■  PERSPECTIVE

EpidemiologyGastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a relatively common problem encountered in emergency medicine that often requires early consultation and hospital admission. The overall mortality rate for GI bleeding is approximately 10% and has not changed significantly since the 1960s. Diagnostic modalities have improved much more than therapeutic techniques. GI bleed-ing is often easy to identify when there is clear evidence of vomiting blood or passing blood in the stool, but the clinical presentation may be subtle, with signs and symptoms of hypo-volemia, such as dizziness, weakness, or syncope.

The approach to GI bleeding depends on whether the hem-orrhage is located in the proximal or the distal segment of the GI tract (i.e., upper or lower GI bleeding). These segments are anatomically defined by the ligament of Treitz in the fourth section of the duodenum. In the United States, upper GI bleeding (UGIB) affects 50 to 150 people per 100,000 population each year and results in more than 300,000 admis-sions and about 30,000 deaths per year at an estimated annual cost of almost $1 billion. Lower GI bleeding (LGIB) affects a smaller portion of patients and results in proportionally fewer hospital admissions than UGIB.1

GI bleeding can occur in persons of any age but most com-monly affects people in their 40s through 70s (mean age, 59 years). Most deaths caused by GI bleeding occur in patients older than 60 years. UGIB is more common in men than in women (in a 2 : 1 ratio), whereas LGIB is more common in women. Significant UGIB requiring admission is more common in adults, whereas LGIB requiring admission is more common in children.2

■  DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH

Differential Considerations

Peptic ulcer disease, gastric erosions, and varices account for approximately three fourths of adult patients with UGIB (Box 22-1). Diverticulosis and angiodysplasia account for approxi-mately 80% of adults with LGIB. In children, esophagitis, gastritis, and peptic ulcer disease are the most common causes of UGIB, and infectious colitis and inflammatory bowel disease are the most common causes of LGIB (Box 22-2). In children younger than 2 years of age, massive LGIB is most often a result of Meckel’s diverticulum or intussusception. At all ages, anorectal abnormalities are the most common cause of minor

LGIB. Despite improved diagnostic techniques, no source of bleeding is identified in approximately 10% of patients with GI bleeding. In patients with abdominal aortic grafts who present to the emergency department (ED) with GI bleeding, the possibility of aortoenteric fistula should be considered. Prompt surgical consultation in the ED should be obtained if this is suspected, because bleeding can be massive and fatal.

Rapid Assessment and Stabilization

Most patients with GI bleeding are easy to diagnose because they present to the ED complaining of vomiting blood or passing black or bloody stool. The diagnosis is confirmed quickly by examination of the stool for the presence of blood.

Patients with suspected GI bleeding who are hemodynami-cally unstable should undergo rapid evaluation and resuscita-tion. They should be undressed quickly to permit placement of cardiac and oxygen saturation monitors, and supplemental oxygen should be given as needed. At least two large-bore peripheral intravenous lines should be placed (minimum 18-gauge); blood should be drawn for hemoglobin or hematocrit, platelet count, prothrombin time (PT), and type and screen or type and crossmatch studies; and crystalloid resuscitation should be initiated. Intravenous crystalloid fluid should be given as a 2-L bolus in adults or 20 mL/kg in children until the patient’s vital signs have stabilized or the patient has received 40 mL/kg of crystalloid in an adult or 60 mL/kg as a child. Patients who remain unstable after 40 to 60 mL/kg of crystalloid should be given type O, type-specific, or cross-matched blood, depending on availability. Persistently unstable patients should receive immediate consultation with a gastroenterologist for UGIB and with a surgeon for LGIB.3

Pivotal Findings

History, physical examination, testing a stool sample for blood, and measuring hemoglobin or hematocrit are the keys to diag-nosing GI bleeding in most patients.

