Endoscopic vs. Medical Therapy for Bleeding Peptic Ulcers with Adherent Clot: A Randomized Comparative Trial

Abstract

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common and potentially life threatening emergency. Despite great advances in the field of medicine, the optimal management of bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot on endoscopy is still controversial. The aim of this study is to compare the combined endoscopic and medical therapy with medical therapy alone for bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot (Forrest type IIB). During two-year study period, around 342 patients presented to our Tertiary care hospital with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Out of these, 81 patients were noted to have adherent clot (Forrest type IIB) during endoscopy and were included in study. 40 patients received combined endoscopic and medical treatment, whereas 41 patients received medical treatment only. The base line characteristics of patients in two groups were comparable and statistically significant. Primary Outcome being recurrence of bleeding within 7 days of treatment was less in combined therapy group compared to medical therapy group (2.5% vs. 17.1%) This was statistically significant. Secondary outcome like recurrence of bleed in 30 days and need for repeat endoscopy were less in combined group compared to medical therapy group. These were statistically significant as well. Other secondary outcomes like necessity for surgery and mortality were fewer in combined group, but these were not statistically significant. In conclusion combination endoscopic therapy consisting of epinephrine injection, removal of the adherent clot, and treatment of underlying stigmata is more effective than medical therapy alone.