Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Management of Patients With Ulcer Bleeding: Loren Laine, MD and Dennis M. Jensen, MD
Management of Patients With Ulcer Bleeding: Loren Laine, MD and Dennis M. Jensen, MD
CME
This guideline presents recommendations for the step-wise management of patients with overt upper gastrointestinal
bleeding. Hemodynamic status is first assessed, and resuscitation initiated as needed. Patients are risk-stratified
based on features such as hemodynamic status, comorbidities, age, and laboratory tests. Pre-endoscopic
erythromycin is considered to increase diagnostic yield at first endoscopy. Pre-endoscopic proton pump inhibitor
(PPI) may be considered to decrease the need for endoscopic therapy but does not improve clinical outcomes. Upper
endoscopy is generally performed within 24 h. The endoscopic features of ulcers direct further management. Patients
with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessels receive endoscopic therapy (e.g., bipolar electrocoagulation,
heater probe, sclerosant, clips) and those with an adherent clot may receive endoscopic therapy; these patients then
receive intravenous PPI with a bolus followed by continuous infusion. Patients with flat spots or clean-based ulcers
do not require endoscopic therapy or intensive PPI therapy. Recurrent bleeding after endoscopic therapy is treated
with a second endoscopic treatment; if bleeding persists or recurs, treatment with surgery or interventional radiology
is undertaken. Prevention of recurrent bleeding is based on the etiology of the bleeding ulcer. H. pylori is eradicated
and after cure is documented anti-ulcer therapy is generally not given. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)
are stopped; if they must be resumed low-dose COX-2-selective NSAID plus PPI is used. Patients with established
cardiovascular disease who require aspirin should start PPI and generally re-institute aspirin soon after bleeding
ceases (within 7 days and ideally 13 days). Patients with idiopathic ulcers receive long-term anti-ulcer therapy.
Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107:345360; doi:10.1038/ajg.2011.480; published online 7 February 2012
trials and meta-analysis for years 19662010 without language restriction as well as review of clinical trials and reviews
known to the authors were performed for preparation of this
document. The GRADE system was used to grade the strength
of recommendations and the quality of evidence (1). The quality
of evidence, which influences the strength of recommendation,
ranges from high (further research is very unlikely to change
our confidence in the estimate of effect) to moderate (further
research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence
in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate) to low
(further research is very likely to have an important impact on
our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the
estimate), and very low (any estimate of effect is very uncertain). The strength of a recommendation is graded as strong
when the desirable effects of an intervention clearly outweigh
the undesirable effects and is graded as conditional when uncertainty exists about the trade-offs (1). In addition to quality of
evidence and balance between desirable and undesirable effects,
other factors affecting the strength of recommendation include
variability in values and preferences of patients, and whether an
intervention represents a wise use of resources (1).
1
Section of Digestive Diseases, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA; 2VA Connecticut Healthcare System, New Haven,
Connecticut, USA; 3David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA; 4CURE Digestive Diseases
Research Center, Los Angeles, California, USA; 5VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California, USA. Correspondence: Loren Laine,
MD, Section of Digestive Diseases, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar Street/1080 LMP, New Haven, Connecticut 06520-8019, USA.
E-mail: loren.laine@yale.edu
Received 31 July 2011; accepted 21 December 2011
345
346
Table 1. Continued.
Hospitalization
25. Patients with high-risk stigmata (active bleeding, visible vessels, clots) should generally be hospitalized for 3 days assuming no rebleeding and no other
reason for hospitalization. They may be fed clear liquids soon after endoscopy (Conditional recommendation).
26. Patients with clean-based ulcers may receive a regular diet and be discharged after endoscopy assuming they are hemodynamically stable, their hemoglobin is stable, they have no other medical problems, and they have a residence where they can be observed by a responsible adult (Strong recommendation).
Long-term prevention of recurrent bleeding ulcers
27. Patients with H. pylori-associated bleeding ulcers should receive H. pylori therapy. After documentation of eradication, maintenance antisecretory
therapy is not needed unless the patient also requires NSAIDs or antithrombotics (Strong recommendation).
28. In patients with NSAID-associated bleeding ulcers, the need for NSAIDs should be carefully assessed and NSAIDs should not be resumed if possible. In
patients who must resume NSAIDs, a COX-2 selective NSAID at the lowest effective dose plus daily PPI is recommended (Strong recommendation).
29. In patients with low-dose aspirin-associated bleeding ulcers, the need for aspirin should be assessed. If given for secondary prevention (i.e., established
cardiovascular disease) then aspirin should be resumed as soon as possible after bleeding ceases in most patients: ideally within 13 days and certainly
within 7 days. Long-term daily PPI therapy should also be provided. If given for primary prevention (i.e., no established cardiovascular disease), anti-platelet
therapy likely should not be resumed in most patients (Conditional recommendation).
30. In patients with idiopathic (non-H. pylori, non-NSAID) ulcers, long-term antiulcer therapy (e.g., daily PPI) is recommended (Conditional recommendation).
PPI, proton pump inhibitor; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug; UGIB, upper gastrointestinal bleeding.
347
348
Recommendations.
5. Intravenous infusion of erythromycin (250 mg ~30 min before
endoscopy) should be considered to improve diagnostic yield and
decrease the need for repeat endoscopy. However, erythromycin has
not consistently been shown to improve clinical outcomes (Conditional recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
Summary of evidence. Prokinetic agents given before endoscopy
have been proposed to improve visualization at endoscopy. Three
fully published randomized trials of erythromycin given intravenously before endoscopy were identified in a recent systematic review (12). Infusions of erythromycin 250 mg or 3 mg/kg were given
over 5 or 30 min and endoscopy was performed 2060 min after the
infusion finished (1315). All trials showed significant improvement
in their primary end point related to visualization of mucosa.
