| Literature DB >> 31723577 |
Daisuke Kikuchi1, Toshiro Iizuka1, Shigeyoshi Makino2, Junnosuke Hayasaka1, Hiroyuki Odagiri1, Yorinari Ochiai1, Yugo Suzuki1, Kosuke Nomura1, Yu Ohkura3, Yosuke Okamoto1, Masami Tanaka1, Akira Matsui1, Toshifumi Mitani1, Shu Hoteya1.
Abstract
Background and study aims Delayed bleeding is one of the most serious adverse events of gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), especially in patients taking antithrombotic therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the utility and safety of a shielding method with autologous fibrin glue and polyglycolic acid (PGA) sheets for patients undergoing gastric ESD who are receiving antithrombotic therapy. Patients and methods One hundred twenty-three patients who were treated with gastric ESD while receiving antithrombotic therapy between December 2014 and September 2017 were enrolled in this study. Patients who received the shielding method were classified into the shielding group. Others were classified into the conventional group. Various clinico-pathological factors were retrospectively compared between the two groups. Results The shielding group consisted of 38 patients, and the conventional group consisted of the remaining 85 patients. In the shielding group, the rate of continuation of antithrombotic therapy was significantly higher (68.4 % vs 41.2 %). Incidence of delayed bleeding was lower in the shielding group (2.6 %, 1/38) than in the conventional group (14.1 %, 12/85). In the propensity score-adjusted logistic regression analysis, the delayed bleeding rate in the shielding group tended to be lower than in the conventional group ( P = 0.070). Allogeneic transfusion was performed in eight patients (8/85, 9.4 %) in the conventional group and none in the shielding group ( P = 0.047). No adverse event associated with endoscopic shielding were observed in the shielding group. Conclusions This study suggests that a shielding method with autologous fibrin glue and PGA sheet effectively prevents delayed bleeding after gastric ESD in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31723577 PMCID: PMC6847688 DOI: 10.1055/a-1007-1694
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Endosc Int Open ISSN: 2196-9736
Fig. 1Endoscopic image of ESD ulcer with polyglicolic acid (PGA) sheet. After coagulation of visible vessel, PGA sheet was applied using biopsy forceps and fixed using clip.
Fig. 2Endoscopic image of ESD ulcer after spraying autologous fibrin glue. Autologous fibrinogen and thrombin solution were sprayed simultaneously to bond the PGA sheet.
Fig. 3Endoscopic image of ESD ulcer 7 days after ESD. PGA sheet was recognized on the ESD ulcer.
Characteristics of patients in this study.
| Shielding group | Conventional group |
| |
| Patients | 38 | 85 | |
| Age (± SD) | 75.6 ± 8.2 | 76.5 ± 7.1 | 0.43 |
| Gender (male/female) | 31/7 | 74/11 | 0.30 |
| Comorbidity | |||
Cerebrovascular disease(%, n/n) | 31.5 (12/38) | 23.5 (20/85) | 0.24 |
Cardiovascular disease (%, n/n) | 36.8 (14/38) | 38.8 (33/85) | 0.50 |
Arrhythmia (%, n/n) | 31.5 (12/38) | 35.2 (30/85) | 0.43 |
Diabetes mellitus (%, n/n) | 15.8 (6/38) | 29.4 (25/85) | 0.081 |
Hemodialysis (%, n/n) | 2.6 (1/38) | 4.7 (4/85) | 0.42 |
Status of antithrombotic therapy in this study.
| Shielding group | Conventional group |
| |
| Continuation rate (%, n/n) | 68.4 (26/38) | 41.1 (35/85) | 0.004 |
| Multiple medication (%, n/n) | 23.7 (9/38) | 16.5 (14/85) | 0.24 |
| Anticoagulant (%, n/n) | 36.8 (14/38) | 34.1 (29/85) | 0.46 |
| Heparin displacement (%, n/n) | 15.8 (6/38) | 11.8 (11/85) | 0.43 |
| Type of antiplatelet therapy (%, n/n) | 0.48 | ||
Aspirin | 39.5 (15/38) | 44.7 (38/85) | |
Clopidogrel | 15.8 (6/38) | 9.4 (8/85) | |
Cilostazol | 13.2 (5/38) | 9.4 (8/85) | |
Ticlopidine | 5.2 (2/38) | 2.4 (2/85) | |
Others | 15.8 (6/38) | 20.0 (17/85) |
Characteristics of lesions in this study.
| Shielding group | Conventional group |
| |
| No. of Lesions | 45 | 106 | |
Tumor size (mm±SD) | 12.6 ± 9.2 | 16.6 ± 13.3 | 0.11 |
Tumor depth (m/sm) | 42/3 | 88/18 | 0.070 |
Lesion location (U/M/L) | 5/16/24 | 19/32/55 | 0.61 |
Proportion of clinical outcomes following ESD in the shielding and conventional groups.
| Shielding group | Conventional group | ||
| Patients | 38 | 85 | |
| Delayed bleeding (%, n/n) | 2.6 (1/38) | 14.1 (12/85) | 0.047 |
| Blood transfusion (%, n/n) | 0 (0/38) | 9.4 (8/85) | 0.047 |
| Thromboembolism (%, n/n) | 0 (0/38) | 0 (0.85) | 1.00 |
| Perforation (%, n/n) | 0 (0/38) | 1.2 (1/85) | 0.69 |
| Pneumonia (%, n/n) | 0 (0/38) | 0 (0/85) | 1.00 |
| Endoscopic hemostasis (%, n/n) | 15.8 (6/38) | 41.2 (35/85) | 0.017 |
| Scar formation 8 weeks after ESD (%, n/n) | 80.0 (32/40) | 85.9 (67/78) | 0.31 |
ESD, endoscopic submucosal dissection
Propensity score-adjusted logistic regression analysis for delayed bleeding.
| Odds ratio | 95 % CI |
| |
| Shielding group | 0.132 | 0.015 – 1.179 | 0.070 |