BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is the cornerstone of therapeutic ERCP and bleeding is one of its most frequent and serious complications. Monopolar coagulation has been used effectively for many causes of gastrointestinal hemorrhages. We investigated the efficacy and safety of endoscopically delivered monopolar coagulation through a polypectomy snare in patients with ES-induced bleeding not responding to injection treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 672 consecutive patients who underwent ES between June 2007 and January 2009. Bleeding patterns (trickle, oozing, spurting) were recorded. Patients with bleeding not responding to spray irrigation or injection of 0.9% NaCl+epinephrine 1: 10,000 solution were treated with monopolar coagulation. Complications related to the technique were assessed. RESULTS: ES-induced bleeding occurred in 59 patients (8.78%). Visible bleeding patterns immediately after ES were: 32 trickle, 21 oozing, and 4 spurting. Delayed bleeding was observed in 2 patients. In 11 patients with intraprocedural bleeding (7 oozing and 4 spurting) not responding to spray irrigation and injection treatment with epinephrine solution, bleeding was successfully treated with monopolar coagulation. There were no procedure-related complications in this series. CONCLUSIONS: Monopolar coagulation is an effective and safe treatment modality and is recommended as an alternative method to other therapeutic modalities for post-ES bleeding not responding to injection treatment.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic sphincterotomy (ES) is the cornerstone of therapeutic ERCP and bleeding is one of its most frequent and serious complications. Monopolar coagulation has been used effectively for many causes of gastrointestinal hemorrhages. We investigated the efficacy and safety of endoscopically delivered monopolar coagulation through a polypectomy snare in patients with ES-induced bleeding not responding to injection treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 672 consecutive patients who underwent ES between June 2007 and January 2009. Bleeding patterns (trickle, oozing, spurting) were recorded. Patients with bleeding not responding to spray irrigation or injection of 0.9% NaCl+epinephrine 1: 10,000 solution were treated with monopolar coagulation. Complications related to the technique were assessed. RESULTS: ES-induced bleeding occurred in 59 patients (8.78%). Visible bleeding patterns immediately after ES were: 32 trickle, 21 oozing, and 4 spurting. Delayed bleeding was observed in 2 patients. In 11 patients with intraprocedural bleeding (7 oozing and 4 spurting) not responding to spray irrigation and injection treatment with epinephrine solution, bleeding was successfully treated with monopolar coagulation. There were no procedure-related complications in this series. CONCLUSIONS: Monopolar coagulation is an effective and safe treatment modality and is recommended as an alternative method to other therapeutic modalities for post-ES bleeding not responding to injection treatment.