However, a more clinically appropriate question is whether
use of erythromycin translates into more diagnoses made at
initial endoscopy or better clinical outcomes. Meta-analysis of
these three trials (1315) reveals a very modest but significant
benefit (relative risk (RR) = 1.13, 1.021.26; number needed to
treat (NNT) = 9) in diagnosis at first endoscopy. Erythromycin
did not significantly reduce clinical outcomes such as blood
transfusions, hospital stay, or surgery, but did decrease the proportion of patients undergoing a second endoscopy (12). Only
two abstracts assessing metoclopramide were identified in this
meta-analysis, and no significant benefits were found in this
small sample (12).
Since this meta-analysis, a study reporting on the non-randomized cohort of patients with variceal bleeding from within a randomized trial found better visualization and shorter hospital stay
with erythromycin, but no significant decreases in transfusions or
repeat endoscopy (16). A randomized comparison of erythromycin, standard-bore nasogastric (NG) tube, or erythromycin plus
NG tube in 253 patients with UGIB revealed no significant differences in visualization, diagnosis at first endoscopy, second-look
endoscopy, further bleeding, or transfusions (17).
Proton pump inhibitor therapy
Recommendations.
6. Pre-endoscopic intravenous proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (e.g., 80 mg
bolus followed by 8 mg/h infusion) may be considered to decrease the
proportion of patients who have higher risk stigmata of hemorrhage
at endoscopy and who receive endoscopic therapy. However, PPIs do
not improve clinical outcomes such as further bleeding, surgery, or
death (Conditional recommendation, high-quality evidence).
The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY
Recommendations.
8. NG or orogastric lavage is not required in patients with UGIB
for diagnosis, prognosis, visualization, or therapeutic effect (Conditional recommendation, low-quality evidence).
Summary of evidence. A variety of reasons have been advanced to
perform NG lavage in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding:
to determine if the source of bleeding is in the upper GI tract, to
provide prognostic information, to clear blood and clots and
allow better visualization at endoscopy, and to treat UGIB.
Documentation of a UGI source. NG aspirates with blood or coffee-ground material clearly document UGIB, and a bloody NG
aspirate increases the likelihood of finding active bleeding or a
non-bleeding visible vessel as compared with coffee-grounds or
a clear NG aspirate (21,22). However, a clear or bile-stained NG
aspirate may be seen in up to 18% of patients with an upper GI
source (2227). For example, in a Canadian UGIB registry, 13%
of patients with UGIB had a clear or bile-stained aspirate; 15%
of patients with a clear/bile-stained aspirate had active bleeding
or non-bleeding visible vessel compared with 23% with coffeegrounds and 45% with bloody aspirates (22). In a prospective
study of patients presenting with hematochezia plus hypotension,
VOLUME 107 | MARCH 2012 www.amjgastro.com
Recommendations.
9. Patients with UGIB should generally undergo endoscopy within
24 h of admission, following resuscitative efforts to optimize hemodynamic parameters and other medical problems (Conditional
recommendation, low-quality evidence).
2012 by the American College of Gastroenterology
349
350
Recommendations.
12. Stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) should be recorded as they
predict risk of further bleeding and guide management decisions. The
stigmata, in descending risk of further bleeding, are active spurting,
non-bleeding visible vessel, active oozing, adherent clot, flat pigmented
spot, and clean base (Strong recommendation, high-quality evidence).
Summary of evidence. The definition of an ulcer is a histological
one, requiring extension into the submucosa or deeper. In contrast, erosions are breaks that remain confined to the mucosa. This
is clinically relevant because serious bleeding does not occur from
an erosion due to the absence of veins and arteries in the mucosa.
Rather serious bleeding occurs when an ulcer erodes into vessels
in the submucosa or deeper. Swain et al. (41) assessed the histological characteristics of gastric ulcers with visible vessels in 27
patients who required surgery for further bleeding, and identified
arteries in the ulcer base in 26 (96%) of the 27 specimens.
The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY
Forrest
classification
Prevalence
IA
IB
Non-bleeding visible
vessel
IIA
Adherent clot
IIB
8%
IIC
16%
Clean base
III
55%
8%
Stigmata
Further bleeding
(N =2,994)
Surgery for
bleeding
(N =1,499)
Mortality
(N =1,387)
Active bleeding
55% (17100%)
35% (2069%)
11% (023%)
Non-bleeding
visible vessel
43% (081%)
34% (056%)
11% (021%)
Adherent clot
22% (1436%)
10% (512%)
7% (010%)
Flat pigmented
spot
10% (013%)
6% (010%)
3% (010%)
5% (010%)
0.5% (03%)
2% (03%)
ENDOSCOPIC THERAPY
Who should receive endoscopic therapy?
Recommendations.
13. Endoscopic therapy should be provided to patients with
active spurting or oozing bleeding or a non-bleeding visible vessel
(Strong recommendation, high-quality evidence) (Figure 1).
2012 by the American College of Gastroenterology
Active bleeding
or non-bleeding
visible vessel
Adherent clot
Flat spot or
clean base
Endoscopic
therapy
May consider
endoscopic
therapy
No endoscopic
therapy
IV PPI
bolus + infusion
IV PPI
bolus + infusion
Oral PPI
14. Endoscopic therapy may be considered for patients with an adherent clot resistant to vigorous irrigation. Benefit may be greater in
patients with clinical features potentially associated with a higher risk of
rebleeding (e.g., older age, concurrent illness, inpatient at time bleeding
began) (Conditional recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
15. Endoscopic therapy should not be provided to patients who have
an ulcer with a clean base or a flat pigmented spot (Strong recommendation, high-quality evidence).
Summary of evidence. Meta-analysis of trials of endoscopic therapy vs. no endoscopic therapy for patients with an actively bleeding ulcer (spurting and oozing combined) shows a significant
decrease in further bleeding (RR = 0.29, 0.200.43) with an NNT
of only 2 (64). The need for urgent intervention and surgery is
also significantly decreased. Meta-analysis of patients with a nonbleeding visible vessel in an ulcer reveals a significant decrease in
further bleeding (RR = 0.49, 0.400.59; NNT = 5) as well as urgent
intervention and surgery (64).
