Gastritis and Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Published on 06/06/2015 by admin

Filed under Pediatrics

Last modified 22/04/2025

Print this page

rate 1 star rate 2 star rate 3 star rate 4 star rate 5 star
Your rating: none, Average: 0 (0 votes)

This article have been viewed 2813 times

108 Gastritis and Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Numerous potential etiologies, combined with the gastrointestinal (GI) tract’s extensive surface area, can make the assessment and management of GI bleeding exceptionally challenging. Observations of several key clinical features assist clinicians in formulating rational differential diagnoses. Gastritis is an important cause of GI bleeding and abdominal pain that deserves particular attention. Although the inability to arrive at a definitive diagnosis (i.e., obscure GI bleeding) remains a significant problem, the growing arsenal of diagnostic modalities is making it increasingly possible to isolate the source of bleeding and construct a successful treatment strategy.

Etiology and Pathogenesis

The causes of GI bleeding are diverse (Figure 108-1). Although the sheer number of causes may seem intimidating, grouping them into pathophysiologic categories aids in constructing a differential diagnosis. Note that underlying disorders of coagulation (e.g., hemophilias, vitamin K deficiency in neonates) and hepatic dysfunction (caused by the liver’s role in producing coagulation factors) can exacerbate any of these causes.

Mucosal Erosion

The GI tract has a robust and sophisticated mucosal defense mechanism designed to prevent erosion. These protective elements include (1) the superficial “unmixed” layer of mucus, bicarbonate, and other factors that form a neutralizing barrier against acid, enzymatic, and abrasive injury; (2) the epithelial cells that generate this superficial layer; (3) continuous cell renewal coupled with (4) uninterrupted nutrient blood flow to the mucosa and (5) sensory innervation that optimizes this blood flow; and (6) endothelial production of prostaglandins and nitric oxide, which synergize to promote all of the aforementioned mechanisms. Disruption of any of these factors may predispose a given region of mucosa to erosion, local loss of vascular integrity, and resultant bleeding.

Clinical Presentation

The clinician’s first priority is to establish the patient’s stability; the initial impression can provide valuable clues. Pallor, lethargy, and diaphoresis are all immediately concerning signs of significant blood loss. However, the absence of these signs in a seemingly well-appearing individual with a history of hematemesis, melena, or hematochezia should not automatically comfort the clinician. Indeed, tachycardia combined with normal blood pressure for age could indicate compensated shock (see Chapter 2). The most definitive physical examination indicator of significant blood loss is orthostatic hypotension, defined as a decrease in systolic blood pressure of at least 20 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure of at least 10 mm Hg within 3 minutes of standing.

The clinician should then focus on addressing several key questions:

What Are the Route and Appearance of the Bleeding?

Visible GI bleeding presents in different forms depending on the location of origin. Traditionally, authors have grouped causes of GI bleeding into upper and lower sources divided by the ligament of Treitz. In 2007, the American Gastroenterological Association promoted the refinement of this classification into upper, middle, and lower GI tract bleeding, with the dividing point between the upper and middle tract being the ampulla of Vater (pancreatic outlet into the duodenum) and the dividing point between the middle and lower tract being the ileocecal valve.

Hematemesis, which is vomiting of either fresh blood or coagulated, denatured blood (“coffee grounds”), indicates upper GI bleeding. Coffee-ground hematemesis generally represents old blood or bleeding that is occurring at a slow rate, as opposed to red blood, which raises concern for active bleeding. Melena (black, tarry, foul-smelling stool containing oxidized blood) usually comes from the upper GI tract, but it can emanate from a middle GI source if the transit rate is not rapid. Hematochezia (red blood per rectum) generally suggests middle or lower GI bleeding, although it may also represent a massive upper GI bleed. Indeed, hematemesis combined with melena or hematochezia is an ominous combination that must be investigated promptly. Therefore, in any patient with bloody stool, the clinician must be convinced that there is no evidence of upper GI bleeding. It is important to remember that many cases of GI bleeding are occult (i.e., microscopic), which are not visible to the eye and can occur anywhere along the GI tract. It is also essential to determine whether the blood could be emanating from a non-GI source, epistaxis and menstruation being two common examples.

Evaluation and Management

The clinician’s first priority is to triage the patient based on the acuity and severity of a patient’s bleeding and ensure hemodynamic stability. Each case needs to be assessed individually, but if the amount of blood reported or witnessed is significant (more than just a streak), there is repeated bleeding, or there is any concern for hemodynamic instability, the patient should be sent to the emergency department for further evaluation. Extra caution should be paid to infants unless an obvious cause combined with very small amounts of bleeding can be identified (e.g., stool covered with streaks of blood in a patient with anal fissure). When the patient has presented for medical attention, management should contain the elements discussed in the following paragraphs.

Determine High-Risk Historical Factors

The clinician must determine whether there are exogenous factors that have contributed to the patient’s clinical picture, including a history of trauma, ingestion, drug use, and other illnesses.

Initial Management in the Emergency Department

Any patient with evidence of significant bleeding should receive supplemental oxygen, be placed on constant hemodynamic monitoring, and have at least two large-bore intravenous catheters placed. If rapid hemodynamic resuscitation is indicated, isotonic fluids may be required, but blood is the preferred product if there is clear evidence of significant blood loss (see Chapter 2).

Although it is associated with patient discomfort, nasogastric lavage is a valuable tool in assessing patients with GI bleeding. When bleeding is self-limited in a well-appearing patient who is hemodynamically stable and when bleeding is clearly from a discernible source such as epistaxis, lavage may not be necessary. However, if the patient has had hematemesis, lavage assesses whether bleeding is ongoing, which would increase the urgency for endoscopic evaluation. In melena and hematochezia, lavage can help determine whether there is upper GI bleeding, although a clear aspirate does not definitively exclude this. When performed, a sump-type catheter (not feeding tube) should be used, the patient’s head should be at 30 degrees to reduce the risk of aspiration, and the liquid should be room temperature normal saline. The clinician should infuse 1 to 2 oz for infants, 4 to 6 oz for school-age children, or 1 L for adult-sized children per infusion and allow the liquid to stand for 2 to 3 minutes before aspirating and repeating until the aspirate is clear. If the lavage does not clear after three attempts, there is limited utility to continuing, and the tube can be left to gravity or low intermittent suction.

Consultation with a gastroenterologist will assist with guiding the evaluation. Intensive care physicians and surgeons should be consulted in cases of significant blood loss or hemodynamic instability.

Additional Evaluations

Radiologic, endoscopic, and surgical evaluations are summarized in Table 108-1. The approach depends on the bleeding acuity and the setting in which the patient is seen. In general, when the source of bleeding is unclear, the goal is to get the patient to endoscopy, in which a fiberoptic camera is inserted into the mouth (upper endoscopy) or anus (lower endoscopy) to directly visualize the intestinal lumen. Endoscopy is the gold standard given its relative safety and its ability to directly visualize the mucosa, obtain tissue for pathologic diagnosis, and potentially administer therapy. However, other diagnostic methods offer particular advantages and may be indispensable to the patient’s assessment before endoscopy. Indeed, certain diagnoses, such as Meckel’s diverticulum or intussusception, may permit bypassing the need for endoscopy, and when bleeding is heavy, the ability to visualize the lumen is severely hampered.

Table 108-1 Diagnostic Modalities for Gastrointestinal Bleeding*

CT, computed tomography; GI, gastrointestinal; Hgb, hemoglobin; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging. RBC, red blood cell; SBFT, small bowel follow-through; Tc-99m, technetium-99m.

* Studies not suitable for the acute-care setting.