ArticleVisceral medicine2024
Long-Term Outcomes following Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding Remain Poor: A Single-Center Comparison over Two Distinct Time Periods within the Last 15 Years in Finland.
Article in Visceral medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and External Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study.International journal of general medicine · 2026Article
- Association of endoscopic intervention with mortality in gastrointestinal bleeding after open-heart surgery: a propensity-score cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Association of time to red blood cell transfusion on outcomes in patients with gastrointestinal bleeding.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Reply to Khan et al., Critical Insights: ABC score is a better predictor for 30-day mortality in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A prospective single-center study.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) is a common and life-threatening condition. This study aimed to compare the causes and long-term outcomes of AUGIB over two distinct periods in the last 15 years. Methods: This population-based study included consecutive patients who underwent emergency upper endoscopy for visible bleeding in 2006 and 2016. Our primary focus was on long-term mortality up to 5 years after the endoscopy, although short-term mortality was also reported. Results: A total of 832 patients (median age 67 [12-96] years, 37% female) were included, with peptic ulcer disease (48%), esophagitis (20%), and variceal bleeding (15%) being the most common diagnoses. The incidence of AUGIB increased with age, reaching 8.31 cases per 1,000 person-years among those aged 80 years or older. Mortality rates at 30 days, 90 days, 1 year, and 5 years were 13%, 16%, 27%, and 47%, respectively. The standardized mortality ratio was high in all age groups, with particularly elevated rates observed among younger patients compared to the standard population. Variceal bleeding, liver cirrhosis, and chronic alcohol abuse were associated with the highest mortality. Only two short-term deaths were attributed to failed hemostasis. The primary causes of death were malignancies, liver failure, and cardiac failure. No improvement in outcomes was observed between the two time periods. Conclusion: Although the treatment of AUGIB may be relatively straightforward, the outcomes following treatment remain poor. High mortality can be attributed to the presence of coexisting conditions and patients' lifestyle.
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.