4.4 Article

The Use of Higher Dose Steroids Increases the Risk of Rebleeding After Endoscopic Hemostasis for Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

Journal

DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES
Volume 63, Issue 11, Pages 3033-3040

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10620-018-5209-y

Keywords

Steroid; Rebleeding; Peptic ulcer bleeding; Dose-dependent relation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundPrevious studies have shown that several factors such as hemodynamic instability at admission are risk factors for rebleeding of peptic ulcer bleeding. However, whether steroid use increases the risk of rebleeding remains elusive.AimsThis study aimed to clarify the risk factors for rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding.MethodsA total of 185 patients who underwent endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding at our institution between 2005 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. We evaluated factors, including comorbid conditions, in-hospital onset, and steroid use, associated with rebleeding by logistic regression analysis. In addition, we investigated the association between the dose of steroids and rebleeding.ResultsThe rebleeding rate after endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding was 14.6%. In the multivariate analysis, the independent risk factors for rebleeding were steroid use (odds ratio 4.56, p=0.015), multiple ulcers (4.43, p=0.005), number of comorbidities3 3.18, p=0.026), hemodynamic instability (3.06, p=0.039), and number of comorbidities3 (2.93, p=0.047). Furthermore, the use of higher dose steroids (20mg per day in prednisolone; 10.55, p=0.002), but not lower dose (<20mg per day in prednisolone), was an independent risk factor for rebleeding in the multivariate analysis. The relationship between steroid use and rebleeding was observed in a dose-dependent manner (p for trend=0.002).ConclusionsThis study first revealed that using higher dose steroids was an independent risk factor for rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding, with a dose-response relation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available