Although spurting and oozing bleeding are combined in most
randomized trials and meta-analyses, as discussed above the rate
of further bleeding appears to be substantially lower with oozing.
Nevertheless, the 39% pooled rate of rebleeding in patients who
were treated conservatively does support performing endoscopic
therapy for oozing. Better efficacy may be expected after endoscopic therapy in patients with oozing than in those with other
high-risk stigmata. In a cohort of patients within the placebo arm
of a randomized trial of high-dose PPI vs. placebo after endoscopic
therapy, the rates of further bleeding at 72 h were lower with oozing
(4.9%) than with spurting (22.5%), clots (17.7%), or non-bleeding
visible vessels (11.3%) (65).
Meta-analysis of randomized trials in patients with an adherent
clot does not show a significant benefit (RR = 0.31, 0.061.77) (64).
However, significant heterogeneity is present among the studies.
Two US trials reported significant benefit of endoscopic hemostasis, with pooled rebleeding rates for endoscopic vs. medical therapy
of 3 vs. 35% (61,66). The other studies, from Europe and Asia,
showed no suggestion of any benefit. The one study using therapy
matching current recommendations (vigorous irrigation; bolus
and continuous infusion of PPI following endoscopy) reported
The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY
351
352
Recommendations.
16. Epinephrine therapy should not be used alone. If used, it should
be combined with a second modality (Strong recommendation,
high-quality evidence).
17. Thermal therapy with bipolar electrocoagulation or heater probe
and injection of sclerosant (e.g., absolute alcohol) are recommended
because they decrease further bleeding, need for surgery, and mortality (Strong recommendation, high-quality evidence).
18. Clips are recommended because they appear to decrease further
bleeding and need for surgery. However, comparisons of clips vs.
other therapies yield variable results and currently used clips have not
been well studied (Conditional recommendation, low-to-moderate
quality evidence).
19. For the subset of patients with actively bleeding ulcers, thermal
therapy or epinephrine plus a second modality may be preferred over
clips or sclerosant alone to achieve initial hemostasis (Conditional
recommendation, low-to-moderate-quality evidence).
Summary of evidence. The primary end point recommended in
trials of UGIB is prevention of further bleeding, which includes
initial hemostasis in actively bleeding patients plus prevention of
rebleeding in those with initial hemostasis and in those without
active bleeding at presentation (68). Endoscopic therapies that
have shown efficacy in randomized trials include thermal therapy
(e.g., bipolar electrocoagulation, heater probe, monopolar electrocoagulation, argon plasma coagulation, and laser), injection
(epinephrine, sclerosants (e.g., absolute ethanol, polidocanol, and
ethanolamine), thrombin or fibrin glue (thrombin plus fibrinogen)), and clips (64).
Randomized trials indicate epinephrine injection is effective
at achieving initial hemostasis in patients with active bleeding,
with results not significantly different from other therapies (64).
However, epinephrine monotherapy is less effective than other
monotherapies in preventing further bleeding (RR = 1.72, 1.08
2.78; NNT = 9) and surgery based on meta-analysis of three trials
employing bipolar electrocoagulation, clips, or fibrin glue as comparators (64). Furthermore, epinephrine plus a second modality
(e.g., bipolar electrocoagulation, sclerosant, and clip) is significantly
more effective than epinephrine alone in reducing further bleeding (RR = 0.34, 0.230.50; NNT = 5) and surgery (64). However, if
a second-look endoscopy is performed and higher risk lesions are
retreated, the benefit of combined therapy vs. epinephrine alone is
not seen (64).
The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY
REPEAT ENDOSCOPY
Recommendations.
22. Routine second-look endoscopy, in which repeat endoscopy is performed 24 h after initial endoscopic hemostatic therapy, is not recommended (Conditional recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
23. Repeat endoscopy should be performed in patients with clinical evidence of recurrent bleeding and hemostatic therapy should
be applied in those with higher risk stigmata of hemorrhage (Strong
recommendation, high-quality evidence).
24. If further bleeding occurs after a second endoscopic therapeutic
session, surgery or interventional radiology with transcathether
The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY
353
354
success rate > 90% and a rebleeding rate of 33%, which was widely
variable across studies (966%) (94).
H. pylori
NSAID
H. pylori therapy
Stop NSAID;
if NSAID required,
use coxib+ PPI
Document cure;
stop PPI/H2RA
Low-dose aspirin
Primary CV
prevention
Do not resume
aspirin in most
patients
Secondary CV
prevention
Idiopathic
Maintenance PPI
Figure 2. Recommended management to prevent recurrent ulcer bleeding based on etiology of ulcer bleeding. CV, cardiovascular; H2RA, histamine-2
receptor antagonist; NSAID, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug; PPI, proton pump inhibitor.
355
356
Randomized trials in NSAID users show that co-therapy with misoprostol, PPIs, and double-dose H2RAs or use of COX-2-selective
inhibitors decrease endoscopic ulcers in patients taking NSAIDs
(119,120) and that misoprostol and COX-2-selective NSAIDs
also decrease complicated ulcers in arthritis patients (120,121).
Although these trials suggest that the agents studied may be beneficial in patients who presented with a bleeding ulcer, they do not
specifically address management of these high-risk patients.
Several randomized trials from Hong Kong have studied prevention of recurrent bleeding in NSAID users who presented with
bleeding ulcers. In patients who were restarted on NSAID after
ulcer healing, maintenance PPI therapy had a significantly lower
risk of recurrent ulcer bleeding at 6 months as compared with
H. pylori therapy only (4.4 vs. 18.8%; NNT = 7) (110). In a followup study, celecoxib was compared with diclofenac plus PPI after
ulcer healing in patients who were H. pylori negative or had successful H. pylori therapy (122). The rates of recurrent ulcer bleeding at 6 months were 4.9% with celecoxib and 6.4% for diclofenac
plus PPI; recurrent ulcers were seen at 6-month endoscopy in 19
and 26% of patients (123). Because rates of recurrent ulcer bleeding were relatively high with either protective strategy, a subsequent 12-month double-blind study of similar design compared
celecoxib plus twice-daily PPI vs. celecoxib plus placebo (124).
