2021
ACG Clinical Guideline: Upper Gastrointestinal and Ulcer Bleeding
Laine L, Barkun AN, Saltzman JR, Martel M, Leontiadis GI. ACG Clinical Guideline: Upper Gastrointestinal and Ulcer Bleeding. The American Journal Of Gastroenterology 2021, 116: 899-917. PMID: 33929377, DOI: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001245.Peer-Reviewed Reviews, Practice Guidelines, Standards, and Consensus StatementsConceptsUpper gastrointestinal bleedingEndoscopic therapyGastrointestinal bleedingHigh-dose proton pump inhibitor therapyOvert upper gastrointestinal bleedingOral proton pump inhibitorsProton pump inhibitor therapyRed blood cell transfusionAbsolute ethanol injectionWeeks of therapyBlood cell transfusionLow-quality evidenceLow-risk patientsManagement of patientsProton pump inhibitorsArgon plasma coagulationActive spurtingErythromycin infusionTC-325Cell transfusionRecurrent bleedingRecurrent ulcersUlcer bleedingEndoscopic hemostasisGRADE approachTowards personalised management for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Sung JJY, Laine L, Kuipers EJ, Barkun AN. Towards personalised management for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Gut 2021, 70: 818-824. PMID: 33649044, DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2020-323846.Peer-Reviewed Reviews, Practice Guidelines, Standards, and Consensus StatementsMeSH KeywordsEndoscopy, GastrointestinalGastrointestinal HemorrhageHemostasis, EndoscopicHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicPrecision MedicineUpper Gastrointestinal TractConceptsIndividual patientsNon-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleedingPre-endoscopic assessmentUpper gastrointestinal bleedingImportant clinical issuePostendoscopic managementGastrointestinal bleedingPatient characteristicsEndoscopic evaluationPoint of careOptimal treatmentInternational guidelinesClinical issuesInternational professional societiesClinical settingSpecific management strategiesStages of managementPatientsTreatmentProfessional societiesManagement strategiesGuidelinesBleedingHaemostasisLesions
2019
The Shock Index is not accurate at predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Saffouri E, Blackwell C, Laursen SB, Laine L, Dalton HR, Ngu J, Shultz M, Norton R, Stanley AJ. The Shock Index is not accurate at predicting outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2019, 51: 253-260. PMID: 31642558, DOI: 10.1111/apt.15541.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveBlood TransfusionCohort StudiesEndoscopy, GastrointestinalFemaleGastrointestinal HemorrhageHospitalizationHumansMaleMiddle AgedMortalityPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexShockSurvival AnalysisUpper Gastrointestinal TractYoung AdultConceptsUpper gastrointestinal bleedingGlasgow-Blatchford scoreShock indexGastrointestinal bleedingABC scoreMajor transfusionAcute upper gastrointestinal bleedingUK National Confidential EnquiryAdmission Rockall scoreSevere gastrointestinal bleedingMajor clinical endpointsPredictors of outcomeNational Confidential EnquiryRockall scoreBlatchford scoreEndoscopic therapyConsecutive patientsHospital admissionConfidential EnquiryProspective studyClinical endpointsPatient outcomesRisk scoreDeath reportsBleeding
2018
Severity and Outcomes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding With Bloody Vs. Coffee-Grounds Hematemesis
Laine L, Laursen SB, Zakko L, Dalton HR, Ngu JH, Schultz M, Stanley AJ. Severity and Outcomes of Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding With Bloody Vs. Coffee-Grounds Hematemesis. The American Journal Of Gastroenterology 2018, 113: 358. PMID: 29380820, DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2018.5.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAgedBlood PreservationBlood TransfusionEsophageal and Gastric VaricesFemaleGastrointestinal HemorrhageHeart RateHematemesisHemoglobinsHemostasis, EndoscopicHumansMaleMelenaMiddle AgedMortalityProspective StudiesRecurrenceRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexUpper Gastrointestinal TractConceptsCoffee ground emesisBloody emesisHemostatic interventionUpper gastrointestinal bleedingComposite end pointRisk stratification scoresSystolic blood pressureTiming of endoscopyPredictors of outcomeBeats/minGastrointestinal bleedingConsecutive patientsPrimary outcomeSevere bleedingStratification scoresBlood pressureProspective studyHematemesisMelenaEmesisHigh mortalityEnd pointMortalityOutcomesSeverity
2017
Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study
Stanley AJ, Laine L, Dalton HR, Ngu JH, Schultz M, Abazi R, Zakko L, Thornton S, Wilkinson K, Khor CJ, Murray IA, Laursen SB. Comparison of risk scoring systems for patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: international multicentre prospective study. The BMJ 2017, 356: i6432. PMID: 28053181, PMCID: PMC5217768, DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i6432.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsUpper gastrointestinal bleedingRockall scoreGastrointestinal bleedingInternational multicentre prospective studyAdmission Rockall scoreFull Rockall scoreGlasgow-Blatchford scoreHigh-risk patientsMulticentre prospective studyAssessment of patientsPNED scoreHospital stayBlatchford scoreDay mortalityConsecutive patientsRisk patientsComposite endpointEndoscopic treatmentProspective studyClinical endpointsClinical utilityLower riskPatientsLarge hospitalsBleeding
2010
Risk factors for NSAID‐associated upper GI clinical events in a long‐term prospective study of 34 701 arthritis patients
Laine L, Curtis SP, Cryer B, Kaur A, Cannon CP. Risk factors for NSAID‐associated upper GI clinical events in a long‐term prospective study of 34 701 arthritis patients. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2010, 32: 1240-1248. PMID: 20955443, DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2010.04465.x.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchMeSH KeywordsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalArthritisCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsDiclofenacEtoricoxibFemaleGastrointestinal DiseasesHumansMaleMiddle AgedProportional Hazards ModelsProspective StudiesPyridinesRisk FactorsSulfonesTime FactorsUpper Gastrointestinal TractConceptsClinical eventsRisk factorsLow-dose aspirin useDouble-blind randomized trialsLong-term prospective studiesCox proportional hazards modelNonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugsDiscontinuation of NSAIDsPredictors of discontinuationUpper GI eventsLow-dose aspirinPotential risk factorsProportional hazards modelAnti-inflammatory drugsAspirin useGI eventsPatient characteristicsArthritis patientsTreat analysisRandomized trialsRheumatoid arthritisProspective studyGI effectsDyspepsiaHazards model
2008
Evaluating the process of care in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: a survey of expert vs. non‐expert gastroenterologists
ESRAILIAN E, GRALNEK IM, JENSEN D, LAINE L, DULAI GS, EISEN G, SPIEGEL BM. Evaluating the process of care in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage: a survey of expert vs. non‐expert gastroenterologists. Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2008, 28: 1199-1208. PMID: 18729846, DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2008.03838.x.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchConceptsHigh-risk bleedingProcess of careIntravenous proton pump inhibitorsNonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhageUpper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhageLarge-channel endoscopeUpper gastrointestinal hemorrhageUse of hemoclipsGastrointestinal tract hemorrhageProton pump inhibitorsChoice of endoscopeNasogastric lavageGastrointestinal hemorrhageTract hemorrhagePromotility agentsContinuous infusionPump inhibitorsGuideline complianceWide variationBleedingHemorrhageGastroenterologistsVignette surveyCareEndoscope