History

Patients typically complain of vomiting red blood or coffee grounds–like material, or passing black or bloody stool. Hematemesis (vomiting blood) occurs with bleeding of the esophagus, stomach, or proximal small bowel. Approximately

170

Chapter 22 Gastrointestinal BleedingPhilip L. Henneman

Ch

apter 22 / G

astrointestinal Bleeding

171ingestion, allergies, associated medical illnesses, previous surgery, treatment by nonhospital personnel, and the response to that treatment.4,5 Patients with GI bleeding may report symptoms of hypovolemia, such as dizziness, weakness, or loss of consciousness, most often after standing up. Other nonspe-cific complaints include dyspnea, confusion, and abdominal pain. Rarely an elderly patient may present with ischemic chest pain precipitated by significant anemia due to a GI bleed. One in five patients with GI bleeding may have only nonspecific complaints.

The history is of limited help in predicting the site or quan-tity of bleeding. Patients with a previously documented GI lesion bleed from the same site in only 60% of cases. Gross esti-mates of blood loss based on the volume and color of the vomitus or stool (e.g., brown or black, pink or red) or the number of episodes of hemorrhage are notoriously inaccurate.

Physical Examination

Vital Signs Vital signs and postural changes in heart rate and blood pressure have been used to assess the amount of blood loss in patients with GI bleeding but are insensitive and non-specific, with the exception of significant, sustained heart rate increase and hypotension. All patients with a history suggest-ing GI bleeding who are hypotensive, are tachycardic, or expe-rience sustained posture-induced changes in heart rate of greater than 20 beats per minute should be assumed to have a significant hemorrhage. Normal vital signs do not exclude a significant hemorrhage, and postural changes in heart rate and blood pressure may occur in individuals who are not bleeding (e.g., elderly patients, many normal individuals, individuals on certain medications such as beta-blockers, individuals with hypovolemia from other causes).

General Examination The physical examination is valuable in establishing a specific diagnosis and assessing the severity of blood loss and the physiologic response to that loss. Careful attention is given to the patient’s general appearance, vital signs, mental status (including restlessness), skin signs (e.g., color, warmth, and moisture to assess for shock, or presence of lesions such as telangiectasia, bruises, or petechiae to assess for vascular diseases or hypocoagulable states), pulmonary and cardiac findings, abdominal examination, and rectal and stool examination. Frequent reassessment is important because a patient’s status may change quickly.

Rectal Examination Rectal and stool examinations are often key to making or confirming the diagnosis of GI bleeding. The finding of red, black, or melenic stool early in the assessment is helpful in prompting early recognition and management of patients with GI bleeding. The absence of black or bloody stool, however, does not exclude the diagnosis of GI bleeding. Regardless of the apparent character and color of the stool, occult blood testing is indicated.

Ancillary Testing

Tests for Occult Blood The presence of hemoglobin in occult amounts in stool is confirmed by tests such as guaiac assays (e.g., Hemoccult, HemaPrompt). Stool tests for occult blood may have positive results 14 days after a single, major episode of UGIB. False-positive results have been associated with the ingestion of certain fruits (e.g., cantaloupe, grapefruit, figs), uncooked vegetables (e.g., radish, cauliflower, broccoli) and red meat, methylene blue, chlorophyll, iodide, cupric sulfate, and bromide preparations. False-negative results are uncom-mon but can be caused by bile or ingestion of magnesium-containing antacids or ascorbic acid. Tests to evaluate gastric contents for occult blood (e.g., Gastroccult) can be unreliable

Upper LowerPeptic ulcer disease DiverticulosisGastric erosions AngiodysplasiaVarices Upper GI bleedingMallory-Weiss tear Cancer/polypsEsophagitis Rectal diseaseDuodenitis Inflammatory bowel disease

BOX 22-1 Etiology of Significant gaStrointEStinal (gi) BlEEding in adultS*

*Potential causes listed in decreasing frequency.

Upper LowerEsophagitis Anal fissureGastritis Infectious colitisUlcer Inflammatory bowelEsophageal varices PolypsMallory-Weiss tear Intussusception

BOX 22-2 Etiology of gaStrointEStinal BlEEding in childrEn*

*Potential causes listed in decreasing frequency.

