메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Background/Aims: The role of very early (≤12 hours) endoscopy in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding is controversial. We aimed to compare results of very early and early (12–24 hours) endoscopy in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleedingdemonstrating low-risk versus high-risk features and nonvariceal versus variceal bleeding. Methods: This retrospective study included patients with nonvariceal and variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The primaryoutcome was a composite of inpatient death, rebleeding, or need for surgery or intensive care unit admission. Endoscopy timing wasdefined as very early and early. We performed the analysis in two subgroups: (1) high-risk vs. low-risk patients and (2) variceal vs. nonvariceal bleeding. Results: A total of 102 patients were included, of whom 59.8% underwent urgent endoscopy. Patients who underwent very earlyendoscopy received endoscopic therapy more frequently (p=0.001), but there was no improvement in other clinical outcomes. Furthermore, patients at low risk and with nonvariceal bleeding who underwent very early endoscopy had a higher risk of thecomposite outcome. Conclusions: Very early endoscopy does not seem to be associated with improved clinical outcomes and may lead to poorer outcomesin specific populations with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The actual benefit of very early endoscopy remains controversial andshould be further clarified.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (11)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0