Usefulness of the Forrest Classification to Predict Artificial Ulcer Rebleeding during Second-Look Endoscopy after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

BACKGROUND/AIMS Delayed post-endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) bleeding (DPEB) is difficult to predict and there is controversy regarding the usefulness of prophylactic hemostasis during second-look endoscopy. This study evaluated the risk factors related to DPEB, the relationship between clinical outcomes and the Forrest classification, and the results of prophylactic hemostasis during second-look endoscopy. METHODS Second-look endoscopy was performed on the day after ESD to check for recent hemorrhage or potential bleeding and the presence of artificial ulcers in all patients. RESULTS DPEB occurred in 42 of 581 patients (7.2%). Multivariate analysis determined that a specimen size ≥40 mm (odds ratio [OR], 3.03; p=0.003), and a high-risk Forrest classification (Forrest Ib+IIa+IIb; OR, 6.88; p<0.001) were risk factors for DPEB. DPEB was significantly more likely in patients classified with Forrest Ib (OR, 24.35; p<0.001), IIa (OR, 12.91; p<0.001), or IIb (OR, 8.31; p<0.001) ulcers compared with Forrest III ulcers. There was no statistically significant difference between the prophylactic hemostasis and non-hemostasis groups (Forrest Ib, p=0.938; IIa, p=0.438; IIb, p=0.397; IIc, p=0.773) during second-look endoscopy. CONCLUSIONS The Forrest classification of artificial gastric ulcers during second-look endoscopy seems to be a useful tool for predicting delayed bleeding. However, routine prophylactic hemostasis during second-look endoscopy seemed to not be useful for preventing DPEB.