50% of patients with UGIB present with this complaint. Hematemesis may be bright red or darker (i.e., coffee grounds–like) as a result of the conversion of hemoglobin to hematin or other pigments by hydrochloric acid in the stomach. The color of vomited or aspirated blood from the stomach does not dif-ferentiate between arterial and venous bleeding.

Melena, or black tarry stool, will result from the presence of approximately 150 to 200 mL of blood in the GI tract for a prolonged period. Melena is seen in approximately 70% of patients with UGIB and in one third of patients with LGIB. Black stool that is not tarlike may result from presence of 60 mL of blood from the upper GI tract. Blood from the duo-denum or jejunum must remain in the GI tract for approxi-mately 8 hours before turning black. Occasionally, black stool may follow bleeding into the lower portion of the small bowel and ascending colon. Stool may remain black and tarry for several days, even though bleeding has stopped. Black stool also may be seen after ingestion of bismuth (e.g., Pepto-Bismol), which can confuse the situation because such prepa-rations often are taken for UGI distress. In contrast with melena, stool rendered black by bismuth is not positive on Hemoccult testing.

Hematochezia, or bloody stool (bright red or maroon), most often signifies LGIB but may be due to a brisk UGIB with rapid transit time through the bowel in 10 to 15% of patients. Because UGIB is much more common than LGIB, a more proximal source of significant bleeding must be excluded before assuming the bleeding is from the lower GI tract. Approximately two thirds of patients with LGIB present with red blood from bleeding per rectum. Small amounts of red blood (e.g., 5 mL) from rectal bleeding, such as bleeding due to hemorrhoids, may cause the water in the toilet bowl to appear bright red. Bright red stools also can be seen after ingestion of a large quantity of beets; in this case, Hemoccult testing would be negative and the patient also will report pink-colored water in the toilet bowl.

In taking the history, specific questions should address the duration and quantity of bleeding, associated symptoms, pre-vious history of bleeding, current medications, alcohol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and long-term aspirin

172PA

RT 

I ■

Fun

dam

enta

l Clin

ical

Con

cept

s /

SeC

tio

n t

wo

• C

ardi

nal P

rese

ntat

ions

and should not be used for this purpose. In newborns, mater-nal blood that is swallowed may cause bloody stools; the Apt test may show that it is maternal in origin.

Clinical Laboratory Tests Blood should be drawn for evaluation of baseline hematocrit or hemoglobin, coagulation studies (PT and platelet count), and type and crossmatch studies (or type and screen studies if the patient is stable). The initial hema-tocrit may be misleading in patients with preexisting anemia or polycythemia. Changes in the hematocrit may lag signifi-cantly behind actual blood loss. Infusion of normal saline speeds equilibration of the hematocrit; however, rapid infu-sion of crystalloid in nonbleeding patients also may cause a decrease in hematocrit by hemodilution. The optimal hema-tocrit with respect to oxygen-carrying capacity and viscosity in critically ill patients has been reported to be 33%. In general, patients with a hemoglobin concentration of 8 g/dL or less (hematocrit <25%) from acute blood loss usually require blood therapy. After transfusion and in the absence of ongoing blood loss, the hematocrit can be expected to increase approximately 3% for each unit of blood administered (hemoglobin level increases by 1 mg/dL).

The PT should be used to determine whether a patient has a preexisting coagulopathy. An elevated PT may indicate vitamin K deficiency, liver dysfunction, warfarin therapy, or consumptive coagulopathy. Patients receiving therapeutic anticoagulants or patients with an elevated PT and evidence of active bleeding should receive sufficient fresh frozen plasma to correct the PT. Serial platelet counts are used to determine the need for platelet transfusions (i.e., less than 50,000/mm3).

