Pre‐endoscopic proton pump inhibitor therapy reduces recurrent adverse gastrointestinal outcomes in patients with acute non‐variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) following endoscopic haemostasis reduce rebleeding rates in patients with high-risk acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Many advocate the use of PPIs prior to endoscopy, although its incremental benefit is unproven. AIM: To determine if providing PPIs before endoscopy reduces adverse gastrointestinal outcomes in acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding patients. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review to identify patients presenting to two tertiary care centres with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding between 1999 and 2004. Subjects receiving PPI therapy before endoscopy were compared with those not receiving pre-endoscopic PPI therapy. The primary outcome measure was the development of any adverse bleeding outcome (rebleeding, surgery for control of bleeding, in-hospital mortality, readmission within 30 days for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding). RESULTS: 385 patients were included in our study [132 (12 intravenous/120 po) pre-endoscopic PPI vs. 253 no pre-endoscopic PPI]. Patients receiving pre-endoscopic PPI therapy were significantly less likely to develop adverse outcomes compared with those not given pre-endoscopic PPIs (25% vs. 13%, P = 0.005). Rebleeding, upper gastrointestinal surgery, mortality and length of hospital stay were also significantly lower in patients receiving pre-endoscopic PPI. CONCLUSIONS: The use of PPIs before endoscopy significantly reduces the risk of developing adverse gastrointestinal outcomes in patients with acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Future studies are required to better characterize this relationship.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".