Outcome of Conservative Therapy in Coronavirus disease-2019 Patients Presenting With Gastrointestinal Bleeding

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background/Objective

There is a paucity of data on the management of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in patients with Coronavirus disease -2019 (COVID-19) amid concerns about the risk of transmission during endoscopic procedures. We aimed to study the outcomes of conservative treatment for GI bleeding in patients with COVID-19.

Methods

In this retrospective analysis, 24 of 1342 (1.8%) patients with COVID-19, presenting with GI bleeding from 22nd April to 22nd July 2020, were included.

Results

The mean age of patients was 45.8 ± 12.7 years; 17 (70.8%) were males; upper GI (UGI) bleeding: lower GI (LGI) 23:1. Twenty-two (91.6%) patients had evidence of cirrhosis- 21 presented with UGI bleeding while one had bleeding from hemorrhoids. Two patients without cirrhosis were presumed to have non-variceal bleeding. The medical therapy for UGI bleeding included vasoconstrictors-somatostatin in 17 (73.9%) and terlipressin in 4 (17.4%) patients. All patients with UGI bleeding received proton pump inhibitors and antibiotics. Packed red blood cells (PRBCs), fresh frozen plasma (FFPs) and platelets were transfused in 14 (60.9%), 3 (13.0%) and 3 (13.0%), respectively. The median PRBCs transfused was 1 (0–3) unit(s). The initial control of UGI bleeding was achieved in all 23 patients and none required an emergency endoscopy. At 5-day follow-up, none rebled or died. Two patients later rebled, one had intermittent bleed due to gastric antral vascular ectasia, while another had rebleed 19 days after discharge. Three (12.5%) cirrhosis patients succumbed to acute hypoxemic respiratory failure during hospital stay.

Conclusion

Conservative management strategies including pharmacotherapy, restrictive transfusion strategy, and close hemodynamic monitoring can successfully manage GI bleeding in COVID-19 patients and reduce need for urgent endoscopy. The decision for proceeding with endoscopy should be taken by a multidisciplinary team after consideration of the patient's condition, response to treatment, resources and the risks involved, on a case to case basis.

Related collections

Most cited references 30

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1

Neeltje van Doremalen, Trenton Bushmaker, Dylan H Morris … (2021)

To the Editor: A novel human coronavirus that is now named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (formerly called HCoV-19) emerged in Wuhan, China, in late 2019 and is now causing a pandemic. 1 We analyzed the aerosol and surface stability of SARS-CoV-2 and compared it with SARS-CoV-1, the most closely related human coronavirus. 2 We evaluated the stability of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 in aerosols and on various surfaces and estimated their decay rates using a Bayesian regression model (see the Methods section in the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). SARS-CoV-2 nCoV-WA1-2020 (MN985325.1) and SARS-CoV-1 Tor2 (AY274119.3) were the strains used. Aerosols (<5 μm) containing SARS-CoV-2 (105.25 50% tissue-culture infectious dose [TCID50] per milliliter) or SARS-CoV-1 (106.75-7.00 TCID50 per milliliter) were generated with the use of a three-jet Collison nebulizer and fed into a Goldberg drum to create an aerosolized environment. The inoculum resulted in cycle-threshold values between 20 and 22, similar to those observed in samples obtained from the upper and lower respiratory tract in humans. Our data consisted of 10 experimental conditions involving two viruses (SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1) in five environmental conditions (aerosols, plastic, stainless steel, copper, and cardboard). All experimental measurements are reported as means across three replicates. SARS-CoV-2 remained viable in aerosols throughout the duration of our experiment (3 hours), with a reduction in infectious titer from 103.5 to 102.7 TCID50 per liter of air. This reduction was similar to that observed with SARS-CoV-1, from 104.3 to 103.5 TCID50 per milliliter (Figure 1A). SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on plastic and stainless steel than on copper and cardboard, and viable virus was detected up to 72 hours after application to these surfaces (Figure 1A), although the virus titer was greatly reduced (from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter of medium after 72 hours on plastic and from 103.7 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter after 48 hours on stainless steel). The stability kinetics of SARS-CoV-1 were similar (from 103.4 to 100.7 TCID50 per milliliter after 72 hours on plastic and from 103.6 to 100.6 TCID50 per milliliter after 48 hours on stainless steel). On copper, no viable SARS-CoV-2 was measured after 4 hours and no viable SARS-CoV-1 was measured after 8 hours. On cardboard, no viable SARS-CoV-2 was measured after 24 hours and no viable SARS-CoV-1 was measured after 8 hours (Figure 1A). Both viruses had an exponential decay in virus titer across all experimental conditions, as indicated by a linear decrease in the log10TCID50 per liter of air or milliliter of medium over time (Figure 1B). The half-lives of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1 were similar in aerosols, with median estimates of approximately 1.1 to 1.2 hours and 95% credible intervals of 0.64 to 2.64 for SARS-CoV-2 and 0.78 to 2.43 for SARS-CoV-1 (Figure 1C, and Table S1 in the Supplementary Appendix). The half-lives of the two viruses were also similar on copper. On cardboard, the half-life of SARS-CoV-2 was longer than that of SARS-CoV-1. The longest viability of both viruses was on stainless steel and plastic; the estimated median half-life of SARS-CoV-2 was approximately 5.6 hours on stainless steel and 6.8 hours on plastic (Figure 1C). Estimated differences in the half-lives of the two viruses were small except for those on cardboard (Figure 1C). Individual replicate data were noticeably “noisier” (i.e., there was more variation in the experiment, resulting in a larger standard error) for cardboard than for other surfaces (Fig. S1 through S5), so we advise caution in interpreting this result. We found that the stability of SARS-CoV-2 was similar to that of SARS-CoV-1 under the experimental circumstances tested. This indicates that differences in the epidemiologic characteristics of these viruses probably arise from other factors, including high viral loads in the upper respiratory tract and the potential for persons infected with SARS-CoV-2 to shed and transmit the virus while asymptomatic. 3,4 Our results indicate that aerosol and fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is plausible, since the virus can remain viable and infectious in aerosols for hours and on surfaces up to days (depending on the inoculum shed). These findings echo those with SARS-CoV-1, in which these forms of transmission were associated with nosocomial spread and super-spreading events, 5 and they provide information for pandemic mitigation efforts.