Blood Bank Blood should be sent for “type and hold” or type and crossmatch studies early in the patient’s care. Immediate transfusion needs in unstable patients can be met with O- positive packed red blood cells (O-negative packed red blood cells in women of childbearing age whose Rh status is unknown). Type-specific blood is usually available within 10 to 15 minutes. Group O blood and type-specific blood are safe for patients and cause few transfusion reactions. Fully cross-matched blood may take 60 minutes to prepare. Stable patients can be managed more cost-effectively by ordering “type and hold” without crossmatching for units of blood.

Other Laboratory Tests Electrolytes usually are normal in patients with GI bleeding. However, determination of electrolytes, blood urea nitrogen, and creatinine may be useful in a small percentage of patients with GI bleeding when indicated. For example, in patients with repeated vomiting, hypokalemia, hyponatremia, and metabolic alkalosis may develop, which usually correct with adequate hydration and the resolution of vomiting. Patients with shock often have metabolic acidosis from lactate accumulation. The blood urea nitrogen is elevated in many patients with UGIB as a result of the absorption of blood from the GI tract and hypovolemia causing prerenal azotemia. After 24 hours, hypovolemia probably is the sole determinant of azotemia unless there has been recurrent bleeding or there is baseline renal insufficiency.

Electrocardiogram An electrocardiogram (ECG) should be obtained in all patients with a GI bleed who are older than 50 years of age or have preexisting ischemic cardiac disease, sig-nificant anemia, or chest pain, shortness of breath, or persistent hypotension. Asymptomatic myocardial ischemia (ST segment depression greater than 1 mm) or injury (ST segment eleva-tion greater than 1 mm) may develop in the setting of GI bleeding. Patients with GI bleeding and clinical or ECG evi-dence of myocardial ischemia should receive packed red blood cells as soon as possible, as well as appropriate treatment for myocardial ischemia.

Imaging GI hemorrhage is not an indication for plain ab -dominal radiography. An upright chest radiograph should be

obtained in patients with UGIB suspected of aspiration or with signs and symptoms of bowel perforation (shock with signifi-cant abdominal or peritoneal tenderness). Subdiaphragmatic air consistent with bowel perforation is a rare finding with UGIB, but it is an indication for immediate surgical consulta-tion and operative repair.

■  DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS

Not all patients complaining of vomiting blood or passing blood in the stool have GI bleeding. Swallowing blood during epistaxis or from the oral cavity may cause hematemesis or melena. Red vomitus may be due to food products (e.g., Jell-O, tomato sauce, wine), and black stool may be due to iron therapy or bismuth (e.g., Pepto-Bismol). Hypovolemia (and its symptoms) may be due to vomiting and diarrhea without bleeding. Poor oral intake with or without fever also may result in hypovolemia. Usually the patient’s hemoglobin or hematocrit is normal or elevated until hemodilution can occur. There are many causes of anemia other than GI bleed-ing. In the absence of suggestive symptoms or blood in the stool, GI bleeding is less likely to be the cause of observed anemia.3

■  MANAGEMENT

Quick identification, aggressive resuscitation, risk stratifica-tion, and prompt consultation are the keys to appropriate emergency management. When the diagnosis of GI bleeding is made, emergency management of patients can proceed (Fig. 22-1).

Reassurance

Patients who present to the ED with symptoms and signs of GI bleeding are often frightened by their symptoms. They may be concerned about the possibility of painful procedures and of the real or perceived risk of death. These patients and their families should be treated in a supportive and reassuring manner. They should be provided with accu-rate information about their problem, and all aspects of the care they are receiving should be explained in a way that they understand.

Nasogastric Tube and Gastric Lavage

After initial resuscitation of the patient, it is important to iden-tify whether the hemorrhage is proximal or distal to the liga-ment of Treitz (i.e., UGIB or LGIB). If the patient’s vomitus demonstrates blood, then the diagnosis of UGIB is confirmed. If a patient reports bloody or “coffee grounds” emesis or if melenic stool is present, an upper GI bleed is more likely. Placement of a nasogastric (NG) tube formerly was widely undertaken in the belief that it had both diagnostic and thera-peutic benefit. Although in some cases, an NG tube may help to establish or confirm the diagnosis of UGIB, it is not useful for risk stratification. Aspiration of bloody contents from the NG tube diagnoses UGIB (or bleeding from nasal or oral passageways), but it does not determine if the bleeding is ongoing or has already stopped. Earlier assertions that gastric lavage “until clear” demonstrated that the bleeding had stopped have been refuted by findings at endoscopy. There is a 10% incidence of failure to aspirate blood through the NG tube in established UGIB. False-negative results are pos-sible if the bleeding is intermittent or has already stopped and the stomach is cleared, or if the bleeding is in the duodenum, and edema or spasm of the pylorus has prevented reflux of

