Youngjong Cho1, Sung-Joon Park2, Seongwhi Cho3, Sangjoon Lee4, Hyoung Nam Lee5, Suk Hyun Bae6. 1. Department of Radiology, Gangneung Asan Hospital, Gangneung-si, Gangwon-do, South Korea. 2. Department of Radiology, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan-si, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea. 3. Department of Radiology, Kangwon National University Hospital, Chuncheon-si, Gangwon-do, South Korea. 4. Department of Radiology, Pohang St. Mary's Hospital, Daejamdong-gil 17, Nam-gu, Pohang-si, Gyeongsangbuk-do, Republic of Korea, 37661. wannafindlee@gmail.com. 5. Department of Radiology, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Cheonan Hospital, Cheonan-si, Republic of Korea. 6. Department of Radiology, Inje University College of Medicine, Ilsan Paik Hospital, Goyang-si, Korea.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study compared the detection sensitivity of catheter angiography to that of contrast-enhanced multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) for detecting acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) to elucidate the diagnostic efficacy of catheter angiography. We also determined GIB outcomes of transcatheter arterial embolization after failed endoscopic hemostasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from 63 patients managed at four institutions who met the following criteria during a 3-year period: (1) ongoing non-variceal GIB confirmed during endoscopy; (2) failed endoscopic hemostasis; and (3) endoscopy, MDCT, and catheter angiography performed within 24 h. The diagnostic efficacies of MDCT, selective angiography with a 5-Fr catheter (5Fr-angiography), and super-selective angiography with a microcatheter (micro-angiography) were compared using endoscopic diagnosis as the reference method. The rates of technical success, clinical success, and complications were analyzed when arterial embolization was performed. RESULTS: All transcatheter angiographies were performed after MDCT. Micro-angiography had a significantly higher GIB detection rate (73.0%) than MDCT (57.1%) and 5Fr-angiography (39.7%) (micro-angiography vs. MDCT, P = 0.021; MDCT vs. 5Fr-angiography, P = 0.043). Arterial embolization was attempted in 55 of 63 patients, with technical success achieved in 53 of 55 patients (96.4%) and clinical success in 38 of 42 patients (90.5%). Eleven patients were lost to follow-up. Three patients experienced complications, including bowel infarction (two patients) and common bile duct stricture (one patient). CONCLUSION: In cases of endoscopic hemostasis failure, angiography can be performed even if MDCT yields negative results but should include micro-angiography; moreover, embolization can be performed safely and effectively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: None.
PURPOSE: This study compared the detection sensitivity of catheter angiography to that of contrast-enhanced multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) for detecting acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) to elucidate the diagnostic efficacy of catheter angiography. We also determined GIB outcomes of transcatheter arterial embolization after failed endoscopic hemostasis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from 63 patients managed at four institutions who met the following criteria during a 3-year period: (1) ongoing non-variceal GIB confirmed during endoscopy; (2) failed endoscopic hemostasis; and (3) endoscopy, MDCT, and catheter angiography performed within 24 h. The diagnostic efficacies of MDCT, selective angiography with a 5-Fr catheter (5Fr-angiography), and super-selective angiography with a microcatheter (micro-angiography) were compared using endoscopic diagnosis as the reference method. The rates of technical success, clinical success, and complications were analyzed when arterial embolization was performed. RESULTS: All transcatheter angiographies were performed after MDCT. Micro-angiography had a significantly higher GIB detection rate (73.0%) than MDCT (57.1%) and 5Fr-angiography (39.7%) (micro-angiography vs. MDCT, P = 0.021; MDCT vs. 5Fr-angiography, P = 0.043). Arterial embolization was attempted in 55 of 63 patients, with technical success achieved in 53 of 55 patients (96.4%) and clinical success in 38 of 42 patients (90.5%). Eleven patients were lost to follow-up. Three patients experienced complications, including bowel infarction (two patients) and common bile duct stricture (one patient). CONCLUSION: In cases of endoscopic hemostasis failure, angiography can be performed even if MDCT yields negative results but should include micro-angiography; moreover, embolization can be performed safely and effectively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: None.