LGIB were found to have upper gastrointestinal bleeding, highlighting the importance of excluding a gastroduodenal source in patients with severe hematochezia. The majority of patients with LGIB (72 % ) stopped bleeding spontaneously, and there were no differences in rebleeding, blood transfusions, diagnostic or therapeutic interventions, length of hospital stay, or hospital charges in patients undergoing urgent vs. elective colonoscopy. However, the limited number of patients in this study and the fact that patients in the urgent colonoscopy arm appeared to have more severe bleeding than those undergoing elective examinations make it diffi cult to draw conclusions regarding the utility of urgent vs. elective colonoscopy in LGIB. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105:2643 -2645 doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010 Lower gastrointestinal bleeding (LGIB) is a common gastrointestinal emergency. Th e incidence of LGIB is increasing, and, in the elderly, may surpass that of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) ( 1 ). However, the literature regarding LGIB lags considerably behind UGIB. Endoscopy is the standard of care in the management of UGIB, and urgent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) within 12 -24 h of admission has been shown to provide valuable prognostic information, facilitate the treatment of high-risk lesions, and improve patient outcomes and resource utilization.In contrast, the role of urgent colonoscopy in LGIB remains controversial. Historically, colonoscopy in LGIB was performed electively due to the need for colon preparation and concern regarding complications. Over the last two decades, a number of studies have indicated that urgent colonoscopy, defi ned as colonoscopy performed within 12 -24 h of admission following a rapid colon purge, is safe and may facilitate the identifi cation and treatment of bleeding lesions ( 2 -4 ). However, studies comparing this approach to delayed colonoscopy or to other interventions for LGIB are limited. Moreover, urgent colonoscopy is logistically complicated, stigmata of hemorrhage are arguably diffi cult to identify, and there are a number of other potential management options to choose from, including fl exible sigmoidoscopy, angiography, radionuclide scintigraphy, and multidetector computed tomography scanning.In this issue of the American Journal of Gastroenterology , Laine and Shah present a randomized trial of urgent vs. elective colonoscopy in patients with LGIB ( 5 ). Aft er undergoing an EGD to exclude an upper gastrointestinal source, 72 patients with severe LGIB were randomized 1:1 to colonoscopy within 12 h of admission or elective colonoscopy within 36 -60 h. Colonoscopies were performed by the on-call or attending gastroenterologist, and management decisions outside the endoscopic encounter were left to the admitting team. Th e authors found no diff erences in the primary outcome, rebleeding during the hospitalization, or secondary outcomes, including number of units of blood transfused, number of diagnostic or therapeutic interventions, length of hospital stay, or hospit...