ArticleIrish journal of medical science2024
Risk factors for rebleeding in gastroduodenal ulcers.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors and prediction model for rebleeding in grade IIb peptic ulcer patients after endoscopy.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Trends in upper gastrointestinal bleeding management.World journal of clinical cases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRebleeding after hemostasis of the gastroduodenal ulcer (GDU) is one of the indicators associated with death among GDU patients. However, there are few studies on risk score that contribute to rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding peptic ulcers.
aimsThe aim of this study was to identify factors associated with rebleeding, including patient factors, after endoscopic hemostasis of bleeding gastroduodenal ulcers and to stratify the risk of rebleeding.
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 587 consecutive patients who were treated for Forrest Ia to IIa bleeding gastroduodenal ulcers with endoscopic hemostasis at three institutions. Risk factors associated with rebleeding were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. The Rebleeding Nagoya University (Rebleeding-N) scoring system was developed based on the extracted factors. The Rebleeding-N score was internally validated using bootstrap resampling methods.
resultsSixty-four patients (11%) had rebleeding after hemostasis of gastroduodenal ulcers. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed four independent rebleeding risk factors: blood transfusion, albumin <2.5, duodenal ulcer, and diameter of the exposed vessel ≧2 mm. Patients with 4 risk factors in the Rebleeding-N score had a 54% rebleeding rate, and patients with 3 risk factors had 44% and 25% rebleeding rates. In the internal validation, the mean area under the curve of the Rebleeding-N score was 0.830 (95% CI = 0.786-0.870).
conclusionsRebleeding after clip hemostasis of bleeding gastroduodenal ulcers was associated with blood transfusion, albumin <2.5, diameter of the exposed vessel ≧2 mm, and duodenal ulcer. The Rebleeding-N score was able to stratify the risk of rebleeding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.