Hemant Mutneja1, Abhishek Bhurwal2, Andrew Go3, Gurpartap Singh Sidhu4, Shilpa Arora5, Bashar M Attar6. 1. John H Stroger Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois, USA. hemantmutneja@gmail.com. 2. Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA. abhishek.bhurwal@gmail.com. 3. Loyola University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA. andrew.go@lumc.edu. 4. John H Stroger Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois, USA. drgssidhu@gmail.com. 5. Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA. shilpa_arora@rush.edu. 6. John H Stroger Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, Illinois; Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois USA. bashar_attar@rush.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hemospray is a non-contact modality of endoscopic hemostasis that has been used in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) with varying success. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of Hemospray in the management of UGIB. METHODS: An electronic bibliographic search of digital dissertation databases was performed from inception till October 2019. All prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of Hemospray in the management of UGIB were analysed. The primary outcome was immediate haemostasis and the secondary outcome was rebleeding rate. Subgroup analyses based on etiology of UGIB (tumour-related, variceal, etc) were also performed. RESULTS: A total of 11 prospective studies, including 4 randomized trials were included for the analysis. The pooled immediate haemostasis rate with Hemospray was 93% (95% CI 90.3-95%, p<0.001). Rebleeding occurred in 14.4% (95% CI 8.8-22.8%, p<0.001) of patients. For the subgroup of tumour-related bleeding, the immediate haemostasis rate was 95.3% (95% CI 89.6-97.3%; p <0.001) and rebleeding rate was 21.9% (95% CI 13.9-32.7%, p <0.001). In patients with variceal bleeding, immediate haemostasis was achieved in 92.7% (95% CI 83.6-96.9%; p<0.001) of patients, with a rebleeding rate of 3.1% (95% CI 0.9-10.2%, p <0.001). CONCLUSION: Hemospray shows high immediate haemostasis and low bleeding percentages. The odds were in its favour compared to conventional endoscopic modalities, but not statistically significant. The results are undermined by the risk of bias in the studies. Nevertheless, it is an easy technique that should be further investigated with better studies.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hemospray is a non-contact modality of endoscopic hemostasis that has been used in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) with varying success. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy of Hemospray in the management of UGIB. METHODS: An electronic bibliographic search of digital dissertation databases was performed from inception till October 2019. All prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials evaluating the efficacy of Hemospray in the management of UGIB were analysed. The primary outcome was immediate haemostasis and the secondary outcome was rebleeding rate. Subgroup analyses based on etiology of UGIB (tumour-related, variceal, etc) were also performed. RESULTS: A total of 11 prospective studies, including 4 randomized trials were included for the analysis. The pooled immediate haemostasis rate with Hemospray was 93% (95% CI 90.3-95%, p<0.001). Rebleeding occurred in 14.4% (95% CI 8.8-22.8%, p<0.001) of patients. For the subgroup of tumour-related bleeding, the immediate haemostasis rate was 95.3% (95% CI 89.6-97.3%; p <0.001) and rebleeding rate was 21.9% (95% CI 13.9-32.7%, p <0.001). In patients with variceal bleeding, immediate haemostasis was achieved in 92.7% (95% CI 83.6-96.9%; p<0.001) of patients, with a rebleeding rate of 3.1% (95% CI 0.9-10.2%, p <0.001). CONCLUSION: Hemospray shows high immediate haemostasis and low bleeding percentages. The odds were in its favour compared to conventional endoscopic modalities, but not statistically significant. The results are undermined by the risk of bias in the studies. Nevertheless, it is an easy technique that should be further investigated with better studies.