Recurrent ulcer bleeding occurred in 0 vs. 8.9% (NNT = 12). Thus,
patients with a bleeding ulcer while on NSAIDs who must remain
on NSAIDs should receive a COX-2-selective NSAID at the lowest
effective dose plus PPI therapy.
Low-dose aspirin ulcers
A subsequent trial performed in H. pylori-positive low-dose aspirin users with ulcer complications showed that after H. pylori
eradication and ulcer healing, PPI therapy had significantly less
recurrent ulcer bleeding than placebo at a median of 12 months
(1.6 vs. 14.8%; NNT = 8) (111). Thus, in patients with bleeding
ulcers who require continued antiplatelet therapy, once-daily PPI
should be given.
The need for antiplatelet therapy should be reviewed in patients
who have ulcer bleeding while taking low-dose aspirin. In patients
taking aspirin for primary prophylaxis (no overt cardiovascular disease), the benefit of low-dose aspirin is relatively small: meta-analysis of randomized trials reveals an annual absolute risk reduction of
0.07% (NNT = 1,429) (129). Primary prevention is recommended
only in patients at higher risk for cardiovascular events, based on
risk assessment tools. In patients hospitalized with ulcer bleeding,
the risk of subsequent bleeding likely outweighs the cardiovascular
benefit in many or most patients on primary prophylaxis.
In contrast, the benefit of low-dose aspirin for secondary prophylaxis in patients with established cardiovascular disease is much
larger (annual absolute risk reduction of 1.49% (NNT = 68)) (129)
and failure to resume low-dose aspirin after ulcer bleeding is
associated with an increased mortality (130). A randomized trial
in low-dose aspirin users with established cardiovascular disease
who presented with a bleeding ulcer showed that resumption of
low-dose aspirin vs. placebo after endoscopic hemostasis and initiation of PPI therapy was associated with no significant increase
in recurrent ulcer bleeding at 1 month (10.3 vs. 5.4%), but a significant decrease in mortality at 1 month and 2 months (1.3 vs. 12.9%)
(130). Thus, it is important to resume antiplatelet therapy, along
with PPI co-therapy, as early as possible in patients with established cardiovascular disease.
The timing of resumption of aspirin is not clear and data are primarily based on observational studies. A systematic review found
that thrombotic events in patients with established cardiovascular
disease occurred at a mean of 10.7 days after aspirin withdrawal
(131), while another review of patients on secondary prevention
stopping aspirin perioperatively reported the mean interval after
discontinuation for acute cerebral events was 14.3 days and for
acute coronary syndrome was 8.5 days (132). Recent joint consensus recommendations from US cardiology and GI organizations
stated that reintroduction of antiplatelet therapy in high-cardiovascular-risk patients is reasonable in those who remain free of
rebleeding after 37 days (133), while the study from Sung et al.
(130) indicated a benefit of resumption of low-dose aspirin immediately after endoscopic hemostasis in patients with high-risk stigmata. Thus, the benefit-risk ratio of aspirin resumption must be
carefully considered jointly by gastroenterologists, cardiologists,
neurologists, and patients on a case-by-case basis. However, early
resumption of antiplatelet therapy within 13 days after hemostasis, and certainly within 7 days, will be appropriate in most patients
with established cardiovascular disease.
Idiopathic (non-H. pylori, non-NSAID) ulcers
CONCLUSION
Management of the patient presenting with overt bleeding
proceeds in a step-wise manner. The first step is assessment of
hemodynamic status and initiation of resuscitative measures as
needed. Patients are risk stratified based on clinical features such
as hemodynamic status, comorbidities, age, and initial laboratory tests. Most patients should receive an upper endoscopy
within 24 h or less, and endoscopic features of the ulcer assist in
directing further management. Those with high-risk findings of
active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessel should receive
endoscopic therapy and those with an adherent clot may receive
endoscopic therapy; these patients should then receive intravenous PPI therapy with a bolus followed by continuous infusion.
Those with flat spots or clean-based ulcers do not require endoscopic therapy or intensive intravenous PPI therapy. Recurrent ulcer bleeding after endoscopic therapy should be treated
with a second endoscopic treatment, but if bleeding still persists
or recurs treatment with surgery or interventional radiology is
undertaken.
Prevention of recurrent bleeding is based on the presumed
etiology of the bleeding ulcer. H. pylori should be eradicated
if present and after cure is documented, no further therapy is
needed. NSAIDs should be stopped; if they must be continued
a low-dose of a COX-2-selective NSAID plus a PPI should be
used. Patients with established cardiovascular disease who require
aspirin or other antiplatelet agents should start PPI therapy and
generally have antiplatelet therapy reinstituted as soon as possible
after bleeding ceases (ideally within 13 days and certainly within
7 days). Those with idiopathic ulcers should receive long-term
antiulcer therapy.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
REFERENCES
1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus
on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ
2008;336:9246.
2. Cocchi MN, Kimlin E, Walsh M et al. Identification and resuscitation of the
trauma patient in shock. Emerg Med Clin N Am 2007;25:62342.
3. Hebert PC, Wells G, Blajchman MA et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial of transfusion requirements in critical care. Transfusion
Requirements in Critical Care Investigators, Canadian Critical Care Trials
Group. N Engl J Med 1999;340:40917.
4. Colomo A, Hernndez-Gea V, Muiz-Daz E et al. Transfusion strategies
in patients with cirrhosis and acute gastrointestinal bleeding. Hepatology
2008;48:413A.
5. Blair SD, Janvrin SB, McCollum CN et al. Effect of early blood transfusion
on gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Br J Surg 1986;73:7835.
6. Wu WC, Rathore SS, Wang Y et al. Blood transfusion in elderly patients
with acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2001;345:12306.
