Published online Nov 6, 2015. doi: 10.4292/wjgpt.v6.i4.172
Peer-review started: March 5, 2015
First decision: April 29, 2015
Revised: May 10, 2015
Accepted: September 28, 2015
Article in press: October 9, 2015
Published online: November 6, 2015
Processing time: 250 Days and 15.3 Hours
Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is defined as bleeding proximal to the ligament of Treitz in the absence of oesophageal, gastric or duodenal varices. The clinical presentation varies according to the intensity of bleeding from occult bleeding to melena or haematemesis and haemorrhagic shock. Causes of UGIB are peptic ulcers, Mallory-Weiss lesions, erosive gastritis, reflux oesophagitis, Dieulafoy lesions or angiodysplasia. After admission to the hospital a structured approach to the patient with acute UGIB that includes haemodynamic resuscitation and stabilization as well as pre-endoscopic risk stratification has to be done. Endoscopy offers not only the localisation of the bleeding site but also a variety of therapeutic measures like injection therapy, thermocoagulation or endoclips. Endoscopic therapy is facilitated by acid suppression with proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy. These drugs are highly effective but the best route of application (oral vs intravenous) and the adequate dosage are still subjects of discussion. Patients with ulcer disease are tested for Helicobacter pylori and eradication therapy should be given if it is present. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs have to be discontinued if possible. If discontinuation is not possible, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors in combination with PPI have the lowest bleeding risk but the incidence of cardiovascular events is increased.
Core tip: Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is still accompanied by a significant mortality rate in older patients. Causes of UGIB are ulcers, Mallory-Weiss lesions, erosions, esophagitis or angiodysplasia. Endoscopy offers the localisation of the bleeding site as well as a variety of therapeutic measures. Patients with peptic lesions are effectively treated with proton pump inhibitors. Helicobacter pylori is a risk factor for the genesis of peptic ulcers and eradication therapy should be given if it is present.
- Citation: Biecker E. Diagnosis and therapy of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther 2015; 6(4): 172-182
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2150-5349/full/v6/i4/172.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4292/wjgpt.v6.i4.172
Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is defined as bleeding proximal to the band of Treitz. Approximately 10% to 20% of bleeding episodes are from esophageal, gastric or duodenal varices or from portal hypertensive gastropathy related to portal hypertension. This article will deal only with non-variceal UGIB. Table 1 gives an overview of possible causes of UGIB.
Peptic ulcer | |
Oesophagitis | |
Drug-induced mucosal damage (NSAID) | Ulcer |
Erosion | |
Traumatic or postoperative lesions | Mallory-Weiss lesion |
Arterio-intestinal fistula | |
Malignant tumor | |
Sequelae of portal hypertension | Oesophageal varices |
Varices of the gastric fundus | |
Portal hypertensive gastropathy | |
Vascular anomalies | Dieulafoy lesion |
Gastric antral vascular ectasia (GAVE syndrome) | |
Angiodysplasia | |
Rendu-Osler-Weber syndrome (hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia) | |
Bleeding from the hepato-pancreatico-biliary system | |
Bleeding from a duodenal diverticulum |
The reported annual incidence of UGIB ranges from 48 to 160 cases per 100000 adults[1-6], with a mortality from 10% to 14%[4,7]. Besides the advances in endoscopy and intensive care medicine, these mortality rates have not changed very much during the last decades[3,4,7]. Most likely, this is caused by the fact that patients with UGIB are nowadays older and more likely to have relevant co-morbidity than in the past. Accordingly, the mortality rate in patients under the age of 60 years and no relevant co-morbidity is almost zero[8].
Clinical signs of UGIB are vomiting of blood (haematemesis) and/or passage of black, tarry stools (melena). In some cases, melena might be caused by bleeding from the small intestine downwards the duodenum. Tarry stools are usually seen if more than 50 mL to 100 mL of blood is lost per day. The passage of bright red blood per rectum (haematochezia) could be caused by severe, brisk bleeding. Non-specific signs like fatigue, prostration or shortness of breath could be caused by occult bleeding. Typical laboratory findings are anaemia, low MCV, low ferritin and an increase in the reticulocyte count. Patients are haemodynamically affected (hypotension, tachycardia) if more than 10% to 20% of the total intravascular blood volume is lost. Several clinical signs provide clues to the localisation of the bleeding: Melena and/or haematemesis indicate UGIB. Haematochezia indicates lower gastrointestinal bleeding or massive bleeding in the upper GI-tract, typically distal of the pylorus. Ascites and/or jaundice make the diagnosis of liver cirrhosis very likely and point at variceal bleeding. Special attention should be paid to the medical history of the patient: Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) or acetyl-salicylic acid (ASA) make bleeding from ulcers or severe erosive gastritis likely. The presence of an aortic prosthesis increases the risk of an aorto-intestinal fistula.
Patients who present with signs and symptoms of UGIB should first be stratified into low or high risk[8,9] to guide further treatment. The stratification is done on the basis of clinical, endoscopic and laboratory criteria using prognostic scales. The most used scores in clinical practice are the Blatchford et al[10] and Rockall et al[11] scores. Tables 2 and 3 give a concise overview of the two scores. Both scores allow the identification of patients with low risk, meaning that these patients do not require emergence endoscopy and could safely be managed as outpatients. Clinical criteria include pulse, blood pressure, melena, cardiac failure, syncope and evidence of liver disease. Placement of a naso-gastric tube and aspiration of blood make the diagnosis of an acute bleeding very likely. Haemoglobin and blood urea levels are laboratory criteria.
Admission risk marker | Score component value |
Blood urea (mmol/L) | |
6.5-8.0 | 2 |
8.0-10.0 | 3 |
10.0-25 | 4 |
> 25 | 6 |
Haemoglobin (g/dL) for men | |
12.0-12.9 | 1 |
10.0-11.9 | 3 |
< 10.0 | 6 |
Haemoglobin (g/dL) for women | |
10.0-11.9 | 1 |
< 10.0 | 6 |
Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | |
100-109 | 1 |
90-99 | 2 |
< 90 | 3 |
Other markers | |
Pulse ≥ 100 (per minute) | 1 |
Presentation with melaena | 1 |
Presentation with syncope | 2 |
Liver disease | 2 |
Cardiac failure | 2 |
Variable | Score 0 | Score 1 | Score 2 | Score 3 |
Age | < 60 | 60-79 | ≥ 80 | |
Shock | No shock | Pulse ≥ 100 | Systolic blood pressure < 100 | |
Systolic blood pressure ≥ 100 | ||||
Co-morbidity | Non major | Chronic heart failure, ischemic heart disease, major comorbidity | Renal failure, liver failure, metastatic cancer | |
Diagnosis | Mallory-Weiss lesion | All other diagnoses | GI malignancy | |
Evidence of bleeding | None | Blood, adherent clot, visible or spurting vessel |
Every patient who is haemodynamically instable should first be stabilized in an intensive care-unit before endoscopic diagnostic or therapy is initiated.
The risk of re-bleeding is based on the Forrest classification[12] (Table 4) and endoscopic findings like the localisation of the bleeding and type of bleeding (ulcer, cancer or variceal bleeding).
