MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407284970 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwae059.095

A95 APPROACH AND OUTCOMES OF PATIENTS WITH NON-VARICEAL UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING: ANALYSIS OF 50 CASES IN A TERTIARY CARE CENTRE

2025· article· en· W4407284970 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kristie Labib, Sergio Zepeda-Gómez, Abdullah Aldaihani, M.A. Fazal, Ali Madeeh Hashmi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTertiary careInternal medicineGastrointestinal bleedingGeneral surgeryGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. NVUGIB refers to bleeding occurring above the ligament of Treitz, excluding variceal causes. Despite improvements in management, the incidence and mortality of NVUGIB remain high. Key challenges include determining optimal treatment strategies and predicting patient outcomes. Aims To analyze clinical presentation, management strategies, endoscopic findings, treatment and outcomes of NVUGIB patients. Methods A retrospective review was conducted at the University of Alberta Hospital on 50 patients diagnosed with NVUGIB who underwent endoscopy within 48 hours of presentation. We analyzed clinical presentation, management strategies, endoscopic findings, treatment and outcomes to assess their impact on patient care. Results Of the 50 patients, 54% were male, and melena was the most frequent presenting symptom (56%). Sixty-two percent of patients received intravenous proton pump inhibitors (IV PPI) during initial management, while 42% were on NSAIDs without concurrent PPI therapy. Peptic ulcer disease was the leading cause of bleeding (90%), followed by vascular lesions (6%) and Mallory-Weiss tears (4%). Among ulcers, 66.7% were classified as Forrest III. Nine patients (18%) underwent urgent endoscopy within 6-12 hours, while 30% had early endoscopy (12-24 hours), and 52% had late endoscopy (after 24 hours). High-risk lesions (Forrest Ia, Ib, IIa) were identified in 32% of patients. The early endoscopy group had the highest rate of high-risk lesions (53%), compared to the urgent group (33%) and the late group (19%). Patients with high-risk lesions experienced significantly longer hospital stays, averaging 7.8 days compared to 4.9 days for those without high-risk findings (p < 0.005). Re-bleeding occurred in 16% of patients after initial endoscopy. Six patients received successful repeat endoscopic therapy, while two required embolization for bleeding duodenal ulcers. No further episodes of bleeding occurred in the re-bleeding group, and one patient died within 30 days of presentation, the cause was unrelated to bleeding. Conclusions Peptic ulcer disease remains the most common cause of NVUGIB, with NSAID use as a key risk factor. Timely endoscopy and appropriate initial management are critical for optimizing outcomes. High-risk lesions are found in approximately 30% of patients and are associated with longer hospital stays. Physicians should be aware of embolization as a rescue therapy for patients who experience re-bleeding. 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.217 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologySame topicGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207