7. Rockall TA, Logan RFA, Devlin HB et al. Risk assessment after acute upper
gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Gut 1996;38:31621.
8. Blatchford O, Murray WR, Blatchford M. A risk score to predict need
for treatment for upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Lancet 2000;356:
131821.
9. Stanley AJ, Ashley D, Dalton HR et al. Outpatient management of patients
with low-risk upper-gastrointestinal haemorrhage: multicentre validation
and prospective evaluation. Lancet 2009;373:427.
10. Chen IC, Hung MS, Chiu TF et al. Risk scoring systems to predict need for
clinical intervention for patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal
bleeding. Am J Emerg Med 2007;25:7749.
11. Pang SH, Ching JYL, Lau JYW et al. Comparing the Blatchford and
pre-endoscopic Rockall score in predicting the need for endoscopic
therapy in patients with upper GI hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc
2010;71:113440.
12. Barkun AN, Bardou M, Martel M et al. Prokinetics in acute upper GI bleeding: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;72:113845.
13. Carbonell N, Pauwels A, Serfaty L et al. Erythromycin infusion prior to
endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a randomized, controlled, double-blind trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:12115.
14. Coffin B, Pocard M, Panis Y et al. Erythromycin improves the quality of
EGD in patients with acute upper GI bleeding: a randomized controlled
study. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56:1749.
15. Frossard JL, Spahr L, Queneau PE et al. Erythromycin intravenous bolus
infusion in acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a randomized, controlled,
double-blind trial. Gastroenterology 2002;123:1723.
16. Altraif I, Handoo FA, Aljumah A et al. Effect of erythromycin before
endoscopy in patients presenting with variceal bleeding: a prospective,
randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc
2011;73:24550.
17. Pateron D, Vicaut E, Debuc E et al. Erythromycin infusion or gastric lavage
for upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a multicenter randomized controlled
trial. Ann Emerg Med 2011;57:5829.
18. Sreedharan A, Martin J, Leontiadis GI et al. Proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated prior to endoscopic diagnosis in upper gastrointestinal
bleeding. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010 (7): CD005415.
19. Lau JY, Leung WK, Wu JCY et al. Omeprazole before endoscopy in patients
with gastrointestinal bleeding. N Engl J Med 2007;356:163140.
20. Leontiadis GI, Sharma VK, Howden CW. Proton pump inhibitor therapy
for peptic ulcer bleeding: Cochrane collaboration meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Mayo Clin Proc 2007;82:28696.
21. Silverstein FE, Gilbert DA, Tedesco FJ et al. The national ASGE survey on
upper gastrointestinal bleeding. II. Clinical prognostic factors. Gastrointest
Endosc 1981;27:8093.
22. Aljebreen AM, Fallone CA, Barkun AN. Nasogastric aspirate predicts
high-risk endoscopic lesions in patients with acute upper-GI bleeding.
Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:1728.
23. Gilbert DA, Silverstein FE, Tedesco FJ et al. The national ASGE survey on
upper gastrointestinal bleedingIII. Endoscopy in upper gastrointestinal
bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 1981;27:92102.
24. Ahmad A, Bruno JM, Boynton R et al. Nasogastric aspirates frequently lead
to erroneous results and delay of therapy in patients with suspected UGI
bleeding. Gastroinest Endosc 2004;59:P163.
25. Cuellar RE, Gavaler JS, Alexander JA et al. Gastrointestinal tract
hemorrhage. The value of a nasogastric aspirate. Arch Intern Med 1990;
150:13814.
357
358
26. Jensen DM, Machicado GA. Diagnosis and treatment of severe hematochezia. The role of urgent colonoscopy after purge. Gastroenterology
1988;95:156974.
27. Laine L, Shah A. Randomized trial of urgent vs. elective colonoscopy
in patients hospitalized with lower GI bleeding. Am J Gastroenterol
2010;105:263641.
28. Lin HJ, Kun W, Perng CL et al. Early or delayed endoscopy for patients with
peptic ulcer bleeding: a prospective randomized study. J Clin Gastroenterol
1996;22:26771.
29. Lee SD, Kearney KJ. A randomized controlled trial of gastric lavage prior to
endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. J Clin Gastroenterol
2004;38:8615.
30. Kodali VP, Petersen BT, Miller CA et al. A new jumbo-channel therapeutic
gastroscope for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc
1997;45:40911.
31. Sedarat A, Jensen D, Ohning G et al. Definitive endoscopic diagnosis and
hemostasis when clots obscure the bleeding site in severe UGI hemorrhage:
prevalence, techniques, & results. Am J Gastroenterol 2011;106(Suppl 2): S541.
32. Ponsky JL, Hoffman M, Swayngim DS. Saline irrigation in gastric hemorrhage: the effect of temperature. J Surg Res 1980;28:2045.
33. Spiegel BM, Vakil NB, Ofman JJ. Endoscopy for acute nonvariceal upper
gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage: is sooner better? A systematic review.
Arch Intern Med 2001;161:1393404.
34. Tsoi KKF, Ma TKW, Sung JJY. Endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal
bleeding: How urgent is it? Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;6:
4639.
35. Cooper GS, Chak A, Way LE. Early endoscopy in upper gastrointestinal
hemorrhage: associations with recurrent bleeding, surgery, and length of
hospital stay. Gastrointest Endosc 1999;49:14552.
36. Cooper GS, Chak A, Connors AF Jr et al. The effectiveness of early endoscopy for upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a community based analysis.
Med Care 1998;36:46274.
37. Lee JG, Turnipseed S, Romano C et al. Endoscopy-based triage significantly
reduces hospitalization rates and costs of treating upper GI bleeding: a
randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 1999;50:75561.
38. Bjorkman DJ, Zaman A, Fennerty MB et al. Urgent vs. elective endoscopy
for acute non-variceal upper-Gi bleeding: an effectiveness study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;60:18.