Re-bleeding risk (%) | |
Acute bleeding | |
Forrest I a (spurting bleeding) | 90 |
Forrest I b (oozing bleeding) | 50 |
Signs of recent bleeding | |
Forrest II a (visible vessel) | 25-30 |
Forrest II b (adherent clot) | 10-20 |
Forrest II c (flat pigmented haematin on ulcer base) | 7-10 |
Lesions without active bleeding | |
Forrest III (lesions without signs of recent bleeding or fibrin-covered clean ulcer base) | 3-5 |
In contrast to immediate and sufficient volume resuscitation, the timing and amount of blood transfusions in patients with UGIB is a subject of intense discussion. It is widely accepted that patients with a haemoglobin level of 7 g/dL or less should receive a transfusion, whereas it is rarely indicated in patients with a haemoglobin level of 10 g/dL or more. The threshold for each patient has to be individually defined and depends on factors like age, haemodynamic status, markers of tissue hypoxia and presence of coronary artery disease. A meta-analysis of studies in a heterogeneous group of critically ill patients (trauma, surgery, intensive care)[13] showed that transfusion was associated with an increase in mortality, multi-organ failure as well as an increase in nosocomial infection and acute respiratory distress syndrome. Yet, confounding factors of this meta-analysis by the need for transfusion itself could not be excluded.
Most national[8] and international guidelines[14,15] on UGIB recommend a target level for blood transfusions in patients without signs of tissue hypoxia and/or coronary artery disease in the range of 7 g/dL to 9 g/dL. This was confirmed by a trial in critical care patients that demonstrated a lower mortality in patients with a haemoglobin level of 7 g/dL to 9 g/dL compared to patients with a haemoglobin level of 10 g/dL to 12 g/dL[16]. However, in the context of UGIB the study has to be interpreted with caution since patients with UGIB were excluded in this study. A lower mortality in patients with UGIB and a restrictive transfusion regimen (haemoglobin below 7 g/dL vs haemoglobin below 9 g/dL) was shown in a recent trial including 921 patients[17]. In patients with massive bleeding the haemoglobin level is of limited use only, since there is no time for haemodilution and a drop in haemoglobin concentration to develop. Therefore, patients with massive bleeding should be managed with transfusion of blood, platelets, clotting factors and volume resuscitation according to local protocols for managing massive bleeding.
A reasonable amount of patients with UGIB is on a medication with anticoagulants, but data from clinical trials that investigated correction of an underlying coagulopathy is sparse. A retrospective study was not able to show that patients with a baseline international normalized ratio (INR) greater than 1.3 had a higher risk of re-bleeding, surgery or mortality[18]. These findings were substantiated by another study[19], in which neither platelet count nor INR predicted re-bleeding. In contrast to these findings, one study, published in abstract form only, showed that an INR of 1.5 or greater at presentation is a predictor of mortality[20]. Correction of coagulopathy to an INR of less than 1.8 led to a lower mortality compared to a historical control group[21] without differences in time to endoscopy and units of transfused blood. Another study that compared cohorts of patients that underwent endoscopic treatment was not able to show differences in mortality, re-bleeding or need for surgery between patients on warfarin whose INR was corrected using fresh frozen plasma compared to patients without correction of coagulopathy[22]. The recommendation for clinical practice is that coagulopathy should not delay early endoscopic treatment and that coagulopathy should be corrected to an INR of 1.5 or less to facilitate endoscopic treatment. Correction of coagulopathy is best done by the application of prothrombin complex[23]. In patients on warfarin therapy, iv Vitamin K should be administered. The situation is even more complicated by the fact that an increasing amount of patients is on a therapy with target-specific oral anticoagulants like rivaroxaban or epixaban. Antidotes or specific reversal agents for these drugs are lacking. The INR is of no value in target-specific oral anticoagulants and correction of coagulopathy using prothrombin complex on the basis of the clinical needs and judgement is necessary[24].
Platelet transfusion is not necessary in patients who are haemodynamically stable and have no signs of active bleeding. In contrast, patients with active bleeding and a platelet count of less than 50 G/L should receive platelets[8]. A substantial gap in evidence still remains in the case of massive bleeding. At the moment, there are no high-quality trials on the effect of component therapies and the ratio of red blood transfusion to component therapies or therapy with recombinant factor VIIa[25].
Endoscopy is able to identify the bleeding site in more than 80% of patients. It is the principle diagnostic tool in UGIB and haemostatic therapy could be applied. While diagnostic endoscopy in clinically stable patients without relevant co-morbidity is safe, complications may arise in actively bleeding patients with co-morbidities. Therefore, patients should be sufficiently stabilized before endoscopy is performed[8,15].
Several studies investigated the best time point for endoscopy in patients with suspected UGIB. Endoscopy within the first 24 h (early endoscopy) improves outcomes of high-risk patients and allows for early discharge of low-risk patients[9,26]. Only in a minority of high-risk patients endoscopy should be delayed due to reasons that make endoscopy an additional risk factor (e.g., perforation, acute coronary syndrome). Endoscopy within 24 h after presentation was performed in the majority (> 75%) of patients in a US-study[27], whereas in a study from the United Kingdom[28] only half of the patients received endoscopy within the first 24 h. Early endoscopy is considered safe and effective in the vast majority of patients and is associated with a reduction in the length of hospital stay in patients of all risk groups[29-35]. A cohort analysis[28] showed a relevant trend (however not statistically significant) that the availability of after-hour endoscopy decreased mortality. These results are substantiated by findings that patients with UGIB who were admitted on weekends had higher in-hospital mortality[29]. However, a more recent study from the United Kingdom was not able to show a higher mortality in patients who were admitted on weekends[36]. Whereas these findings are in favour of early endoscopy within 24 h after presentation, a meta-analysis found no difference in mortality, reduction in re-bleeding or surgery comparing very early endoscopy (< 12 h) over early endoscopy (> 24 h)[15]. One study analysed the need for transfusions and length of hospital stay in patients with blood in the gastric tube aspirate and time to endoscopy < 12 h or > 12 h[33]. They found less need for blood transfusions and shorter hospital stay in the patients who underwent endoscopy in the first 12 h after presentation. Most likely the conflicting results in the available studies are due to the heterogeneity of the included patients. A study identified independent predictors for the need of endoscopy within 12 h after presentation[37]: Fresh blood in the gastric tube aspirate, hemodynamic instability, haemoglobin below 8 g/dL and a leukocyte count of more than 12 G/L. The recommendation from the available data is that patients with suspected UGIB should undergo endoscopy within 24 h after presentation. Patients who are hemodynamically instable and/or blood in the naso-gastric tube aspirate should undergo endoscopy immediately after resuscitation, at least within 12 h after presentation.
The rationale for an acid suppressing therapy is to increase intra-gastric pH and to achieve stabilization of the blood clot that plugs the vessel defect and to promote ulcer healing. Whereas proton pump inhibitors (PPI) therapy is well tolerated and side effects in the acute, short-term use are rare, it is questionable if all patients that present with haematemesis or melena actually need PPI-therapy, since approximately 80% of ulcers stop bleeding without any form of intervention and re-bleeding is rare.
While the debate whether pre-endoscopic PPI-treatment is cost-effective or not[38-40] is ongoing, it is advisable in situations where endoscopic treatment is delayed or endoscopic expertise is not sufficient.
The effect of pre-endoscopic treatment with PPI was investigated in several trials and summarized in a Cochrane analysis[41] that was later updated by additional studies[42]. Of the included studies, one used an oral PPI regimen whereas the remaining five studies investigated iv PPI treatment. The meta-analysis was not able to show differences in re-bleeding, surgical intervention or mortality between the patients on PPI-treatment and patients in the control group. Nevertheless, the patients in the treatment group had less high-risk stigmata and need for endoscopic treatment.
