Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: The appropriate duration of fasting therapy after endoscopic hemostasis for the prevention of recurrent bleeding from non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) remains unclear. Objective: To determine the appropriate duration of fasting therapy using a national administrative database. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: 475 hospitals between April and December in 2008. Patients and interventions: 3254 patients with endoscopic hemostasis for NVUGIB. Main outcome measurements: Patients were divided into 5 groups according to duration of fasting therapy, namely 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 d or more. We compared the risk-adjusted rate of recurrent bleeding in relation to the duration of fasting therapy. Odds ratio (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for recurrent bleeding after fasting therapy were estimated using a multiple logistic regression model. Results: Recurrent bleeding rate after fasting therapy significantly differed by fasting duration, at 21.7% of patients with 1 d of fasting therapy, 12.3% with 2 d, 4.8% with 3 d, 4.6% with 4 d, and 3.0% with 5 d or more (p<0.001). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed no significant difference in the risk of recurrent bleeding between fasting for 3 or 4 d and 5 d or more (OR of fasting for 3 d 1.635, 95% CI 0.793–3.366, p=0.182; and OR of fasting for 4 d 1.548, 95% CI 0.705–3.402, p=0.276). Limitations: Use of claims data lacking clinical detail. Conclusions: 3 d of fasting therapy seems to be suitable for the prevention of recurrent bleeding from NVUGIB.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Murata et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: