Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective, Single-Center Experience on the Role of Endoscopy and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common and potentially fatal medical emergency. This study aimed to investigate the frequency, causes, outcomes, and efficacy of endoscopy in the treatment of UGIB at King Fahad Central Hospital in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. Methods: Between January 2017 and December 2023, a retrospective study was performed including all hospitalized patients with UGIB. This research investigated sociodemographic characteristics, clinical history, endoscopic findings, treatment options, and results using statistical analysis, which included both descriptive and inferential approaches. Results: The study included 483 patients (of which 74.1% men), with a mean age of 53.9 ± 19.5 years. Hematemesis was observed in 67.5% of the patients, whereas melena occurred in 49.7% of the cases. Two-hundred sixty-two (54.2%) patients underwent endoscopy within the first 24 h from presentation. The most frequent endoscopic findings were esophageal varices (52.2%) and duodenal ulcers (21.7%). Bandings accounted for 48.0% of all endoscopic procedures, whereas 36.9% of the patients received epinephrine injections along with endoclips. Medical therapy mostly consisted of a mix of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and octreotide. A significant minority (43.5%) of the patients stayed in the hospital for 1 - 3 days, while 59.6% did not need blood transfusions. During the first 3 days, 7% of patients experienced rebleeding, with a 6% mortality rate. Using multivariate regression analysis, rebleeding was strongly associated with initial presentation with shock (P < 0.001), renal disease (P = 0.01), and increased transfusion requirement (P = 0.001). Mortality was strongly associated with steroid usage (P = 0.007), increasing transfusion requirements (P < 0.0001), and rebleeding (P = 0.002). Conclusions: Timely endoscopy and proper treatment dramatically improved UGIB results. Identifying those who are at high risk and acting swiftly is a critical step in reducing the likelihood of recurrent bleeding and fatality.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".