ArticleCanadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology2025
Impact of Urgent Versus Early Endoscopy on Outcomes in Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Article
- Gastrointestinal bleeding care across hospital and EMS settings in the Almaty region: a cross-sectional survey of organization, practice, and service capacity.Frontiers in health services · 2026Article
- Impact of Urgent Versus Early Endoscopy on Outcomes in Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Retrospective Study.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Acute upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding from variceal and nonvariceal sources is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Although current international guidelines recommend performing endoscopy within 24 h of presentation, the added value of very early ("urgent," < 6 h) versus "early" (6-24 h) endoscopy remains unclear. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the impact of urgent versus early endoscopy on clinical outcomes. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed the medical records of 599 patients admitted to the emergency or gastroenterology department who underwent UGI endoscopy. Patients were stratified by timing, urgent endoscopy within 6 h of specialist consultation and early endoscopy between 6-24 h postconsultation. The protocol was approved by the University of Rzeszów Ethics Committee and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Results: Compared to the early group, patients undergoing urgent endoscopy were younger ( Conclusions: In unadjusted analyses, urgent endoscopy (< 6 h) was associated with worse outcomes, likely reflecting the selection of more severely ill patients. After propensity-score matching for baseline risk factors, however, the timing of endoscopy (< 6 h vs. 6-24 h) was no longer an independent predictor of outcomes. These findings suggest that clinicians' decisions and outcome differences are driven by overall severity of presentation and comorbid burden, rather than the effect of ultra-early endoscopy itself.
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.