Efficacy of new hemostatic techniques in nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding: A systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Abstract

Objectives: Nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding (NVGIB) is a common medical condition with significant mortality and morbidity. Several types of hemostatic modalities are currently available in clinical setting. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of these modalities in treating NVGIB.Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies that compared the efficacy of different hemostatic techniques (over-thescope clip [OTSC], hemostatic powder [HP] and conventional endoscopic treatment [CET]) for NVGIB published up to June 2022. The 30-day rebleeding rate was regarded as the primary outcome. We performed pairwise and network metaanalyses for all treatments. The heterogeneity and transitivity were evaluated.Results: Twenty-two studies were included. Regarding the 30-day rebleeding rate, OTSC and HP plus CET showed superior efficacy in treating NVGIB compared with CET (OTSC vs CET: relative risk [RR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-0.60; HP plus CET vs CET: RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17-0.87), while OTSC and HP plus CET had comparable efficacy (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.38-2.31). HP plus CET ranked the highest in the network ranking estimate. The sensitivity analysis showed that it was not robust that OTSC was superior to CET regarding the short-term rebleeding rate and the initial hemostasis rate. While all-cause mortality, bleeding-related mortality and necessity of surgical or angiographic salvage therapy showed no statistically significant difference.Conclusion: OTSC and HP plus CET significantly reduced 30-day rebleeding rate compared to CET and had comparable efficacy in the treatment of NVGIB.