Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34249312›Full record

ArticleFrontline gastroenterology2021

Reduced survival after upper gastrointestinal bleed endoscopy in the COVID-19 era is a secondary effect of the response to the global pandemic: a retrospective cohort study.

Oliver D Tavabie, Jennie N Clough, Jonathan Blackwell, Maria Bashyam, Harry Martin, Anet Soubieres, Natalie Direkze, David Graham, Christopher Groves, Sean L Preston and 4 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontline gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Myocarditis mortality with and without COVID-19: insights from a national registry.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Oliver D TavabieInstitute of Liver Studies, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4693-6632
Jennie N CloughDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and Saint Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Jonathan BlackwellDepartment of Gastroenterology, St George's Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Maria BashyamThe Liver Unit, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, London, UK.
Harry MartinPancreaticobiliary Medicine Unit, UCLH, London, London, UK.
Anet SoubieresDepartment of Gastroenterology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, London, UK.
Natalie DirekzeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, London, UK.
David GrahamDepartment of Gastroenterology, UCLH, London, London, UK.
Christopher GrovesDepartment of Gastroenterology, St George's Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Sean L PrestonDepartment of Gastroenterology, Royal London Hospital, London, London, UK.
Sabina DeMartinoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Guy's and Saint Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Upkar S GillDepartment of Gastroenterology, Royal London Hospital, London, London, UK.
Bu'Hussain HayeeDepartment of Gastroenterology, King's College Hospital, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1670-8815
Deepak JoshiInstitute of Liver Studies, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GBGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBKing's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBSt George's Hospital · GBKing's College Hospital · GBQueen Mary University of London · GBRoyal London Hospital · GB

Funding

MRF_ MRF-044-0004-F-GILL-C0823
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic has placed increased strain on healthcare systems worldwide with enormous reorganisation undertaken to support 'COVID-centric' services. Non-COVID-19 admissions reduced secondary to public health measures to halt viral transmission. We aimed to understand the impact of the response to COVID-19 on the outcomes of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeds. DESIGN/

methodsA retrospective observational multicentre study comparing outcomes following endoscopy for UGI bleeds from 24 March 2020 to 20 April 2020 to the corresponding dates in 2019. The primary outcome was in-hospital survival at 30 days with secondary outcomes of major rebleeding within 30 days postprocedure and intervention at the time of endoscopy.

results224 endoscopies for 203 patients with UGI bleeds were included within this study. 19 patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. There was a 44.4% reduction in the number of procedures performed between 2019 and 2020. Endoscopies performed for UGI bleeds in the COVID-19 era were associated with an adjusted reduced 30-day survival (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08-0.67). There was no increased risk of major rebleeding or interventions during this era. Patients with COVID-19 did not have reduced survival or increased complication rates.

conclusionEndoscopy for UGI bleeds in the COVID-19 era is associated with reduced survival. No clear cause has been identified but we suspect that this is a secondary effect of the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Urgent work is required to encourage the public to seek medical help if required and to optimise patient pathways to ensure that the best possible care is provided.

Indexed as

endoscopygastrointestinal bleedingoesophageal varicestherapeutic endoscopy

Identifiers

PMID34249312
PMCPMC8231434
OpenAlexW3091822819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.