Ch

apter 22 / G

astrointestinal Bleeding

173be inserted in most cases of LGIB, but there is no evidence to support an improved outcome related to this practice.2,6 Typically, a clinical decision is made regarding the likelihood of an upper versus lower GI origin for the bleeding, and endos-copy is then performed based on that determination. If the first endoscopy approach fails to identify the bleeding site, often endoscopy of the other end of the GI tract is necessary.

Gastric tubes are safe in most patients, but pharyngeal and esophageal perforation, cardiac arrest, ethmoid sinus fracture with brain trauma, and bronchial intubation have been reported. No evidence exists that gastric tube placement aggravates hemorrhage from varices or Mallory-Weiss tears.

Gastric lavage may be helpful to prepare a patient for endoscopy. Before gastric lavage, patients with evidence of a possible perforated viscus (e.g., severe pain, peritoneal signs) should undergo radiologic assessment looking for free air. Lavage should not be performed in the presence of pneu-moperitoneum. Gastric lavage does not reduce blood loss in patients with UGIB, and use of iced lavage fluid is not recommended. Gastric lavage in preparation for endoscopy is best performed with a large-bore Ewald tube, passed orally while the patient is in the left lateral decubitus position with the bed in Trendelenburg position. Additional holes may be cut in the distal portion of the Ewald tube to improve aspiration of blood and clots. Clots that cannot be aspirated continue to cause pink return, giving the false impression of continued bleeding. The irrigant need not be sterile; regular tap water may be used. The irrigant should be delivered and removed by gravity in volumes of 200 to 300 mL until the return is clear. Little irrigant is absorbed by the patient. Gastric rupture has been reported as a rare complication of gastric lavage.7,8

Anoscopy/Proctosigmoidoscopy

Patients with mild rectal bleeding who do not have obviously bleeding hemorrhoids should undergo anoscopy or proctosig-moidoscopy. If bleeding internal hemorrhoids are discovered, and the patient does not have portal hypertension, the patient may be discharged with appropriate treatment and follow-up evaluation for hemorrhoids. If hemorrhoids are not detected, it is important to determine if the stool above the rectum contains blood. The absence of blood above the rectum in a patient who is actively bleeding indicates that the source of bleeding is in the rectum. The presence of blood above the anoscope or sigmoidoscope does not invariably indicate a prox-imal source of bleeding, because retrograde passage of blood into the more proximal colon commonly occurs. Such patients need further evaluation.

Endoscopy

Endoscopy is the most accurate diagnostic tool available for the evaluation of UGIB. It identifies a lesion in 78% to 95% of patients with UGIB if it is performed within 12 to 24 hours of the hemorrhage. Accurate identification of the bleeding site allows for risk stratification with respect to predicting rebleed-ing and mortality. Endoscopy-based triage significantly reduces hospitalization rates and costs of treating upper GI bleeding.8,9 Significant advances in endoscopic hemostasis also make it of therapeutic value in select patients (e.g., for banding or scle-rosing of varices). Colonoscopy is an effective tool for diagnosis and selected treatment of LGIB.10,11

Figure 22-1. Emergency management of patients with gastrointestinal bleeding. ED, emergency department; IV, intravenous; LGIB, lower gastrointestinal bleeding; UGIB, upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Chiefcomplaint

Initialresuscitation

History

Physicalexamination

Examinationof gastric contents

Initial EDrisk

stratification

AnoscopyProctosigmoidoscopy

ED/final disposition

AngiographyNuclear imaging studyColonoscopy

Endoscopy

EDdisposition

EDdisposition

IV access(if not done earlier)

LGIBUGIB

Laboratory

blood into the stomach. The presence of bile in an otherwise clear aspirate excludes the possibility of active bleeding above the ligament of Treitz, but should not be used to exclude UGIB in a patient with documented melena.

