{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020080321285140562, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015060240963855422, 'mean_word_length': 5.516339869281046, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Differential diagnosis of gastrointestinal hemorrhage].

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the classical emergency situations in medicine. Some 100 hospitalizations per 100,000 inhabitants per year are assumed. The mortality rate of gastrointestinal bleeding continues to be about 10 per cent. Those affected are in rate of gastrointestinal bleeding continues to be about 10 per cent. Those affected are in particular patients of more advanced age. The cardinal symptoms hematemesis, melena, hematochezia, stimulate a step-wise approach with parallel diagnosis and therapy. Emergency endoscopy does not result in any significant improvement in prognosis if the patients are considered overall. Only about 20 per cent of the referred patients, that is those with a persistent bleed, profit from the possibility of accurate endoscopic diagnosis. The techniques of endoscopic hemostasis are presently under discussion; in the case of inoperable patients they represent the sole possibility.