39. Lim LG, Ho KY, Chan YH et al. Urgent endoscopy is associated with lower
mortality in high-risk but hot low-risk nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal
bleeding. Endoscopy 2011;43:3006.
40. Yen D, Hu S, Chen L et al. Arterial oxygen desaturation during emergent
nonsedated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in the emergency department. Am J Emerg Med 1997;15:6447.
41. Swain CP, Storey DW, Bown SG et al. Nature of the bleeding vessel in recurrently bleeding gastric ulcers. Gastroenterology 1986;90:595608.
42. Branicki FJ, Coleman SY, Fok PJ et al. Bleeding peptic ulcer: a prospective evaluation of risk factors for rebleeding and mortality. World J Surg
1990;14:26270.
43. Lin HJ, Perng CL, Lee FY et al. Clinical courses and predictors for rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcers and non-bleeding visible vessels. Gut
1994;35:138993.
44. Elmunzer BJ, Young SD, Inadomi JM et al. Systematic review of the predictors of recurrent hemorrhage after endoscopic hemostatic therapy for
bleeding peptic ulcers. Am J Gastroenterol 2008;103:262532.
45. Laine L, Peterson WL. Bleeding peptic ulcer. N Engl J Med 1994;331:
71727.
46. Savides TS, Jensen DM. GI bleeding. In: Feldman M, Friedman LS, Brandt
LJ (eds). Sleisenger and Fordtrans. Gastrointestinal and Liver Disease.
Pathophysiology/Diagnosis/Management, 8th edn. Saunders Elsevier:
Philadelphia, 2010, pp 285322.
47. Swain CP, Kalabakas A, Rampton DS et al. A prospective study of the
incidence and significance of stigmata of recent hemorrhage in ulcer
patients without clinical evidence of recent bleeding. Gastroenterology
1991;100:A171.
48. Enestvedt BK, Gralnek IM, Mattek N et al. An evaluation of endoscopic
indications and findings related to nonvariceal upper-GI hemorrhage in a
large multicenter consortium. Gastrointest Endosc 2008;67:4229.
49. Sung JJ, Barkun A, Kuipers EJ et al. Intravenous esomeprazole for prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med
2009;50:45564.
50. Chung SCS, Leung JWC, Steele RJC et al. Endoscopic injection of
adrenaline for actively bleeding ulcers: a randomized trial. Br Med J
1988;296:16313.
The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY
51. Chang-Chien CS, Wu CS, Chen PC et al. Different implications of stigmata of recent hemorrhage in gastric and duodenal ulcers. Dig Dis Sci
1988;33:4004.
52. Kovacs TOG, Jensen DM. Recent advances in the endoscopic diagnosis and
therapy of upper gastrointestinal, small intestinal, and colonic bleeding.
Med Clin N Am 2002;86:131956.
53. Tekant Y, Goh P, Alexander D et al. Combination therapy using adrenaline
and heater probe to reduce rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer haemorrhage: a prospective randomized trial. Br J Surg 1995;82:2236.
54. Fullarton G, Birnie G, Macdonald A et al. Controlled trial of heater probe
treatment in bleeding peptic ulcers. Br J Surg 1989;76:5414.
55. Pascu O, Draghici A, Acalovchi I. The effect of endoscopic hemostasis with
alcohol on the mortality rate of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. A randomized prospective study. Endoscopy 1989;21:535.
56. Freitas D, Donato A, Monteiro JG. Controlled trial of liquid monopolar electrocoagulation in bleeding peptic ulcers. Am J Gastroenterol
1985;80:8537.
57. Wara P. Endoscopic prediction of major rebleeding-a prospective study of
stigmata of hemorrhage in bleeding ulcer. Gastroenterology 1985;88:
120914.
58. Fullarton GM, Murray WR. Prediction of rebleeding in peptic ulcers by
visual stigmata and endoscopic Doppler ultrasound criteria. Endoscopy
1990;22:6871.
59. Laine L, Friedman M, Cohen H. Lack of uniformity in evaluation of
endoscopic prognostic features of bleeding ulcers. Gastrointest Endosc
1994;40:4117.
60. Lau JYW, Sung JJY, Chan ACW et al. Stigmata of hemorrhage in bleeding peptic ulcers: an interobserver agreement study among international
experts. Gastrointest Endosc 1997;46:336.
61. Jensen D, Kovacs T, Jutabha R et al. Randomized trial of medical or
endoscopic therapy to prevent recurrent ulcer hemorrhage in patients with
adherent clots. Gastroenterology 2002;123:40713.
62. Lin JH, Wang K, Perng KL et al. Natural history of bleeding peptic ulcers
with a tightly adherent blood clot: a prospective observation. Gastrointest
Endosc 1996;43:4703.
63. Laine L, Stein C, Sharma V. A prospective outcome of patients with
clot in an ulcer and the effect of irrigation. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;43:
10710.
64. Laine L, McQuaid KR. Endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers: an evidence-based approach based on meta-analyses of randomized controlled
trials. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;7:3347.
65. Jensen DM, Ahlbom H, Eklund S et al. Rebleeding risk for oozing peptic
ulcer bleeding (PUB) in a large international studya reassessment based
upon a multivariate analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;71:AB117.
66. Bleau B, Gostout C, Sherman K et al. Recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer
associated with adherent clot: a randomized study comparing endoscopic
treatment with medical therapy. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;56:16.
67. Sung J, Chan F, Lau J et al. The effect of endoscopic therapy in patients
receiving omeprazole for bleeding ulcers with nonbleeding visible vessels or
adherent clots: a randomized comparison. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:
23743.
68. Laine L, Spiegel B, Rostom A et al. Methodology for randomized trials of
patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: recommendations from an international consensus conference. Am J Gastroenterol
2010;105:54050.
69. Bianco M, Rotondano G, Marmo R et al. Combined epinephrine and
bipolar probe coagulation vs. bipolar probe coagulation alone for bleeding peptic ulcer: a randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc
2004;60:9105.
