Literature DB >> 19152905

Endoscopic hemostasis in peptic ulcer bleeding for patients with high-risk lesions: a series of meta-analyses.

Alan N Barkun1, Myriam Martel, Youssef Toubouti, Elham Rahme, Marc Bardou.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
OBJECTIVE: Optimal endoscopic hemostasis remains undetermined. This was a systematic review of contemporary methods of endoscopic hemostasis for patients with bleeding ulcers that exhibited high-risk stigmata.
SETTING: Randomized trials that evaluated injection, thermocoagulation, clips, or combinations of these were evaluated from MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (1990-2006). PATIENTS: A total of 4261 patients were evaluated. OUTCOMES: Outcomes were rebleeding (primary), surgery, and mortality (secondary). Summary statistics were determined; publication bias and heterogeneity were sought by using funnel plots or by subgroup analyses and meta-regression.
RESULTS: Forty-one trials assessed 4261 patients. All endoscopic therapies decreased rebleeding versus pharmacotherapy alone, including sole intravenous (IV) proton pump inhibition (PPI) (OR 0.56 [95% CI, 0.34-0.92]); only one trial assessed high-dose IV PPI. Injection alone was inferior compared with other methods, except for thermal hemostasis (OR 1.02 [95% CI, 0.74-1.40]), with a strong trend of increased rebleeding if 1 injectate is used rather than 2 (OR 1.40 [95% CI, 0.95-2.05]). Injection followed by thermal therapy did not decrease rebleeding compared with clips (OR 0.82 [95% CI, 0.28-2.38]) or thermal therapy alone (OR 0.79 [95% CI, 0.24-2.62]). Subgroup analysis, however, suggested that injection followed by thermal therapy was superior to thermal therapy alone. Clips were superior to thermal therapy (OR 0.24 [95% CI, 0.06-0.95]) but, when followed by injection, were not superior to clips alone (OR 1.30 [95% CI, 0.36-4.76]). Surgery or mortality was not altered in most comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS: All endoscopic treatments are superior to pharmacotherapy alone; only 1 study assessed high-dose IV PPI. Optimal endoscopic therapies include thermal therapy or clips, either alone or in combination with other methods. Additional data are needed that compare injection followed by thermal therapy to clips alone or clips combined with another method.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19152905     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  45 in total

1.  Gastrointestinal bleeding: adjuvant pharmacotherapy for peptic ulcer bleeding.

Authors:  Yao-Chun Hsu; Hwai-Jeng Lin
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 46.802

2.  Somatostatin adjunctive therapy for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal rebleeding after endoscopic therapy.

Authors:  Cheol Woong Choi; Dae Hwan Kang; Hyung Wook Kim; Su Bum Park; Kee Tae Park; Gwang Ha Kim; Geun Am Song; Mong Cho
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-08-07       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Randomized controlled trial of hemostatic powder versus endoscopic clipping for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Authors:  Felipe Iankelevich Baracat; Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura; Vítor Ottoboni Brunaldi; Caio Vinicius Tranquillini; Renato Baracat; Paulo Sakai; Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Moura
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  The Novel Scoring System for 30-Day Mortality in Patients with Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding.

Authors:  Sejin Hwang; Seong Woo Jeon; Joong Goo Kwon; Dong Wook Lee; Chang Yoon Ha; Kwang Bum Cho; ByungIk Jang; Jung Bae Park; Youn Sun Park
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2016-02-26       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  Endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Felipe Baracat; Eduardo Moura; Wanderley Bernardo; Leonardo Zorron Pu; Ernesto Mendonça; Diogo Moura; Renato Baracat; Edson Ide
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Is the AIMS65 score useful in predicting outcomes in peptic ulcer bleeding?

Authors:  Sung Hoon Jung; Jung Hwan Oh; Hye Yeon Lee; Joon Won Jeong; Se Eun Go; Chan Ran You; Eun Jung Jeon; Sang Wook Choi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Non-ulcer and Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Prospective Multicenter Study of Risk Prediction Using a Scoring System.

Authors:  Hyun Woo Park; Seong Woo Jeon
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 8.  Quality Assurance in Endoscopy: Which Parameters?

Authors:  Ulrike W Denzer
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2016-01-29

9.  Changing trends in the UK management of upper GI bleeding: is there evidence of reduced UK training experience?

Authors:  H A Penny; M Kurien; E Wong; R Ahmed; E Ejenavi; M Lau; C Romaya; F Gohar; K L Dear; K Kapur; B Hoeroldt; A J Lobo; D S Sanders
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-02-11

10.  Management of the difficult duodenal stump in penetrating duodenal ulcer disease: a comparative analysis of duodenojejunostomy with "classical" stump closure (Nissen-Bsteh).

Authors:  Yogesh K Vashist; Emre F Yekebas; Florian Gebauer; Michael Tachezy; Kai Bachmann; Alexandra König; Asad Kutup; Jakob R Izbicki
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2012-08-19       Impact factor: 3.445

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.