The use of PPI therapy in patients with UGIB was investigated in numerous studies. A Cochrane analysis from 2006[43] as well as an update of this meta-analysis[44] comprising 24 and 31 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), respectively, studied PPI-treatment. Therapy with PPI - alone or in combination with endoscopic treatment - compared to placebo or histamine receptor antagonists reduced re-bleeding and need for surgery but did not reduce mortality[40]. Subgroup analysis of the data revealed a lower mortality for patients with active bleeding and endoscopic haemostasis who were treated with an 80 mg PPI bolus followed by continuous infusion of 8 mg/h. In contrast, lower doses of PPI reduced re-bleeding but had no effect on mortality. These findings were substantiated by another meta-analysis from the year 2009[45] that found lower re-bleeding rates, need for surgery and mortality in patients with high-dose intravenous PPI therapy. One meta-analysis compared continuous intravenous PPI therapy with bolus intravenous therapy and found bolus therapy as effective as continuous therapy[46]. Lower PPI doses were also associated with less re-bleeding but had no effect on surgery and mortality. Even though there is strong evidence that high-dose PPI therapy combined with endoscopic therapy is highly effective, it is still a subject of intense discussion whether oral PPI therapy is as effective as intravenous therapy. A recent Cochrane analysis was not able to draw a final conclusion since the available studies are not sufficient[47]. A more recent meta-analysis came to the conclusion that oral and intravenous PPI therapies are comparable[48] but also criticized the low quality of the available studies. One recent single-center Asian study that compared high-dose oral PPI therapy with intravenous high-dose PPI therapy in patients with Forrest Ia/Ib or IIa/IIb peptic ulcer found no difference in the risk of re-bleeding between the two groups[49].
Cost effective analyses revealed a clear advantage for high-dose intravenous PPI therapy for three days following successful endoscopic haemostasis[50-52] compared to placebo-as mentioned above, adequate RCTs comparing high-dose intravenous PPI with standard dose intravenous PPI or high dose oral PPI therapy are not yet available.
Two trials showed that PPI therapy in hospitalized patients might be associated with Clostridium difficile infection[53,54]. These findings were substantiated by a recent retrospective cohort study[55]. However, the benefits of PPI treatment in UGIB clearly outweigh this risk.
Post-endoscopic PPI therapy depends on the underlying aetiology of UGIB. In most RCTs, oral PPI therapy was initiated three days after the acute bleeding episode and a dose once daily is thought to be appropriate[56-60]. One trial that investigated the role of PPI therapy in the non-acute setting demonstrated effective ulcer healing with a once daily dose[61]. The duration of therapy is not clearly defined. Patients with Helicobacter negative ulcers who require long-term NSAID therapy might need concomitant continuing PPI therapy.
Several endoscopic techniques to achieve haemostasis are available. Epinephrine injection is easy to perform and effective in the acute setting but re-bleeding occurs in almost all patients. Therefore, it should be used in combination with another method. The application of clips, thermocoagulation, injection with a sclerosing agent or fibrin or thrombin glue could be performed alone or in combination with epinephrine injection. A new method for the treatment of refractory bleeding is the over the scope clip, that allows the treatment of large defects[62].
First of all, the ulcer bed should be cleaned from blood and blood clots by vigorous irrigation to visualize the underlying lesion. By irrigation alone, the underlying stigmata are exposed in 26% to 43% of cases[63,64]. It is a subject of discussion[45,65] whether adherent clots should be removed by using more vigorous methods like cold guillotining with a snare. There is good evidence that the risk for re-bleeding with clots that remain adherent after washing without endoscopic therapy (only therapy with a proton-pump inhibitor) is as low as 0% to 8%[63,66]. One Asian study that compared endoscopic therapy plus high-dose iv PPI therapy with high-dose iv PPI therapy alone[66] found no re-bleeding in the patients in whom the adherent clots could not be removed by irrigation. Since it is known that the PPI metabolism in Asian people differs from the metabolism in patients with Caucasian background, it is not clear whether these results could be extrapolated to an European or North American population. Furthermore, other studies revealed a re-bleeding risk of 25% to 35%[64,67-69] in high-risk patients. This subject was further evaluated in two meta-analyses: One meta-analysis from 2009[45] comprising 5 RCTs of patients with adherent clots found no advantage of endoscopic vs medical therapy alone. These data was substantiated by another meta-analysis comprising 6 RCTs[70] that was also not able to show a reduction in the re-bleeding risk in patients with endoscopic therapy compared to patients with medical therapy alone. On the other hand, a systematic review[71] did not show that endoscopic therapy increased the risk for complications. As a recommendation for clinical practice, patients who are at high risk for re-bleeding and an adherent clot to the ulcer base that is resistant to irrigation, endoscopic therapy after cold guillotining may be beneficial. In patients with a low risk of re-bleeding and those who are Helicobacter positive, high-dose PPI therapy alone might be sufficient.
Numerous studies and meta-analyses studied the efficacy of the available endoscopic techniques in patients with high-risk lesions[45,71-77]. Injection with epinephrine as a monotherapy has been shown to be superior to medical therapy alone but it is clearly inferior to other monotherapies like clip application, thermocoagulation or injection with alcohol, fibrin or thrombin glue[45,71-76,78]. The combination of epinephrine injection with one of the above mentioned therapies for the treatment of high-risk stigmata significantly reduces re-bleeding, need for surgery and mortality[75,78]. The combination of clip application with epinephrine injection is superior to epinephrine injection alone but not to clips alone[72,74]. This is also true for the combination therapy of injection with epinephrine and a second injectate or thermocoagulation[71]. Complication rates with mono- or combination therapy do not vary significantly[71,79,80].
There is an ongoing discussion whether a routine endoscopic control after the initial endoscopy is necessary or not. The advantages of a programmed second look endoscopy like the identification of residual stigmata that need re-treatment has to be outweighed against potential risks like an increase in ulcer perforation. Five studies[81-85] as well as two meta-analyses of these trials[86,87] investigated the benefit of a second-look endoscopy. The results from these trials were inconclusive due to methodological flaws. A more recent meta-analysis[88] found that routine second-look endoscopy and endoscopic treatment with thermocoagulation as appropriate reduced the risk of re-bleeding. In contrast to the use of a heater probe, second-look endoscopy with injection therapy did not reveal any advantages. Another meta-analysis[89] demonstrated that second look endoscopy decreased re-bleeding and need for surgery but not mortality. The impact of this meta-analysis is decreased by the fact that only one study with concomitant high-dose PPI therapy was included. All of the above mentioned studies had several methodological shortcomings: the included patients were heterogeneous; intervention and control treatments were not standardized. When looking at high risk patients who presented with haemorrhagic shock and/or active bleeding[81] or patients with a very high risk for re-bleeding based on the Forrest criteria[84] second look endoscopy led to a decrease in the re-bleeding rate. A trial, which included a control group that received high-dose iv PPI therapy-as it is standard now-found no benefit for second look therapy[81]. These findings suggest that second look endoscopy is not necessary in patients with high dose PPI therapy. Similar results were obtained from a cost-effectiveness study[90] that compared second-look endoscopy in selected high-risk patients only to second-look endoscopy in all patients and found endoscopy in selected patients to be more effective and less expensive. From the available data, routine second-look endoscopy is not recommended. However, patients at high-risk of re-bleeding might benefit from a programmed second-look endoscopy.
The highest risk for re-bleeding in patients treated with a combination of endoscopic and PPI therapy is within the first 72 h after the initial bleeding episode. Sixty to 76% of re-bleeding occurred in the first three days[56,57,59]. Thus, patients with bleeding from high-risk lesions should be treated as in-patients for at least three days. Patients at high-risk for re-bleeding should be monitored more intensely on an intensive or intermediate care unit for at least 24 h. Nevertheless, selected patients with ulcers not more than 15 mm in size, no relevant co-morbidity, appropriate family support and absence of haemorrhagic shock at presentation could be safely managed as outpatients[91].