0 comments Cited 4074 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Expanding consensus in portal hypertension: Report of the Baveno VI Consensus Workshop: Stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension.

Roberto de Franchis (2015)

0 comments Cited 593 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

T A Rockall, R. F. Logan, H Devlin … (1996)

The aim of this study was to establish the relative importance of risk factors for mortality after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and to formulate a simple numerical scoring system that categorizes patients by risk. A prospective, unselected, multicentre, population based study was undertaken using standardised questionnaires in two phases one year apart. A total of 4185 cases of acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage over the age of 16 identified over a four month period in 1993 and 1625 cases identified subsequently over a three month period in 1994 were included in the study. It was found that age, shock, comorbidity, diagnosis, major stigmata of recent haemorrhage, and rebleeding are all independent predictors of mortality when assessed using multiple logistic regression. A numerical score using these parameters has been developed that closely follows the predictions generated by logistical regression equations. Haemoglobin, sex, presentation (other than shock), and drug therapy (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and anticoagulants) are not represented in the final model. When tested for general applicability in a second population, the scoring system was found to reproducibly predict mortality in each risk category. In conclusion, a simple numerical score can be used to categorize patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage by risk of death. This score can be used to determine case mix when comparing outcomes in audit and research and to calculate risk standardised mortality. In addition, this risk score can identify 15% of all cases with acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage at the time of presentation and 26% of cases after endoscopy who are at low risk of rebleeding and negligible risk of death and who might therefore be considered for early discharge or outpatient treatment with consequent resource savings.

0 comments Cited 277 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Clin Exp Hepatol

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Clin Exp Hepatol

Title: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hepatology

Publisher: Indian National Association for Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V.

ISSN (Print): 0973-6883

ISSN (Electronic): 2213-3453

Publication date PMC-release: 3 October 2020

Publication date (Electronic): 3 October 2020

Affiliations

[∗ ]Department of Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

[† ]Department of Gastroenterology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna, India

[‡ ]Department of Anaesthesiology, Pain and Critical Care, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi

[§ ]Department of Microbiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Author notes

[∗ ] Address for correspondence. Dr Shalimar, Additional Professor, Department of Gastroenterology and Human Nutrition, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Room no 127, First floor, Old OT Block, Human Nutrition Unit, New Delhi, 110029, India.

Article

Publisher Item ID: S0973-6883(20)30146-8

DOI: 10.1016/j.jceh.2020.09.007

PMC ID: 7833290

PubMed ID: 33519132

SO-VID: a1199c96-0f8c-44de-a03c-a0392b55da16

License:

Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

Outcome of Conservative Therapy in Coronavirus disease-2019 Patients Presenting With Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Read this article at

Abstract

Background/Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Related collections

Novel Coronavirus Disease COVID-19

Most cited references 30

Aerosol and Surface Stability of SARS-CoV-2 as Compared with SARS-CoV-1

Expanding consensus in portal hypertension: Report of the Baveno VI Consensus Workshop: Stratifying risk and individualizing care for portal hypertension.

Risk assessment after acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 471

Cited by 4

Most referenced authors 709