False-positive results may occur from nasal bleeding. Gastric contents should not be tested for occult blood; visual inspection of the vomitus or aspirate is insufficient to diagnose subtle bleeding, and testing is unreliable. In patients who have hematochezia, an upper GI origin for the bleeding often is associated with signs and symptoms of shock, because rapid transit time of large quantities of blood is producing the hema-tochezia. Because up to 10 to 15% of patients with hemato-chezia have UGIB, it has been recommended that an NG tube

174PA

RT 

I ■

Fun

dam

enta

l Clin

ical

Con

cept

s /

SeC

tio

n t

wo

• C

ardi

nal P

rese

ntat

ions

Angiography and Tagged Red Blood  Cell Scan

Angiography can detect the location of UGIB in two thirds of patients studied. Since the advent of endoscopy, however, the use of angiography has decreased significantly, and today angiography is used in only 1% of patients with UGIB. Angiography is used more commonly in patients with LGIB and usually in consultation with a general surgeon. Although angiography rarely diagnoses the cause of bleeding, it does identify the site of bleeding in approximately 40% of patients who have LGIB and in 65% of patients who eventu-ally require surgical intervention. Angiography ideally is per-formed during active bleeding; this may be apparent from persistently unstable vital signs or continued transfusion requirements to establish or maintain an optimal hemoglobin or hematocrit level. Arterial embolization can be used in selected cases of LGIB.12 In some patients with more indolent or elusive bleeding, a nuclear isotope–tagged red blood cell scan, usually performed from the inpatient unit, may identify the bleeding site.

Gastric Acid Secretion Inhibition

All patients with peptic ulcer disease documented by endos-copy should receive therapy with a proton-pump inhibitor (e.g., omeprazole).13–15 There is no documented benefit to ini-tiating this therapy or administering H2 antihistamines in the ED for patients with UGIB, however.

Octreotide (Somatostatin Analogues)

Patients with documented esophageal varices and acute upper GI bleeding should receive an intravenous infusion of octreo-tide at 25–50 µg/hour for a minimum of 24 hours while being observed in the intensive care unit (ICU). Octreotide is a useful addition to endoscopic sclerotherapy and decreases rebleeding occurrences.16,17 (See Chapter 87.) Octreotide may also reduce the incidence of lower GI rebleeding secondary to angiodysplasia.18

Vasopressin

Intravenous vasopressin has been used in the treatment of UGIB, most commonly in patients with variceal hemorrhage. Controlled studies have not shown a positive effect of vaso-pressin on overall mortality, however. These results, combined with a relatively high rate of serious complications (9% major and 3% fatal), suggest that use of vasopressin should be limited. A trial of vasopressin may be warranted in an exsanguinating patient with suspected variceal bleeding, especially if endos-copy is not immediately available. The recommended dose of vasopressin is 20 units given intravenously over 20 minutes and then 0.2 to 0.4 unit per minute. Consultation with a gas-troenterologist is advisable.

Sengstaken-Blakemore Tube

Placement of a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube stops hemorrhage in approximately 80% of patients bleeding from esophageal varices. The Linton tube may be superior to the Sengstaken-Blakemore tube in patients with bleeding gastric varices; however, either of these tubes is rarely used. In general, these tubes should not be used without endoscopic documentation of the source of bleeding because complications are common and significant (14% major, 3% fatal). A trial of balloon tam-ponade should be considered, however, in an exsanguinating

patient with probable variceal bleeding in whom endoscopy is not immediately available and vasopressin has not slowed the hemorrhage. Consultation with a surgeon or gastroenterologist is advisable.