If haemostasis could not be achieved or repeated re-bleeding occurs, it is associated with a high mortality. Patients rarely die because of exsanguination but because of problems that arouse from associated co-morbidity like cardiac events, acute kidney failure, infection or stroke. Accordingly, patients in whom endoscopic therapy failed should be admitted to surgery without delay. In patients who are high-risk candidates for surgery, percutaneous or transcatheter arterial embolization might be an alternative[92-99]. Data from uncontrolled trials revealed technically success rates from 52% to 98% with a reported re-bleeding rate of 10% to 20%[92-99]. The reported periprocedural mortality is as high as 25% to 30%. This is most likely due to the negative selection of patients with advanced age and co-morbidity to unstable to undergo surgery[92,93,95,97]. Possible complications of the procedure are mainly bowel ischemia or infarction of the stomach, liver or spleen[94,95,98-101].
Patients with UGIB from ulcers or haemorrhagic gastritis should be tested for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection and should undergo eradication therapy if H. pylori is present. The effectiveness in prevention of re-bleeding in peptic ulcer disease was demonstrated in a meta-analysis[102]. It is well known that H. pylori testing might reveal false negative results in the setting of an acute bleeding episode[103]. The reason is not fully understood but is most likely due to the alkaline setting that results in pH buffering from blood in the stomach[103] as well as from PPI therapy, which is dose-dependent. Therefore, an initially negative testing for H. pylori should be repeated during follow-up.
The use of NSAID and ASA is associated with a markedly increased risk of ulcer disease. Several studies addressed this issue and investigated whether the combination of NSAID and PPI decreased the risk for recurrent bleeding and also compared traditional NSAID with cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors. Two small trials with a relatively low patient number showed that the combination of NSAID with PPI therapy as well as COX-2 inhibitor therapy alone lowered the risk for recurrent bleeding compared to historical controls on a therapy with NSAID alone[104-106]. These findings are substantiated by population-based studies that also found a reduction in UGIB by adding PPI to traditional NSAID or by therapy with a COX-2 inhibitor alone[3,107]. The combination of a COX-2 inhibitor with PPI further decreased the bleeding risk compared to a COX-2 inhibitor alone[108]. These finding were in-line with the results of a meta-analysis of three RCTs[109] and two studies[108,110] that also revealed a lower bleeding risk in patients who were on a combination of COX-2 inhibitors and PPI compared to patients on a COX-2 inhibitor alone.
Although COX-2 inhibitors, especially in combination with PPI therapy, lower the risk for UGIB, it was demonstrated that the use of a COX-2 inhibitor is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events[111,112].
In clinical practice, NSAID therapy should be discontinued if possible. In patients without an increased risk for cardiovascular events and the need for NSAID therapy, patients should receive the combination of a COX-2 inhibitor and PPI. However, possible long-term side effects of PPI therapy should be kept in mind.
Things are more complicated in patients who receive cardioprotective ASA therapy. Prolonged discontinuation of ASA therapy (e.g., to complete ulcer healing) is associated with an increase in adverse cardiovascular events[113,114]. In most cases, thrombotic events occur between 7 and 10 d after discontinuation of ASA therapy[113,115,116]. This is well explained by the fact that ASA therapy inhibits irreversibly platelet function and the half-life of platelets of around 7 d. In patients at high risk of cardiovascular events, the early reintroduction of ASA therapy outweighs the risk of re-bleeding[117]. Discontinuation of ASA therapy in patients with acute ulcer bleeding was shown to increase the eight-week mortality rate, whereas the early reintroduction of ASA therapy in combination with PPI revealed an insignificant trend to a higher re-bleeding rate only. The findings of another RCT[117] were even more convincing with no reported re-bleeding in patients on ASA therapy and ulcer bleeding in whom therapy with ASA or clopidogrel in combination with PPI was initiated one day after endoscopy. In summary, therapy with ASA or clopidogrel in patients with cardiovascular risk factors should be restarted as soon as the risk for cardiovascular events outweighs the risk for re-bleeding.
Compared to ASA, the risk of ulcer bleeding associated with clopidogrel mono therapy is lower, but is still as high as 14%[118,119]. Clopidogrel therapy alone has a higher re-bleeding risk than ASA therapy combined with PPI therapy[118,119]. Clopidogrel requires cytochrome P450 isoenzyme CYP2C19 to be converted to its active metabolite[120]. Since PPI and clopidogrel compete for the same cytochrome P450 isoenzyme, PPI may decrease the effect of clopidogrel. An increase in cardiovascular events in patients who received clopidogrel and PPI therapy in combination has been shown by some observational studies[121-125], but other studies did not reveal an increase in cardiovascular events[125,126]. Since reliable RCT addressing this issue are lacking, the interval between the intake of PPI and clopidogrel should be as long as possible (e.g., PPI in the morning and clopidogrel in the evening).
Non-variceal UGIB could be a life-threatening event, especially in older patients with co-morbidities. With a combination of endoscopic and PPI therapy haemostasis could be achieved in the majority of patients. When endoscopic measures fail, patients should undergo surgery or interventional radiology without delay. In peptic ulcer disease, testing for H. pylori is mandatory and eradication reduces the re-bleeding risk. Caution is necessary in patients that need a long-term therapy with NSAID. In patients at risk, NSAID have to be combined with PPI therapy.
P- Reviewer: Rantanen T S- Editor: Kong JX
L- Editor: A E- Editor: Li D
1. | Lassen A, Hallas J, Schaffalitzky de Muckadell OB. Complicated and uncomplicated peptic ulcers in a Danish county 1993-2002: a population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:945-953. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 130] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 137] [Article Influence: 7.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
2. | Lewis JD, Bilker WB, Brensinger C, Farrar JT, Strom BL. Hospitalization and mortality rates from peptic ulcer disease and GI bleeding in the 1990s: relationship to sales of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and acid suppression medications. Am J Gastroenterol. 2002;97:2540-2549. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 130] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 149] [Article Influence: 6.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
3. | Targownik LE, Nabalamba A. Trends in management and outcomes of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: 1993-2003. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:1459-1466. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 105] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 114] [Article Influence: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
4. | van Leerdam ME, Vreeburg EM, Rauws EA, Geraedts AA, Tijssen JG, Reitsma JB, Tytgat GN. Acute upper GI bleeding: did anything change Time trend analysis of incidence and outcome of acute upper GI bleeding between 1993/1994 and 2000. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:1494-1499. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 347] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 348] [Article Influence: 16.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (37)] |
5. | Zhao Y, Encinosa W. Hospitalizations for gastrointestinal bleeding in 1998 and 2006: Statistical Brief 65. 2009;. [Cited in This Article: ] |
6. | Quan S, Frolkis A, Milne K, Molodecky N, Yang H, Dixon E, Ball CG, Myers RP, Ghosh S, Hilsden R. Upper-gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to peptic ulcer disease: incidence and outcomes. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20:17568-17577. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in CrossRef: 53] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 59] [Article Influence: 5.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (2)] |
7. | Lu Y, Barkun AN, Martel M. Adherence to guidelines: a national audit of the management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The REASON registry. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;28:495-501. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
8. | Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Management; London, 2012. . [Cited in This Article: ] |
9. | Barkun A, Bardou M, Marshall JK. Consensus recommendations for managing patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:843-857. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 365] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 400] [Article Influence: 19.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
10. | Blatchford O, Murray WR, Blatchford M. A risk score to predict need for treatment for upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Lancet. 2000;356:1318-1321. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 666] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 633] [Article Influence: 26.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
11. | Rockall TA, Logan RF, Devlin HB, Northfield TC. Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Gut. 1996;38:316-321. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 888] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 863] [Article Influence: 30.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
12. | Forrest JA, Finlayson ND, Shearman DJ. Endoscopy in gastrointestinal bleeding. Lancet. 1974;2:394-397. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
13. | Marik PE, Corwin HL. Efficacy of red blood cell transfusion in the critically ill: a systematic review of the literature. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:2667-2674. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 628] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 609] [Article Influence: 38.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
14. | Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Carlet JM, Bion J, Parker MM, Jaeschke R, Reinhart K, Angus DC, Brun-Buisson C, Beale R. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:296-327. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 3281] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3056] [Article Influence: 191.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
15. | Barkun AN, Bardou M, Kuipers EJ, Sung J, Hunt RH, Martel M, Sinclair P. International consensus recommendations on the management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:101-113. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 754] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 682] [Article Influence: 48.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
