You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
Concerns regarding the recommendations of the British Society of Gastroenterology’s lower GI bleeding guidelines
  1. Ajay M Verma1,
  2. Neeraj Bhala2,
  3. Andrew Chilton1,
  4. Benjamin R Disney3
  1. 1 Department of Digestive Diseases, Kettering General Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Kettering, UK
  2. 2 Gastroenterology and Liver Units, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK
  3. 3 Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, Coventry, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Ajay M Verma, Department of Digestive Diseases, Kettering General Hospital, Kettering NN16 8UZ, UK; ajay.verma{at}nhs.net

https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2019-318582

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    We are writing with regard to the recently published British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) lower GI bleeding (LGIB) guidelines.1 We have significant concerns about some of the recommendations.

    The quick reference flowchart suggests that patients with stable LGIB (shock index <1), classed as having a major (risk scored) bleed, should be admitted for a lower GI endoscopy on the next available list. This is inconsistent with the main body of the guideline which states: a colonoscopy on the next available list. We find this recommendation concerning, particularly as it has implications for endoscopy unit resources, inpatient services, and patient safety. Delivering urgent inpatient colonoscopy in this cohort of patients is logistically challenging.

    Is a colonoscopy necessary for all? The acute LGIB national audit showed that 73.9% of patients presented with rectal …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors AMV wrote the letter; NB, AC and BRD reviewed the letter and made adjustments to the text.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.