70. Lin H, Tseng G, Perng C et al. Comparison of adrenaline injection and
bipolar electrocoagulation for the arrest of peptic ulcer bleeding. Gut
1999;44:7159.
71. Church N, Dallal H, Masson J et al. A randomized trial comparing heater
probe plus thrombin with heater probe plus placebo for bleeding peptic
ulcer. Gastroenterology 2003;125:396403.
72. Jensen DM, Machicado GA, Hirabayashi K. Randomized controlled study
of three different types of hemoclips for hemostasis of bleeding canine
acute gastric ulcers. Gastrointest Endosc 2006;64:76873.
73. Jensen DM, Machicado GA. Hemoclipping of chronic ulcers; a randomized
prospective study of initial deployment success, clip retention rates, and
ulcer healing. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;70:96975.
74. Lin H, Hsieh H, Tseng G et al. A prospective, randomized trial of large- vs.
small-volume injection of ephinephrine for peptic ulcer bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 2002;55:6159.
VOLUME 107 | MARCH 2012 www.amjgastro.com
75. Park C, Lee S, Park J et al. Optimal injection volume of epinephrine for endoscopic prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding. Gastrointest Endosc
2004;60:87580.
76. Liou T, Lin S, Wang H et al. Optimal injection volume of epinephrine for
endoscopic treatment for peptic ulcer bleeding. World J Gastroenterol
2006;12:310813.
77. Laine L. Multipolar electrocoagulation vs. injection therapy in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers: A prospective, randomized trial. Gastroenterology 1990;99:13036.
78. Choudari C, Rajgopal C, Palmer K. Comparison of endoscopic injection therapy vs. the heater probe in major peptic ulcer haemorrhage. Gut
1992;33:115961.
79. Choudari C, Palmer K. Endoscopic injection therapy for bleeding peptic
ulcer; a comparison of adrenaline alone with adrenaline plus ethanolamine
oleate. Gut 1994;35:60810.
80. Moret M, Zaballa M, Surez M et al. Endoscopic local injection of
ethanolamine oleate and thrombin as an effective treatment for bleeding
duodenal ulcer: a controlled trial. Gut 1992;33:4569.
81. Laine LA. Determination of the optimum technique for bipolar electrocoagulation treatment. Gastroenterology 1991;100:10712.
82. Morris DL, Brearley S, Thompson H et al. A comparison of the efficacy and
depth of gastric wall injury with 3.2- and 2.3-mm bipolar probes in canine
arterial hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc 1985;31:3613.
83. Jensen DM, Machicado GA. Endoscopic hemostasis of ulcer hemorrhage
with injection, thermal, or combination methods. Tech Gastrointest Endosc
2005;7:12431.
84. Laine L, Long GL, Bakos GJ et al. Optimizing bipolar electrocoagulation for
endoscopic hemostasis: assessment of factors influencing energy delivery
and coagulation. Gastrointest Endosc 2008;67:5028.
85. Hung WK, Li VK, Chung CK et al. Randomized trial comparing pantoprazole infusion, bolus and no treatment on gastric pH and recurrent bleeding
in peptic ulcers. ANZ J Surg 2007;77:67781.
86. Andriulli A, Loperfido S, Focareta R et al. High vs. low-dose proton
pump inhibitors after endoscopic hemostasis in patients with peptic
ulcer bleeding: a multicentre, randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol
2008;103:30118.
87. Yksel I, Ataseven H, Kkl S et al. Intermittent vs. continuous pantoprazole infusion in peptic ulcer bleeding: a prospective randomized study.
Digestion 2008;78:3943.
88. Choi KD, Kim N, Jang IJ et al. Optimal dose of intravenous pantoprazole
in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding requiring endoscopic hemostasis in
Korea. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;24:161724.
89. Javid G, Zargar SA, U-Saif R et al. Comparison of p.o. or i.v. proton pump
inhibitors on 72-h intragastri c pH in bleeding peptic ulcer. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009;24:123643.
90. Marmo R, Rotondano G, Blanco MA et al. Outcome of endoscopic treatment for peptic ulcer bleeding: is a second look necessary? A meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2003;57:627.
91. Tsoi KKF, Chan HCH, Chiu PWY et al. Second-look endoscopy with thermal coagulation or injections for peptic ulcer bleeding. A meta-analysis.
J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;25:813.
92. Lau JY, Sung JJ, Lam YH et al. Endoscopic retreatment compared with
surgery in patients with recurrent bleeding after initial endoscopic control
of bleeding ulcers. N Engl J Med 1999;340:7516.
93. Spiegel BMR, Ofman JJ, Woods K et al. Minimizing recurrent peptic ulcer
hemorrhage after endoscopic hemostasis: the cost-effectiveness of competing strategies. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;93:8697.
94. Loffroy R, Rao P, Ota S et al. Embolization of acute nonvariceal upper
gastrointestinal hemorrhage resistant to endoscopic treatment: results
and predictors of recurrent bleeding. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol
2010;33:1088100.
95. Gross JB, Bailey PL, Connis RT et al. Practice guidelines for sedation
and analgesia by non-anesthesiologists. Anesthesiology 2002;96:
100417.
96. Hepworth CC, Newton M, Barton S et al. Randomized controlled trial of
early feeding in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer and a visible vessel.
Gastroenterology 1995;108:A113.
97. Laine L, Cohen H, Brodhead J et al. A prospective evaluation of immediate vs. delayed refeeding and the prognostic value of endoscopic features
in patients with major upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage. Gastroenterology 1992;102:3146.
98. Cipolletta L, Bianco MA, Rotondano G et al. Outpatient management for
low-risk nonvariceal upper GI bleeding: a randomized controlled trial.
Gastroinest Endosc 2002;55:15.
2012 by the American College of Gastroenterology
99. Lau JYW, Chung SCS, Leung JW et al. The evolution of stigmata of
hemorrhage in bleeding peptic ulcers: as sequential endoscopic study.