16. | Hébert PC, Wells G, Blajchman MA, Marshall J, Martin C, Pagliarello G, Tweeddale M, Schweitzer I, Yetisir E. A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. Transfusion Requirements in Critical Care Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials Group. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:409-417. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 3699] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3275] [Article Influence: 131.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
17. | Villanueva C, Colomo A, Bosch A, Concepción M, Hernandez-Gea V, Aracil C, Graupera I, Poca M, Alvarez-Urturi C, Gordillo J. Transfusion strategies for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:11-21. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 1186] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 996] [Article Influence: 90.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
18. | Wolf AT, Wasan SK, Saltzman JR. Impact of anticoagulation on rebleeding following endoscopic therapy for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:290-296. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 75] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 81] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
19. | Barkun A, Sabbah S, Enns R, Armstrong D, Gregor J, Fedorak RN, Rahme E, Toubouti Y, Martel M, Chiba N. The Canadian Registry on Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding and Endoscopy (RUGBE): Endoscopic hemostasis and proton pump inhibition are associated with improved outcomes in a real-life setting. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:1238-1246. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 248] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 241] [Article Influence: 12.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
20. | Barkun AN, Bardou M, Gralnek IM, Shingina A, Razzaghi A. Impact of elevated INR and of low platelet count on outcomes in acute upper GI bleeding (UGIB) [Abstract]. Gastroenterology. 2009;136:A-605. [Cited in This Article: ] |
21. | Baradarian R, Ramdhaney S, Chapalamadugu R, Skoczylas L, Wang K, Rivilis S, Remus K, Mayer I, Iswara K, Tenner S. Early intensive resuscitation of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding decreases mortality. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:619-622. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 126] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 97] [Article Influence: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
22. | Choudari CP, Rajgopal C, Palmer KR. Acute gastrointestinal haemorrhage in anticoagulated patients: diagnoses and response to endoscopic treatment. Gut. 1994;35:464-466. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 97] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 106] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
23. | Goldstein JN, Refaai MA, Milling TJ, Lewis B, Goldberg-Alberts R, Hug BA, Sarode R. Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate versus plasma for rapid vitamin K antagonist reversal in patients needing urgent surgical or invasive interventions: a phase 3b, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2077-2087. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 329] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 307] [Article Influence: 34.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
24. | Holster IL, Hunfeld NG, Kuipers EJ, Kruip MJ, Tjwa ET. On the treatment of new oral anticoagulant-associated gastrointestinal hemorrhage. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2013;22:229-231. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
25. | McQuilten ZK, Crighton G, Engelbrecht S, Gotmaker R, Brunskill SJ, Murphy MF, Wood EM. Transfusion interventions in critical bleeding requiring massive transfusion: a systematic review. Transfus Med Rev. 2015;29:127-137. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 37] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 39] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
26. | Jairath V, Kahan BC, Logan RF, Hearnshaw SA, Doré CJ, Travis SP, Murphy MF, Palmer KR. Outcomes following acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in relation to time to endoscopy: results from a nationwide study. Endoscopy. 2012;44:723-730. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 64] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 61] [Article Influence: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
27. | Romagnuolo J, Barkun AN, Enns R, Armstrong D, Gregor J. Simple clinical predictors may obviate urgent endoscopy in selected patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:265-270. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 71] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 69] [Article Influence: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
28. | Hearnshaw SA, Logan RF, Lowe D, Travis SP, Murphy MF, Palmer KR. Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the UK: patient characteristics, diagnoses and outcomes in the 2007 UK audit. Gut. 2011;60:1327-1335. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 398] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 401] [Article Influence: 30.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
29. | Ananthakrishnan AN, McGinley EL, Saeian K. Outcomes of weekend admissions for upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a nationwide analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:296-302e1. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 118] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 120] [Article Influence: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
30. | Cipolletta L, Bianco MA, Rotondano G, Marmo R, Piscopo R. Outpatient management for low-risk nonvariceal upper GI bleeding: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;55:1-5. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 115] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 125] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
31. | Hay JA, Maldonado L, Weingarten SR, Ellrodt AG. Prospective evaluation of a clinical guideline recommending hospital length of stay in upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage. JAMA. 1997;278:2151-2156. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 96] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 92] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
32. | Lee JG, Turnipseed S, Romano PS, Vigil H, Azari R, Melnikoff N, Hsu R, Kirk D, Sokolove P, Leung JW. Endoscopy-based triage significantly reduces hospitalization rates and costs of treating upper GI bleeding: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 1999;50:755-761. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 200] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 174] [Article Influence: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
33. | Lin HJ, Wang K, Perng CL, Chua RT, Lee FY, Lee CH, Lee SD. Early or delayed endoscopy for patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. A prospective randomized study. J Clin Gastroenterol. 1996;22:267-271. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 120] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 109] [Article Influence: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
34. | Rockall TA, Logan RF, Devlin HB, Northfield TC. Selection of patients for early discharge or outpatient care after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. National Audit of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Haemorrhage. Lancet. 1996;347:1138-1140. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 226] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 215] [Article Influence: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
35. | Spiegel BM, Vakil NB, Ofman JJ. Endoscopy for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage: is sooner better A systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:1393-1404. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 129] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 118] [Article Influence: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
36. | Jairath V, Kahan BC, Logan RF, Hearnshaw SA, Travis SP, Murphy MF, Palmer KR. Mortality from acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the United kingdom: does it display a “weekend effect”. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:1621-1628. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 63] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 68] [Article Influence: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
37. | Adamopoulos AB, Baibas NM, Efstathiou SP, Tsioulos DI, Mitromaras AG, Tsami AA, Mountokalakis TD. Differentiation between patients with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding who need early urgent upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and those who do not. A prospective study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003;15:381-387. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
38. | Al-Sabah S, Barkun AN, Herba K, Adam V, Fallone C, Mayrand S, Pomier-Layrargues G, Kennedy W, Bardou M. Cost-effectiveness of proton-pump inhibition before endoscopy in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008;6:418-425. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 45] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 51] [Article Influence: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
39. | Barkun AN. Should every patient with suspected upper GI bleeding receive a proton pump inhibitor while awaiting endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;67:1064-1066. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 19] [Article Influence: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
40. | Leontiadis GI, Howden CW. The role of proton pump inhibitors in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Gastroenterol Clin North Am. 2009;38:199-213. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 27] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
41. | Dorward S, Sreedharan A, Leontiadis GI, Howden CW, Moayyedi P, Forman D. Proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated prior to endoscopic diagnosis in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;CD005415. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 15] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 27] [Article Influence: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
42. | Lau JY, Leung WK, Wu JC, Chan FK, Wong VW, Chiu PW, Lee VW, Lee KK, Cheung FK, Siu P. Omeprazole before endoscopy in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:1631-1640. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 239] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 258] [Article Influence: 15.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
43. | Leontiadis GI, Sharma VK, Howden CW. Proton pump inhibitor treatment for acute peptic ulcer bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;CD002094. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 80] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 108] [Article Influence: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
