A140 DELAYED BLEEDING POST-ENDOSCOPIC AMPULLECTOMY FOR AMPULLARY ADENOMAS: INCIDENCE, RISK FACTORS AND MANAGEMENT OF DELAYED BLEEDING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The duodenal tumors of major papilla account 10% of all peri-ampullary lesions, and the majority represent adenomas, carrying malignant potential through the well-known adenoma–carcinoma sequence ([i]). Historically, surgical resection was the standard of care, but it is associated with significant risk of complications (44.7%) ([ii]). Hence, endoscopic ampullectomy became the treatment modality for selected cases. Despite the significantly lower rate of adverse events, pancreatitis and bleeding occurs in up to 25% of patients ([iii]). The rate of bleeding may be even higher, depending on periampullary lesion size and type. Factors related to delayed bleeding are poorly understood. Aims The aim of our study was to determine predicting factors for delayed post-ampullectomy bleeding. Methods We conducted a single-center retrospective study over 13 years (2010-2023). All patients who underwent an endoscopic ampullectomy were analyzed. The primary endpoint was the incidence of delayed bleeding, which was defined as a post-procedural bleeding that necessitated either a blood transfusion, ICU admission or re-intervention. Secondary outcomes included risk factors for delayed bleeding, management, and other adverse events. Results 113 patients underwent endoscopic papillectomy [mean age 66.2 ± 12.2 years; male gender 51 (45.1%)]. Mean lesion size was 27.0 ± 14.3 mm and mean procedure duration was 62.8 ± 35.6 minutes. There were 24 cases of delayed bleeding (21.2%). Of these, 6 (25%) required repeat endoscopic intervention. The average length of hospital was longer in those experiencing a delayed bleed (8.6 ± 4.9 vs 4.8 ± 2.4 days, Pampersand:003C0.001). By univariable logistic regression, the odds of delayed bleeding were greater in those with hypertension (OR 3.8, 95%CI 1.4-10.3, P=0.008) or an INR ≥ 1.2 (OR 13.3, 95%CI 3.0-58.3, P=0.001). A multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that INR≥ 1.2 predicted delayed bleeding, with an OR of 16.1 (95%CI 3.0-85.4, P=0.001). Other adverse events included perforation (n=7, 6.3%) and pancreatitis (n=19, 16.8%). There were no deaths. Conclusions Post-ampullectomy bleeding is a common adverse event in patients undergoing ampullectomy leading to more prolonged hospital stay. History of hypertension and elevated INR above 1.2 might be related to delayed post-ampullectomy bleeding. Additional strategies to reduce post-ampullectomy bleeding should be explored. Funding Agencies None
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".