Surgery

Surgery is indicated for all hemodynamically unstable patients with active bleeding who do not respond to appropriate intra-vascular volume replacement, correction of any coagulopathy, and endoscopic intervention (if available). The mortality rate for patients undergoing emergency procedures for GI bleeding is approximately 23%. Generally, surgery is indicated when-ever the risk of ineffective medical therapy and continued hemorrhage outweighs that of surgical morbidity and mortal-ity.19 Emergency surgical consultation should be considered when blood replacement exceeds 5 units within the first 4 to 6 hours or when 2 units of blood is needed every 4 hours (after replacement of initial losses) to maintain normal cardiac output.

■  DISPOSITION

Risk Stratification

Risk stratification involves combining historical, clinical, and laboratory data to determine the risk of death and rebleeding in patients presenting to an ED with GI bleeding. Patients can be sorted into four risk categories: very low, low, moderate, and high risk. Some patients present to the ED with a vague complaint of vomiting blood or passing blood from the rectum in whom detailed history and examination allows a diagnosis of hemorrhoid, or anal fissure, or there may be little or no objective evidence of significant GI bleeding. These patients can be categorized as very low risk and can be sent home without further diagnostic tests2,7,20 (Box 22-3).

Before discharge, patients should be educated about the signs and symptoms of significant GI bleeding and when to return to the ED or when to call their primary care physician. They should be given specific education about the possible or actual cause of the bleeding and specific treatment for that disorder. They should be educated about the side effects of any medications. Patents should undergo specific follow-up evaluation within 24 to 36 hours. They should be instructed to avoid aspirin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and alcohol.2,21,22

Patients with low-risk, moderate-risk, and high-risk criteria are more complicated and require further assessment. Histori-cally, nearly all patients with significant GI bleeding were admitted to the hospital. As health care has changed, a greater emphasis has been placed on outpatient management of select

BOX 22-3VEry-low-riSk critEria for PatiEntS comPlaining of gaStrointEStinal BlEEding who can BE diSchargEd homE

■ No comorbid diseases■ Normal vital signs■ Normal or trace positive result on stool guaiac testing■ Negative findings on gastric aspiration, if done■ Normal or near-normal hemoglobin/hematocrit■ Good support systems■ Proper understanding of signs and symptoms of

significant bleeding■ Immediate access to emergent care if needed■ Follow-up arranged within 24 hr

Ch

apter 22 / G

astrointestinal Bleeding

175

low-risk patients with GI bleeding. Studies have shown that combining clinical and endoscopic criteria provides an accu-rate estimation of the risk of rebleeding and mortality in patients with UGIB. These combined criteria have been used to identify patients with UGIB at low risk, who can be dis-charged home, and patients at moderate or high risk, who need to be admitted to an appropriate care site in the hospital. Risk stratification for patients with LGIB is less well studied, so nearly all patients with significant LGIB are admitted. Risk stratification can be used for patients with LGIB, however, to decide an appropriate inpatient care site.

Table 22-1 presents an initial risk stratification tool for patients with upper and lower GI bleeding. Combining clinical and endoscopic findings allows for final risk stratification, as shown in Table 22-2, to decide disposition, inpatient care site, and treatment.1,2,6,20,23-25

Patients with clinical evidence of GI bleeding should undergo endoscopy as soon as it is available for final risk strati-fication, inpatient triage, and determination of appropriate treatment (see Table 22-2). If endoscopy is not immediately available, patients with low clinical risk may be admitted to an ED observation unit or short-stay hospital bed until endoscopy can be performed. Patients with moderate clinical risk criteria may be admitted to an inpatient floor, intermediate care unit, or ICU, as indicated by specific patient management needs and depending on the capabilities of the institution. Patients with high clinical risk should be admitted to a closely moni-tored step-down unit or an ICU. The timing of endoscopy depends on availability, the acuity of the patient, the need for

emergent therapy, the need to determine final care site, and the need to minimize length of stay.3,26

Patients with LGIB that is not clearly due to hemorrhoids, fissure, or proctitis should be admitted to an inpatient bed. Patients with low risk may be admitted to an inpatient floor bed and prepared for a nuclear medicine imaging study (e.g., red blood cell–labeled study) or colonoscopy. Patients with high-risk criteria should be admitted to a step-down unit or ICU and considered for angiography to identify the site of LGIB. Patients with moderate-risk criteria require individual-ized determination of the most appropriate inpatient care site (floor, intermediate care bed, or ICU) and the most useful diagnostic studies (nuclear imaging or angiography).