44. | Laine L, McQuaid KR. Endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers: an evidence-based approach based on meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:33-47; quiz 1-2. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 235] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 212] [Article Influence: 14.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (38)] |
45. | Sachar H, Vaidya K, Laine L. Intermittent vs continuous proton pump inhibitor therapy for high-risk bleeding ulcers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:1755-1762. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 113] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 93] [Article Influence: 9.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
46. | Neumann I, Letelier LM, Rada G, Claro JC, Martin J, Howden CW, Yuan Y, Leontiadis GI. Comparison of different regimens of proton pump inhibitors for acute peptic ulcer bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;6:CD007999. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 32] [Article Influence: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
47. | Tsoi KK, Hirai HW, Sung JJ. Meta-analysis: comparison of oral vs. intravenous proton pump inhibitors in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013;38:721-728. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
48. | Sung JJ, Suen BY, Wu JC, Lau JY, Ching JY, Lee VW, Chiu PW, Tsoi KK, Chan FK. Effects of intravenous and oral esomeprazole in the prevention of recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcers after endoscopic therapy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2014;109:1005-1010. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 36] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 39] [Article Influence: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
49. | Barkun AN, Herba K, Adam V, Kennedy W, Fallone CA, Bardou M. High-dose intravenous proton pump inhibition following endoscopic therapy in the acute management of patients with bleeding peptic ulcers in the USA and Canada: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;19:591-600. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 51] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 34] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
50. | Erstad BL. Cost-effectiveness of proton pump inhibitor therapy for acute peptic ulcer-related bleeding. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:1277-1283. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 24] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 26] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
51. | Lee KK, You JH, Wong IC, Kwong SK, Lau JY, Chan TY, Lau JT, Leung WY, Sung JJ, Chung SS. Cost-effectiveness analysis of high-dose omeprazole infusion as adjuvant therapy to endoscopic treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57:160-164. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 45] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 45] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
52. | Aseeri M, Schroeder T, Kramer J, Zackula R. Gastric acid suppression by proton pump inhibitors as a risk factor for clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in hospitalized patients. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:2308-2313. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 176] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 165] [Article Influence: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
53. | Dial S, Alrasadi K, Manoukian C, Huang A, Menzies D. Risk of Clostridium difficile diarrhea among hospital inpatients prescribed proton pump inhibitors: cohort and case-control studies. CMAJ. 2004;171:33-38. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 418] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 406] [Article Influence: 20.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
54. | McDonald EG, Milligan J, Frenette C, Lee TC. Continuous Proton Pump Inhibitor Therapy and the Associated Risk of Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175:784-791. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 148] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 148] [Article Influence: 16.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
55. | Jensen DM, Pace SC, Soffer E, Comer GM. Continuous infusion of pantoprazole versus ranitidine for prevention of ulcer rebleeding: a U.S. multicenter randomized, double-blind study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:1991-1999; quiz 2170. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 51] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 52] [Article Influence: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
56. | Lau JY, Sung JJ, Lee KK, Yung MY, Wong SK, Wu JC, Chan FK, Ng EK, You JH, Lee CW. Effect of intravenous omeprazole on recurrent bleeding after endoscopic treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers. N Engl J Med. 2000;343:310-316. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 473] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 414] [Article Influence: 17.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
57. | Lin HJ, Lo WC, Lee FY, Perng CL, Tseng GY. A prospective randomized comparative trial showing that omeprazole prevents rebleeding in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer after successful endoscopic therapy. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:54-58. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 189] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 194] [Article Influence: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
58. | Sung JJ, Barkun A, Kuipers EJ, Mössner J, Jensen DM, Stuart R, Lau JY, Ahlbom H, Kilhamn J, Lind T. Intravenous esomeprazole for prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150:455-464. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 138] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 148] [Article Influence: 9.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
59. | Zargar SA, Javid G, Khan BA, Yattoo GN, Shah AH, Gulzar GM, Sodhi JS, Mujeeb SA, Khan MA, Shah NA. Pantoprazole infusion as adjuvant therapy to endoscopic treatment in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding: prospective randomized controlled trial. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;21:716-721. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
60. | Klok RM, Postma MJ, van Hout BA, Brouwers JR. Meta-analysis: comparing the efficacy of proton pump inhibitors in short-term use. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2003;17:1237-1245. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 59] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 47] [Article Influence: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
61. | Chan SM, Chiu PW, Teoh AY, Lau JY. Use of the Over-The-Scope Clip for treatment of refractory upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a case series. Endoscopy. 2014;46:428-431. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 73] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 81] [Article Influence: 8.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
62. | Laine L, Stein C, Sharma V. A prospective outcome study of patients with clot in an ulcer and the effect of irrigation. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;43:107-110. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 62] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 58] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
63. | Lin HJ, Wang K, Perng CL, Lee FY, Lee CH, Lee SD. Natural history of bleeding peptic ulcers with a tightly adherent blood clot: a prospective observation. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996;43:470-473. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 46] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 44] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
64. | Laine L, Jensen DM. Management of patients with ulcer bleeding. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012;107:345-360; quiz 361. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 483] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 449] [Article Influence: 37.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
65. | Sung JJ, Chan FK, Lau JY, Yung MY, Leung WK, Wu JC, Ng EK, Chung SC. The effect of endoscopic therapy in patients receiving omeprazole for bleeding ulcers with nonbleeding visible vessels or adherent clots: a randomized comparison. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:237-243. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 124] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 126] [Article Influence: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
66. | Bleau BL, Gostout CJ, Sherman KE, Shaw MJ, Harford WV, Keate RF, Bracy WP, Fleischer DE. Recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer associated with adherent clot: a randomized study comparing endoscopic treatment with medical therapy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;56:1-6. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 115] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 89] [Article Influence: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
67. | Jensen DM, Kovacs TO, Jutabha R, Machicado GA, Gralnek IM, Savides TJ, Smith J, Jensen ME, Alofaituli G, Gornbein J. Randomized trial of medical or endoscopic therapy to prevent recurrent ulcer hemorrhage in patients with adherent clots. Gastroenterology. 2002;123:407-413. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 148] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 121] [Article Influence: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
68. | Lau JY, Chung SC, Leung JW, Lo KK, Yung MY, Li AK. The evolution of stigmata of hemorrhage in bleeding peptic ulcers: a sequential endoscopic study. Endoscopy. 1998;30:513-518. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 76] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 64] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
69. | Kahi CJ, Jensen DM, Sung JJ, Bleau BL, Jung HK, Eckert G, Imperiale TF. Endoscopic therapy versus medical therapy for bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2005;129:855-862. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 107] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 82] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
70. | Marmo R, Rotondano G, Piscopo R, Bianco MA, D’Angella R, Cipolletta L. Dual therapy versus monotherapy in the endoscopic treatment of high-risk bleeding ulcers: a meta-analysis of controlled trials. Am J Gastroenterol. 2007;102:279-289; quiz 469. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 182] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 185] [Article Influence: 10.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
71. | Barkun AN, Martel M, Toubouti Y, Rahme E, Bardou M. Endoscopic hemostasis in peptic ulcer bleeding for patients with high-risk lesions: a series of meta-analyses. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:786-799. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 127] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 135] [Article Influence: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