Endoscopy 1998;30:5138.
100. Hsu PI, Lin XZ, Chan SH et al. Bleeding peptic ulcerrisk factors
for rebleeding and sequential changes in endoscopic findings. Gut
1994;35:7469.
101. Hsu PI, Lai KH, Lin XZ et al. When to discharge patients with bleeding
peptic ulcers: a prospective study of residual risk of rebleeding. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;44:3827.
102. Jensen D, Pace S, Soffer E et al. Continuous infusion of pantoprazole vs.
ranitidine for prevention of ulcer rebleeding: a U.S. multicenter randomized, double-blind study. Am J Gastroenterol 2006;101:19919.
103. Zargar S, Javid G, Khan B et al. Pantoprazole infusion as adjuvant
therapy to endoscopic treatment in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding: prospective randomized controlled trial. J Gastroenterol Hepatol
2006;21:71621.
104. Jensen DM, Cheng S, Kovacs TOG et al. A controlled study of ranitidine
for the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage from duodenal ulcer. N Engl J
Med 1994;330:3826.
105. Gisbert JP, Khorrami S, Carballo F et al. Meta-analysis: Helicobacter pylori
eradication therapy vs. antisecretory non-eradication therapy for the prevention of recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer. Aliment Pharmacol Ther
2004;19:61729.
106. Jaspersen D, Koerner T, Schorr W et al. Helicobacter pylori eradication
reduces the risk of rebleeding in ulcer hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc
1995;41:57.
107. Rokkas T, Karameris A, Mavrogeorgis A et al. Eradication of Helicobater
pylori reduces the possibility of rebleeding in peptic ulcer disease. Gastrointest Endosc 1995;41:14.
108. Vcev A, Horvat D, Rubinic M et al. Eradication of Helicobacter pylori
reduces the possibility of rebleeding in duodenal ulcer disease. Acta Fam
Med Flum 1996;21:5965.
109. Bataga S, Bratu B, Bancu L et al. The treatment in bleeding duodenal ulcer.
Gut 1997;41 (Suppl 3): A167.
110. Chan FKL, Chung SCS, Suen BY et al. Preventing recurrent upper
gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with Helicobacter pylori infection
who are taking low-dose aspirin or naproxen. N Engl J Med 2001;
344:96773.
111. Lai KC, Lam SK, Chu KM et al. Lansoprazole for the prevention of recurrences of ulcer complications from long-term low-dose aspirin use. N Engl
J Med 2002;346:20338.
112. Wong GLH, Wong VWS, Chan Y et al. High incidence of mortality and
recurrent bleeding in patients with Helicobacter pylori-negative idiopathic
bleeding ulcers. Gastroenterology 2009;137:52531.
113. Chey WD, Wong BCY. American College of Gastroenterology guideline
on the Management of Helicobacter pylori infection. Am J Gastroenterol
2007;102:180825.
114. Barkun AN, Bardou M, Kuipers EJ et al. International consensus recommendations on the management of patients with nonvariceal upper
gastrointestinal bleeding. Ann Intern Med 2010;152:10113.
115. Cutler AF, Havstad S, Ma CK et al. Accuracy of invasive and noninvasive tests to diagnose Helicobacter pylori infection. Gastroenterology
1995;109:13641.
116. Cutler AF, Prasad VM, Santagode P. Four-year trends in Helicobacter
pylori IgG serology following successful eradication. Am J Med
1998;105:1820.
117. Hui WM, Lam SK, Ho J et al. Effect of omeprazole on duodenal ulcerassociated antral gastritis and Helicobacter pylori. Dig Dis Sci
1991;36:57782.
118. Laine L, Estrada R, Trujillo M et al. The effect of proton pump inhibitor
therapy on diagnostic testing for Helicobacter pylori. Ann Intern Med
1998;129:54750.
119. Rostom A, Dube C, Wells G et al. Prevention of NSAID-induced gastroduodenal ulcers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002 (4): CD0022962002.
120. Rostom A, Muir K, Dube C et al. The gastrointestinal toxicity of COX-2
inhibitors: a Cochrane Collaboration Systematic Review. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007;5:81828.
121. Silverstein FE, Graham DY, Senior JR et al. Misoprostol reduces serious
gastrointestinal complications in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. A randomized, double-blind,
placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1995;123:2419.
122. Chan FK, Hung LC, Suen BY et al. Celecoxib vs. diclofenac and omeprazole in reducing the risk of recurrent ulcer bleeding in patients with
arthritis. N Engl J Med 2002;347:210410.
The American Journal of GASTROENTEROLOGY
359
360
123. Chan FKL, Hung LCT, Suen BY et al. Celecoxib vs. diclofenac plus
omeprazole in high-risk arthritis patients: results of a randomized doubleblind trial. Gastroenterology 2004;127:103843.
124. Chan FK, Wong VW, Suen BY et al. Combination of a cyclo-oxygenase-2
inhibitor and a proton-pump inhibitor for prevention of recurrent ulcer
bleeding in patients at very high risk: a double-blind, randomised trial.
Lancet 2007;369:16216.
125. Yeomans N, Lanas A, Labenz J et al. Efficacy of esomeprazole (20 mg
once daily) for reducing the risk of gastroduodenal ulcers associated
with continuous use of low-dose aspirin. Am J Gastroenterol 2008;
103:246573.
126. Scheiman JM, Devereaux PJ, Herlitz J et al. Prevention of peptic ulcers
with escomeprazole in patients at risk of ulcer development treated with
low-dose acetylsalicylic acid: a randomized, controlled trial (OBERON).
Heart 2011;97:797802.
127. Taha A, McCloskey C, Prasad R et al. Famotidine for the prevention of
peptic ulcers and oesophagitis in patients taking low-dose aspirin (FAMOUS): a phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Lancet 2009;374:11925.
128. Bhatt DL, Cryer BL, Contant CF et al. Clopidogrel with or without omeprazole in coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2010;363:190917.