Consultation with a surgeon should be obtained if it appears that more than 5 units of blood is required to achieve hemo-dynamic stability or if there is reasonable suspicion that opera-tive intervention may be needed. This is especially true of patients older than 65 years of age. In general, the older the patient, the more aggressive the surgical management ought to be. Patients with a history of varices, persistent postural changes in heart rate, or significant bleeding of bright red blood per rectum are more likely to require surgery than are patients without these findings. Emergent vascular surgical consultation is needed for patients who have abdominal aortic grafts who present to the ED with GI bleeding, because of the possibility of an aortoenteric fistula.

Table 22-1  Initial Emergency Department Risk Stratification for Patients with Gastrointestinal Bleeding

LOW RISK MODERATE RISK HIGH RISK

Age < 60 yr Age > 60 yrInitial SBP ≥ 100 mm Hg Initial SBP < 100 mm Hg Persistent SBP < 100 mm HgNormal vital signs for 1 hr Mild ongoing tachycardia for 1 hr Persistent moderate/severe tachycardiaNo transfusion requirement Transfusions required, ≤4 units Transfusion required, >4 unitsNo active major comorbid diseases Stable major comorbid diseases Unstable major comorbid diseasesNo liver disease Mild liver disease—PT normal

or near-normalDecompensated liver disease—e.g., coagulopathy,

ascites, encephalopathyNo moderate-risk or high-risk clinical features No high-risk clinical features

Data from Terdiman JP, Lindenauer GF: Acute gastrointestinal bleeding. In Wachter RM, Goldman L, Hollander H (eds): Hospital Medicine. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2005, pp. 767–779.

PT, prothrombin time; SBP, systolic blood pressure.

Table 22-2  Management by Risk Category for Patients with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding after Endoscopy

RISK STRATIFICATION

Recommended Management

LOW RISK MODERATE RISK HIGH RISK

Low risk Immediate discharge* 23-hr observation (floor)† ICU monitoring for 24 hr‡ (48- to 72-hr hospitalization)

Moderate risk 48-hr inpatient stay† 48- to 72-hr inpatient stay (floor)† ICU monitoring for 24 hr (48- to 72-hr hospitalization)

High risk ICU monitoring for 48 hr (48- to 72-hr hospitalization)

ICU monitoring for 24 to 48 hr (72-hr hospitalization)

ICU monitoring for 72 hr (≥72-hr hospitalization)

*Patients with low-risk clinical and endoscopic findings can be discharged home with appropriate treatment based on diagnosis, scheduled follow-up evaluation within 24 hours, and proper patient education to ensure immediate return if signs of rebleeding appear.

†Patients may be discharged after 24 to 48 hours of in-hospital observation if there is no evidence of rebleeding, vital signs are normal, there is no need for further transfusion, and the hemoglobin or hematocrit has remained stable. They should be provided with appropriate treatment based on diagnosis, scheduled follow-up evaluation within 24 hours, and proper patient education to ensure immediate return if signs of rebleeding appear.

‡Patients with high-risk clinical or endoscopic findings should be hospitalized and monitored closely for evidence of rebleeding.Data from Terdiman JP, Lindenauer GF: Acute gastrointestinal bleeding. In Wachter RM, Goldman L, Hollander H (eds): Hospital Medicine. Philadelphia, Lippincott

Williams & Wilkins, 2005, pp. 767–779.

The references for this chapter can be found online by accessing the accompanying Expert Consult website.