72. | Calvet X, Vergara M, Brullet E, Gisbert JP, Campo R. Addition of a second endoscopic treatment following epinephrine injection improves outcome in high-risk bleeding ulcers. Gastroenterology. 2004;126:441-450. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
73. | Sung JJ, Tsoi KK, Lai LH, Wu JC, Lau JY. Endoscopic clipping versus injection and thermo-coagulation in the treatment of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a meta-analysis. Gut. 2007;56:1364-1373. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 192] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 214] [Article Influence: 12.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
74. | Vergara M, Calvet X, Gisbert JP. Epinephrine injection versus epinephrine injection and a second endoscopic method in high risk bleeding ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;CD005584. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 44] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 58] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
75. | Yuan Y, Wang C, Hunt RH. Endoscopic clipping for acute nonvariceal upper-GI bleeding: a meta-analysis and critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008;68:339-351. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 47] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 54] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
76. | Kim JW, Jang JY, Lee CK, Shim JJ, Chang YW. Comparison of hemostatic forceps with soft coagulation versus argon plasma coagulation for bleeding peptic ulcer--a randomized trial. Endoscopy. 2015;47:680-687. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 16] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 16] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
77. | Vergara M, Bennett C, Calvet X, Gisbert JP. Epinephrine injection versus epinephrine injection and a second endoscopic method in high-risk bleeding ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;10:CD005584. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 36] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 48] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
78. | Chung SC, Leung JW, Sung JY, Lo KK, Li AK. Injection or heat probe for bleeding ulcer. Gastroenterology. 1991;100:33-37. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
79. | Gevers AM, De Goede E, Simoens M, Hiele M, Rutgeerts P. A randomized trial comparing injection therapy with hemoclip and with injection combined with hemoclip for bleeding ulcers. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002;55:466-469. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 90] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 90] [Article Influence: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
80. | Chiu PW, Lam CY, Lee SW, Kwong KH, Lam SH, Lee DT, Kwok SP. Effect of scheduled second therapeutic endoscopy on peptic ulcer rebleeding: a prospective randomised trial. Gut. 2003;52:1403-1407. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
81. | Messmann H, Schaller P, Andus T, Lock G, Vogt W, Gross V, Zirngibl H, Wiedmann KH, Lingenfelser T, Bauch K. Effect of programmed endoscopic follow-up examinations on the rebleeding rate of gastric or duodenal peptic ulcers treated by injection therapy: a prospective, randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy. 1998;30:583-589. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 60] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 56] [Article Influence: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
82. | Rutgeerts P, Rauws E, Wara P, Swain P, Hoos A, Solleder E, Halttunen J, Dobrilla G, Richter G, Prassler R. Randomised trial of single and repeated fibrin glue compared with injection of polidocanol in treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer. Lancet. 1997;350:692-696. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 142] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 137] [Article Influence: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
83. | Saeed ZA, Cole RA, Ramirez FC, Schneider FE, Hepps KS, Graham DY. Endoscopic retreatment after successful initial hemostasis prevents ulcer rebleeding: a prospective randomized trial. Endoscopy. 1996;28:288-294. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 76] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 73] [Article Influence: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
84. | Villanueva C, Balanzó J, Torras X, Soriano G, Sáinz S, Vilardell F. Value of second-look endoscopy after injection therapy for bleeding peptic ulcer: a prospective and randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 1994;40:34-39. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 73] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 69] [Article Influence: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
85. | Marmo R, Rotondano G, Bianco MA, Piscopo R, Prisco A, Cipolletta L. Outcome of endoscopic treatment for peptic ulcer bleeding: Is a second look necessary A meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003;57:62-67. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 88] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 90] [Article Influence: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
86. | Chiu PY, Lau TS, Kwong KH, Suen DK, Kwok SY. Impact of programmed second endoscopy with appropriate re-treatment on peptic ulcer bleeding: A systematic review. Ann Coll Surg H-K. 2003;7:106-115. [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
87. | Tsoi KK, Chiu PW, Sung JJ. Endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: is routine second-look necessary. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;6:717-722. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 14] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
88. | El Ouali S, Barkun AN, Wyse J, Romagnuolo J, Sung JJ, Gralnek IM, Bardou M, Martel M. Is routine second-look endoscopy effective after endoscopic hemostasis in acute peptic ulcer bleeding A meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;76:283-292. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 61] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 66] [Article Influence: 5.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
89. | Spiegel BM, Ofman JJ, Woods K, Vakil NB. Minimizing recurrent peptic ulcer hemorrhage after endoscopic hemostasis: the cost-effectiveness of competing strategies. Am J Gastroenterol. 2003;98:86-97. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 69] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 71] [Article Influence: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
90. | Brullet E, Campo R, Calvet X, Guell M, Garcia-Monforte N, Cabrol J. A randomized study of the safety of outpatient care for patients with bleeding peptic ulcer treated by endoscopic injection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004;60:15-21. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 18] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 20] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
91. | Defreyne L, Vanlangenhove P, De Vos M, Pattyn P, Van Maele G, Decruyenaere J, Troisi R, Kunnen M. Embolization as a first approach with endoscopically unmanageable acute nonvariceal gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Radiology. 2001;218:739-748. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 140] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 128] [Article Influence: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
92. | Holme JB, Nielsen DT, Funch-Jensen P, Mortensen FV. Transcatheter arterial embolization in patients with bleeding duodenal ulcer: an alternative to surgery. Acta Radiol. 2006;47:244-247. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 60] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 54] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
93. | Ljungdahl M, Eriksson LG, Nyman R, Gustavsson S. Arterial embolisation in management of massive bleeding from gastric and duodenal ulcers. Eur J Surg. 2002;168:384-390. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 48] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 52] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
94. | Loffroy R, Guiu B, Cercueil JP, Lepage C, Latournerie M, Hillon P, Rat P, Ricolfi F, Krausé D. Refractory bleeding from gastroduodenal ulcers: arterial embolization in high-operative-risk patients. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2008;42:361-367. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 59] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 60] [Article Influence: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
95. | Toyoda H, Nakano S, Takeda I, Kumada T, Sugiyama K, Osada T, Kiriyama S, Suga T. Transcatheter arterial embolization for massive bleeding from duodenal ulcers not controlled by endoscopic hemostasis. Endoscopy. 1995;27:304-307. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 68] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 78] [Article Influence: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
96. | Jairath V, Kahan BC, Logan RF, Hearnshaw SA, Dore CJ, Travis SP, Murphy MF, Palmer KR. National audit of the use of surgery and radiological embolization after failed endoscopic haemostasis for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Br J Surg. 2012;99:1672-1680. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 42] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
97. | Huang YS, Chang CC, Liou JM, Jaw FS, Liu KL. Transcatheter arterial embolization with N-butyl cyanoacrylate for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding in hemodynamically unstable patients: results and predictors of clinical outcomes. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2014;25:1850-1857. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 21] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
98. | Lee HH, Park JM, Chun HJ, Oh JS, Ahn HJ, Choi MG. Transcatheter arterial embolization for endoscopically unmanageable non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2015;50:809-815. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 25] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 27] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
99. | Ripoll C, Bañares R, Beceiro I, Menchén P, Catalina MV, Echenagusia A, Turegano F. Comparison of transcatheter arterial embolization and surgery for treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer after endoscopic treatment failure. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004;15:447-450. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 139] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 122] [Article Influence: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
100. | Poultsides GA, Kim CJ, Orlando R, Peros G, Hallisey MJ, Vignati PV. Angiographic embolization for gastroduodenal hemorrhage: safety, efficacy, and predictors of outcome. Arch Surg. 2008;143:457-461. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 79] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 90] [Article Influence: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
