Intra-arterial treatment in patients with acute massive gastrointestinal bleeding after endoscopic failure: comparisons between positive versus negative contrast extravasation groups.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether treatment outcome is associated with visualization of contrast extravasation in patients with acute massive gastrointestinal bleeding after endoscopic failure.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2007 to December 2009, patients that experienced a first attack of acute gastrointestinal bleeding after failure of initial endoscopy were referred to our interventional department for intra-arterial treatment. We enrolled 79 patients and divided them into two groups: positive and negative extravasation. For positive extravasation, patients were treated by coil embolization; and in negative extravasation, patients were treated with intra-arterial vasopressin infusion. The two groups were compared for clinical parameters, hemodynamics, laboratory findings, endoscopic characteristics, and mortality rates.
RESULTS: Forty-eight patients had detectable contrast extravasation (positive extravasation), while 31 patients did not (negative extravasation). Fifty-six patients survived from this bleeding episode (overall clinical success rate, 71%). An elevation of hemoglobin level was observed in the both two groups; significantly greater in the positive extravasation group compared to the negative extravasation group. Although these patients were all at high risk of dying, the 90-day mortality rate was significantly lower in the positive extravasation than in the negative extravasation (20% versus 42%, p < 0.05). A multivariate analysis suggested that successful hemostasis (odds ratio [OR] = 28.66) is the most important predictor affecting the mortality in the two groups of patients.
CONCLUSION: Visualization of contrast extravasation on angiography usually can target the bleeding artery directly, resulting in a higher success rate to control of hemorrhage.