A137 BALLOON-ASSISTED ENDOSCOPY FOR SMALL BOWEL BLEEDING – A REVIEW
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding is a potentially life-threatening medical emergency requiring immediate medical attention. Obscure GI bleeding (OGIB) Is defined as GI bleeding with no obvious culprit lesion found on initial upper or lower endoscopy. Further investigations are needed as 75% of those cases originate in the small bowel. The advent of small bowel endoscopy, consisting of video capsule endoscopy (VCE) and device-assisted enteroscopy (DAE) has allowed clinicians to endoscopically visualize the entire GI tract and perform therapeutic interventions. These devices include balloon assisted endoscopy (BAE) and Spiral Endoscopy (SPE). Aims The objectives of this review are to analyze the definitions, etiologies, and risk factors of OGIB. Furthermore, we reviewed the diagnostic and therapeutic yields of DAE and its safety profile. Due to the adverse effects and recall of SPE, we only report here on BAE. Methods A literature review was conducted using PubMed and OvidSP (Medline) to identify articles on the use of VCE and DAE for OGIB. Keywords included a combination of gastrointestinal bleeding with occult, obscure, active and inactive, small bowel bleed, diagnostic yield, therapeutic yield, and rebleeding rate. The information was obtained via systematic review and meta-analysis, retrospective studies, and case reports. Results A total of 32 papers were reviewed. The most common causes of OGIB reported were vascular lesions (23-47%), inflammatory lesions (12-16%), and tumors (5-16%). The risk factors associated with OGIB include age, cardiac disease, liver cirrhosis, chronic kidney disease, and hereditary vascular diseases. The overall diagnostic and therapeutic yields of BAE in OGIB were 76.3% and 49.5%, respectively. Factors that increased the yield included performing an initial VCE (increase by 7%) and performing the procedure within the first 10 days after the initial bleeding episode (87.5%) as compared to after 10 days (11.1%). Recurrent bleeding can occur in up to 46% of patients. Risk factors for rebleeding include cirrhosis, overt bleeding symptoms, and presence of multiple vascular lesions. Associated adverse effects in DAE were minor in 9.1% of patients and severe in less than 2%. These include bleeding (0.8%), perforation (0.3%), and pancreatitis (0.3%). Conclusions OGIB is a challenging clinical entity. BAE now allows clinicians to diagnose and treat culprit lesions in the small bowel with reasonable success and a strong safety profile, however timing and prior VCE can further optimize this. Clinical decisions and follow up should be made based around existing risk stratification tools and scores. Further prospective research is needed to determine optimal timing of DAE from presentation of OGIB that would increase diagnostic and therapeutic yields. Figure 1. A and B) Endoscopic images of small bowel vascular lesion. C) Bleeding vascular lesion treated with hemostatic clips. 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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".