101. | Gisbert JP, Khorrami S, Carballo F, Calvet X, Gene E, Dominguez-Muñoz E. Meta-analysis: Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy vs. antisecretory non-eradication therapy for the prevention of recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;19:617-629. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 109] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 99] [Article Influence: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
102. | Gisbert JP, Abraira V. Accuracy of Helicobacter pylori diagnostic tests in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:848-863. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 139] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 128] [Article Influence: 7.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
103. | Udd M, Miettinen P, Palmu A, Julkunen R. Effect of short-term treatment with regular or high doses of omeprazole on the detection of Helicobacter pylori in bleeding peptic ulcer patients. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2003;38:588-593. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
104. | Chan FK, Hung LC, Suen BY, Wong VW, Hui AJ, Wu JC, Leung WK, Lee YT, To KF, Chung SC. Celecoxib versus diclofenac plus omeprazole in high-risk arthritis patients: results of a randomized double-blind trial. Gastroenterology. 2004;127:1038-1043. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 111] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 103] [Article Influence: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
105. | Chan FK, Hung LC, Suen BY, Wu JC, Lee KC, Leung VK, Hui AJ, To KF, Leung WK, Wong VW. Celecoxib versus diclofenac and omeprazole in reducing the risk of recurrent ulcer bleeding in patients with arthritis. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:2104-2110. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 406] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 316] [Article Influence: 14.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
106. | Lai KC, Chu KM, Hui WM, Wong BC, Hu WH, Wong WM, Chan AO, Wong J, Lam SK. Celecoxib compared with lansoprazole and naproxen to prevent gastrointestinal ulcer complications. Am J Med. 2005;118:1271-1278. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 110] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 93] [Article Influence: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
107. | Rahme E, Barkun AN, Toubouti Y, Scalera A, Rochon S, Lelorier J. Do proton-pump inhibitors confer additional gastrointestinal protection in patients given celecoxib. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;57:748-755. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 34] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 36] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
108. | Chan FK, Wong VW, Suen BY, Wu JC, Ching JY, Hung LC, Hui AJ, Leung VK, Lee VW, Lai LH. Combination of a cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor and a proton-pump inhibitor for prevention of recurrent ulcer bleeding in patients at very high risk: a double-blind, randomised trial. Lancet. 2007;369:1621-1626. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 234] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 204] [Article Influence: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
109. | Laine L, Curtis SP, Cryer B, Kaur A, Cannon CP. Assessment of upper gastrointestinal safety of etoricoxib and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis in the Multinational Etoricoxib and Diclofenac Arthritis Long-term (MEDAL) programme: a randomised comparison. Lancet. 2007;369:465-473. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 186] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 194] [Article Influence: 11.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
110. | Scheiman JM, Yeomans ND, Talley NJ, Vakil N, Chan FK, Tulassay Z, Rainoldi JL, Szczepanski L, Ung KA, Kleczkowski D. Prevention of ulcers by esomeprazole in at-risk patients using non-selective NSAIDs and COX-2 inhibitors. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:701-710. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 190] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 185] [Article Influence: 10.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
111. | Kearney PM, Baigent C, Godwin J, Halls H, Emberson JR, Patrono C. Do selective cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitors and traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs increase the risk of atherothrombosis Meta-analysis of randomised trials. BMJ. 2006;332:1302-1308. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 1001] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 922] [Article Influence: 51.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
112. | Rostom A, Dubé C, Lewin G, Tsertsvadze A, Barrowman N, Code C, Sampson M, Moher D. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors for primary prevention of colorectal cancer: a systematic review prepared for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:376-389. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 243] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 257] [Article Influence: 15.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
113. | Aguejouf O, Eizayaga F, Desplat V, Belon P, Doutremepuich C. Prothrombotic and hemorrhagic effects of aspirin. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2009;15:523-528. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 22] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
114. | Biondi-Zoccai GG, Lotrionte M, Agostoni P, Abbate A, Fusaro M, Burzotta F, Testa L, Sheiban I, Sangiorgi G. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the hazards of discontinuing or not adhering to aspirin among 50,279 patients at risk for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:2667-2674. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 499] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 442] [Article Influence: 24.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
115. | Burger W, Chemnitius JM, Kneissl GD, Rücker G. Low-dose aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention - cardiovascular risks after its perioperative withdrawal versus bleeding risks with its continuation - review and meta-analysis. J Intern Med. 2005;257:399-414. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 621] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 533] [Article Influence: 28.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
116. | Sibon I, Orgogozo JM. Antiplatelet drug discontinuation is a risk factor for ischemic stroke. Neurology. 2004;62:1187-1189. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 133] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 123] [Article Influence: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
117. | Ng FH, Wong BC, Wong SY, Chen WH, Chang CM. Clopidogrel plus omeprazole compared with aspirin plus omeprazole for aspirin-induced symptomatic peptic ulcers/erosions with low to moderate bleeding/re-bleeding risk -- a single-blind, randomized controlled study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;19:359-365. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 42] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 33] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
118. | Chan FK, Ching JY, Hung LC, Wong VW, Leung VK, Kung NN, Hui AJ, Wu JC, Leung WK, Lee VW. Clopidogrel versus aspirin and esomeprazole to prevent recurrent ulcer bleeding. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:238-244. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 431] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 358] [Article Influence: 18.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
119. | Lai KC, Chu KM, Hui WM, Wong BC, Hung WK, Loo CK, Hu WH, Chan AO, Kwok KF, Fung TT. Esomeprazole with aspirin versus clopidogrel for prevention of recurrent gastrointestinal ulcer complications. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4:860-865. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 104] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 103] [Article Influence: 5.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
120. | Muñoz-Esparza C, Jover E, Hernández-Romero D, Saura D, Valdés M, Lip GY, Marín F. Interactions between clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors: a review of evidence. Curr Med Chem. 2011;18:2386-2400. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 8] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8] [Article Influence: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
121. | Ho PM, Maddox TM, Wang L, Fihn SD, Jesse RL, Peterson ED, Rumsfeld JS. Risk of adverse outcomes associated with concomitant use of clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors following acute coronary syndrome. JAMA. 2009;301:937-944. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 739] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 693] [Article Influence: 46.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
122. | Juurlink DN, Gomes T, Ko DT, Szmitko PE, Austin PC, Tu JV, Henry DA, Kopp A, Mamdani MM. A population-based study of the drug interaction between proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel. CMAJ. 2009;180:713-718. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 502] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 476] [Article Influence: 31.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
123. | Moayyedi P, Sadowski DC. Proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel - hazardous drug interaction or hazardous interpretation of data. Can J Gastroenterol. 2009;23:251-252. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
124. | Melloni C, Washam JB, Jones WS, Halim SA, Hasselblad V, Mayer SB, Heidenfelder BL, Dolor RJ. Conflicting results between randomized trials and observational studies on the impact of proton pump inhibitors on cardiovascular events when coadministered with dual antiplatelet therapy: systematic review. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2015;8:47-55. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 78] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 83] [Article Influence: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
125. | Dunn SP, Steinhubl SR, Bauer D, Charnigo RJ, Berger PB, Topol EJ. Impact of proton pump inhibitor therapy on the efficacy of clopidogrel in the CAPRIE and CREDO trials. J Am Heart Assoc. 2013;2:e004564. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 34] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 39] [Article Influence: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
126. | Simon T, Verstuyft C, Mary-Krause M, Quteineh L, Drouet E, Méneveau N, Steg PG, Ferrières J, Danchin N, Becquemont L. Genetic determinants of response to clopidogrel and cardiovascular events. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:363-375. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 1280] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 1201] [Article Influence: 80.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |