Adrenaline Injection Plus Argon Plasma Coagulation versus Adrenaline Injection Plus Hemoclips for Treating High-Risk Bleeding Peptic Ulcers: A Prospective, Randomized Trial

Taghavi, Seyed Alireza; Soleimani, Seyed Mohammad; Hosseini-Asl, Mohammad Kazem; Eshraghian, Ahad; Eghbali, Hajar; Dehghani, Seyed Mohsen; Ahmadpour, Bita; Saberifiroozi, Mehdi

doi:10.1155/2009/760793

Cited by 20 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Three RCTs of comparable size (n = 151 to n = 185) have evaluated the effectiveness of APC plus epinephrine versus other modalities (heater probe, clip, hemostatic forceps) plus epinephrine for treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding 57, 60, 61. In all 3 trials, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of initial hemostasis (>95% in all treatment arms), recurrent bleeding, or other relevant clinical outcomes.…”

Section: Outcomes Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Devices for endoscopic hemostasis of nonvariceal GI bleeding (with videos)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Endoscopic intervention is often the first line of therapy for GI nonvariceal bleeding. Although some of the devices and techniques used for this purpose have been well studied, others are relatively new, with few available outcomes data. Methods In this document, we review devices and techniques for endoscopic treatment of nonvariceal GI bleeding, the evidence regarding their efficacy and safety, and financial considerations for their use. Results Devices used for endoscopic hemostasis in the GI tract can be classified into injection devices (needles), thermal devices (multipolar/bipolar probes, hemostatic forceps, heater probe, argon plasma coagulation, radiofrequency ablation, and cryotherapy), mechanical devices (clips, suturing devices, banding devices, stents), and topical devices (hemostatic sprays). Conclusions Endoscopic evaluation and treatment remains a cornerstone in the management of nonvariceal upper- and lower-GI bleeding. A variety of devices is available for hemostasis of bleeding lesions in the GI tract. Other than injection therapy, which should not be used as monotherapy, there are few compelling data that strongly favor any one device over another. For endoscopists, the choice of a hemostatic device should depend on the type and location of the bleeding lesion, the availability of equipment and expertise, and the cost of the device.

show abstract

Section: Outcomes Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Devices for endoscopic hemostasis of nonvariceal GI bleeding (with videos)

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The majority of UNVGIB could be managed by conventional endoscopic interventions. However, some studies have shown that conventional therapies such as epinephrine injections and hemoclips or coagulation could not achieve successful hemostasis in 4 to 20% of UNVGIB cases, and even caused severe complications [3][4][5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical outcomes of over-the-scope-clip system for the treatment of acute upper non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhong

Tan

Ren

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Conventional endoscopic treatments can’t control bleeding in as many as 20% of patients with non-variceal gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Recent studies have shown that over-the-scope-clip (OTSC) system allowed for effective hemostasis for refractory GI bleeding lesions. So we aimed to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the OTSC system for management of acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding. Method: A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library covering the period from January 2007 to May 2019. The literature was selected independently by two reviewers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The statistical analysis was carried out using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3.0. Results: A total of 16 studies including 769 patients with 778 GI bleeding lesions were identified. Pooled technical success was achieved in 761 lesions [95.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 93.5%-97.2%], and the pooled clinical success was achieved in 666 lesions (84.2%; 95% CI, 77.4%-89.2%). The incidence of re-bleeding was reported in 81 patients and the post-procedure mortality was 10.9% (n = 84). Only 2 (0.3%) patients occurred complications after OTSC system procedure. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that the OTSC system was a technically feasible modality and highly efficacious in achieving hemostasis in acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

show abstract

“…However, some studies have shown that conventional therapies such as epinephrine injections and hemoclips or coagulation could not achieve successful hemostasis in 4 to 20% of UNVGIB cases, and even caused severe complications. [3][4][5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical outcomes of over-the-scope-clip system for the treatment of acute upper non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Zhong

Tan

Ren

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundConventional endoscopic treatments can’t control bleeding in as many as 20% of patients with non-variceal gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Recent studies have shown that over-the-scope-clip (OTSC) system allowed for effective hemostasis for refractory GI bleeding lesions. So we aimed to conduct a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the OTSC system for management of acute non-variceal upper GI bleeding.MethodA comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library covering the period from January 2007 to May 2019. The search terms included “gastrointestinal bleeding” AND “OTSC OR over the scope clip”. The literature was selected independently by two reviewers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The statistical analysis was carried out using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3.0.ResultsA total of 16 studies including 769 patients with 778 GI bleeding lesions were identified. Pooled technical success was achieved in 761 lesions [95.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 93.5%-97.2%], and the pooled clinical success was achieved in 666 lesions (84.2%; 95% CI, 77.4%-89.2%). The incidence of re-bleeding was reported in 81 patients and the post-procedure mortality was 10.9% (n=84). Only 2 (0.3%) patients occurred complications after OTSC system procedure.ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that the OTSC system was a technically feasible modality and highly efficacious in achieving hemostasis in acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

show abstract

Adrenaline Injection Plus Argon Plasma Coagulation versus Adrenaline Injection Plus Hemoclips for Treating High-Risk Bleeding Peptic Ulcers: A Prospective, Randomized Trial

Cited by 20 publications

References 32 publications

Devices for endoscopic hemostasis of nonvariceal GI bleeding (with videos)

Devices for endoscopic hemostasis of nonvariceal GI bleeding (with videos)

Clinical outcomes of over-the-scope-clip system for the treatment of acute upper non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinical outcomes of over-the-scope-clip system for the treatment of acute upper non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About