Risk factors for post-polypectomy bleeding; a retrospective case-control study of a high-volume colonoscopy center

Background and aim Post-polypectomy bleeding (PPB) remains an uncommon although serious complication of colonoscopy. The aim of this study is to determine the PPB-prevalence in a secondary care hospital and its associated risk factors. Patients and methods We collected data from 581 patients, with the removal of 1593 polyps between August 2017 and August 2019. A univariate binary logistic regression analysis was conducted retrospectively. Results PPB occurred in only 10 cases, representing 1.7% of patients: immediate in 1.2% and delayed in 0.5%. The number of removed polyps per patient [4.5 (SD 2.59) for hemorrhagic vs. 2.74 (SD 1.98) for non-hemorrhagic group] and the propofol dose [232 mg (SD 93.07) for hemorrhagic vs. 133 mg (SD 57.28) for non-hemorrhagic group] were relevant patient-related risk factors. The polyp-based analysis showed the polyp size [18.4 mm (SD 10.44) for hemorrhagic vs. 4.42 mm (SD 4.29) for non-hemorrhagic group], the morphology [wide-based: OR 24.83 (95 % CI 2.76 – 223.44), pedunculated: OR 56.67 (95 % CI 5.03 – 638.29)], the location at ileocecal valve [OR 20.48, 95 % CI 1.81 – 231.97)], and the polypectomy method [hot snare piecemeal with epinephrine injection: OR 75.38 (95 % CI 7.67 – 741.21)] as significant risk factors for PPB, too. Conclusions The low rate of PPB confirms the safety of the procedure in non-tertiary, high-volume colonoscopy centers. The number of polyps removed per patient, the polyp size, morphology and location, as well as the sedation dose and the method of polypectomy were shown as relevant risk factors.

Massive Hematochezia from a Large Bleeding Duodenal Diverticulum

Background. Duodenal diverticula are a rare cause of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding despite being a common finding in the GI tract. We present a case of a patient who had massive hematochezia due to a complex duodenal diverticulum. Case Presentation. A 74-year-old Hispanic female presented initially with generalized weakness. During admission, the patient had an episode of a large amount of hematochezia and had to be transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU). Upper endoscopy was done using a forward-viewing endoscope which revealed a bleeding complex duodenal diverticulum. Successful hemostasis was achieved through epinephrine injection followed by placement of hemostatic clips. Conclusion. Although rare, gastroenterologists need to be aware of duodenal diverticulum as a possible cause of gastrointestinal bleed. It could be life-threatening, and thus, prompt diagnosis and management is necessary.

ERCP-Related Bleeding

Clinically significant bleeding is an uncommon complication of diagnostic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. But the endoscopists needs to be skilled at prevention and management. Post ERCP bleeding is most often seen following sphincterotomy. The overall risk of bleeding in patients undergoing sphincterotomy is approximately 1-2 percent. Most bleeding episodes are mild to moderate in severity. The risk of bleeding can be minimized by identifying patients at risk, correcting coagulation abnormalities and careful technique by skilled endoscopists in high-volume centers. Post-sphincterotomy bleeding often stops spontaneously and is rarely life-threatening, except in patients with a bleeding diathesis. Most clinically relevant bleedings can be managed with medical treatment and/or endoscopic therapy, which should be performed without delay in patients who have immediate bleeding. Endoscopic therapy options include epinephrine injection, hemostatic clips, thermal therapy and placement of full covered self-expandable metal stents. Angiography or surgery is usually reserved for patients with refractory bleeding and is rarely required.