decreasing incidence of peptic ulcers, strategies to eradicate Helicobacter pylori infection, and prophylaxis against ulceration from nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Other factors might therefore be involved in the pathogenesis of GIB. Patients with GIB have increasing nongastrointestinal comorbidity, so we investigated whether comorbidity itself increased the risk of GIB.

We conducted a matched case-control study using linked primary and secondary care data collected in England from April 1, 1997 through August 31, 2010. Patients older than 15 years with nonvariceal GIB (n = 16,355) were matched to 5 controls by age, sex, year, and practice (n = 81,636). All available risk factors for GIB were extracted and modeled using conditional logistic regression. Adjusted associations with nongastrointestinal comorbidity, defined using the Charlson Index, were then tested and sequential population attributable fractions calculated.

Comorbidity had a strong graded association with GIB; the adjusted odds ratio for a single comorbidity was 1.43 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.35–1.52) and for multiple or severe comorbidity was 2.26 (95% CI: 2.14%–2.38%). The additional population attributable fraction for comorbidity (19.8%; 95% CI: 18.4%–21.2%) was considerably larger than that for any other measured risk factor, including aspirin or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use (3.0% and 3.1%, respectively).

Nongastrointestinal comorbidity is an independent risk factor for GIB, and contributes to a greater proportion of patients with bleeding in the population than other recognized risk factors. These findings could help in the assessment of potential causes of GIB, and also explain why the incidence of GIB remains high in an aging population.

14 Reads
  • Source
    • "However, orally administered NSAIDs are associated with serious and potentially fatal gastrointestinal and cardiovascular complications . Risks of these complications are increased in patients with comorbidities, the elderly, and in patients taking certain other medications including, but not limited to, antithrombotic agents, corticosteroids, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors [4] [5]. In particular, elderly patients are at risk of serious toxicity from systemically administered NSAIDs. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Topical formulations of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are generally considered to be safer alternatives to oral NSAIDs due to lower systemic absorption. We conducted randomized, crossover studies that compared the pharmacokinetics (PK), bioequivalence and safety of topical diclofenac sodium 2% twice daily (BID), diclofenac sodium 1.5% four times daily (QID) and oral diclofenac sodium in healthy subjects. The results of three bioequivalence studies are reviewed. Healthy adult subjects (n = 76) applied topical diclofenac sodium 2% solution (40.4 mg/2 mL) BID; or 1.5% solution (19.3 mg/40 drops) QID to each knee for 7.5 consecutive days separated by a washout period. Subjects (n = 22) in one study also received oral diclofenac sodium 75 mg BID for 7.5 days. Plasma diclofenac concentrations were determined from serial blood samples collected on Days 1 and 8 (steady state), and diclofenac PK parameters were estimated by noncompartmental methods. The studies demonstrated comparable bioequivalence between the 2% and 1.5% topical solutions as well as lower systemic exposure compared to oral dosing (approximately 93% less). Daily systemic exposure was comparable between the two formulations with only a 12% difference in the AUCss0-24 (p = 0.140). Furthermore, both topical solutions demonstrated delayed elimination with a t1/2 of 4- to 6-fold longer, as compared to oral diclofenac. The 2% solution provided more consistent dosing relative to the 1.5% solution when comparing AUCss0-24 and Cmaxss across studies. Mild application site reactions were the most common treatment-emergent adverse event reported with topical diclofenac. The steady-state PK profile of topical diclofenac 2% solution administered BID is similar to that of the 1.5% solution administered QID. Systemic exposure to diclofenac is substantially lower after topical application as compared to oral administration. (Study 2 was registered with; NCT01202799;
    Postgraduate Medicine 06/2015; 127(6):1-10. DOI:10.1080/00325481.2015.1058689 · 1.70 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The value of prevention strategies could also be limited by population-related factors (such as age, comorbidities, social conditions , and habits) [17] [18] [19]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Gastrointestinal bleeding is the most frequent emergency for gastroenterologists. Despite advances in management, an improvement in mortality is still not evident. Determining time trends of gastrointestinal bleeding hospitalization and outcomes from 2001 to 2010 in the Veneto Region (Italy). Data of patients admitted with gastrointestinal bleeding from Veneto regional discharge records were retrospectively evaluated. Chi-squared and multivariate logistic regression model were used. Overall, 44,343 patients (mean age 64.2±8.6 years) with gastrointestinal bleeding were analysed: 23,450 (52.9%) had upper, 13,800 (31.1%) lower, and 7093 (16%) undefined gastrointestinal bleeding. Admission rate decreased from 108.0 per 100,000 in 2001 to 80.7 in 2010, mainly owing to a decrease in upper gastrointestinal bleeding (64.4 to 35.9 per 100,000, p<0.05). Reductions in hospital fatality rate (from 5.3% to 3%, p<0.05), length of hospital stay (from 9.3 to 8.7 days, p<0.05), and need for surgery (from 5.6% to 5%, p<0.05) were observed. Surgery (OR: 2.97, 95% CI: 2.59-3.41) and undefined gastrointestinal bleeding (OR: 2.89, 95% CI: 2.62-3.19) were found to be risk factors for mortality. Patient admissions for gastrointestinal bleeding decreased significantly over the years, owing to a decrease in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Improved outcomes could be related to regional dedicated clinical gastroenterological management.
    Digestive and Liver Disease 12/2013; 46(4). DOI:10.1016/j.dld.2013.11.005 · 2.96 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Study Design. Retrospective database analysis.Objective. In order to determine rates of gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage following lumbar fusions, a population-based database was analyzed to identify incidence, mortality, and risk factors associated with anterior (ALF), posterior (PLF), and simultaneous anterior/posterior (APLF) lumbar procedures.Summary of Background Data. GI hemorrhage following lumbar surgery is a rare complication that can have devastating consequences. Incidences of GI bleeding after lumbar fusion are not well characterized in the current literature.Methods. Data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample was obtained from 2002-2009. Patients undergoing ALF, PLF, and APLF for degenerative pathologies were identified and the incidence of GI hemorrhage was evaluated. Patient demographics, Charlson Co-morbidity Index (CCI), length of stay (LOS), costs, and mortality were assessed. SPSS v.20 was used to detect statistical differences between groups and perform logistic regression analyses to identify independent predictors of GI bleeding. A p-value of <0.001 denoted significance.Results. A total of 220,522 lumbar fusions were identified in the United States from 2002-2009. Of these, 19,762 were ALFs, 182,801 were PLFs, and 17,959 were APLFs. GI bleeding was noted in ALFs with 1.1 events per 1,000 cases, PLFs with 1.4, and APLFs with 1.7. Patients with GI bleeding demonstrated greater CCI scores, LOS, costs, and mortality (p<0.001). Logistic regression analysis demonstrated independent predictors of GI hemorrhage include advanced age (>65 years), male gender, blood-loss anemia, fluid/electrolyte disorders, metastatic neoplasm, and weight loss (p<0.001).Conclusion. The results of our study demonstrate very low complication rates of GI hemorrhage across ALFs, PLFs, and APLF cohorts. Across all surgical procedures, the presence of GI bleeding complications was associated with greater co-morbidity, LOS, cost, and mortality. We strongly advise physicians to perform stringent peri-operative assessments of risk factors and to provide prompt medical attention in order to minimize the impact of GI bleeding complications.
    Spine 04/2013; 38(18). DOI:10.1097/BRS.0b013e318298768d · 2.30 Impact Factor
Show more

Similar Publications

Preview (2 Sources)

14 Reads
Available from