Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2022

01-02-2022 | Stroke

Endoscopic thermocoagulation hemostasis for acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a randomized controlled study

Authors: Ou Qian, Qiaoxian Zhang, Yufeng Pan, Chiyue Cheng, Lanying Xu, Jinhui Guan, Ze-Hao Zhuang

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

This study evaluated the application of the bipolar electrocoagulation catheter via a peripheral-to-central (3 + 1) technique, relative to directly pressing only at the center of the bleeding site (direct-stroke), to effect endoscopic hemostasis of acute non-varicose gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB).

Methods

Patients (n = 148) with endoscopically diagnosed ANVUGIB were randomly apportioned to receive treatment by 3 + 1 (n = 78) or direct-stroke (n = 70) application of the bipolar electrocoagulation catheter. The 3 + 1 strategy required pressing at3 narrowly restricted sites equidistant peripheral and center to the site of bleeding. The rates of initial success, hemostasis time, and number of compressions were compared according to intention-to-treat (ITT) or per protocol (PP).

Results

The ITT (PP) rate of initial hemostatic success in patients receiving the 3 + 1 catheter was 91.02% (95.9%); and for the direct-stroke group was 71.42% (76.9%). For Forrest IIa lesions specifically, these rates were respectively 91.70% (97.1%) and 63.9% (67.6%). The ITT (PP) hemostasis times of the 3 + 1 and direct-stroke groups were 10.96 ± 3.28 (10.65 ± 2.90) and 14.27 ± 6.58 (14.12 ± 6.67) min; and the number of compressions numbered 5.73 ± 1.98 (5.42 ± 1.46) and 6.47 ± 2.82 (6.16 ± 2.47).

Conclusion

During thermocoagulation treatment of ANVUGIB via bipolar electrocoagulation catheter, the 3 + 1 strategy showed a significantly higher rate of successful initial hemostasis relative to the direct-stroke technique, and shorter hemostasis time, with no increase in total procedural steps.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Lei W et al (2018) Clinical observation of emergency endoscopic treatment of non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Guide China Med 16(11):203–204 Lei W et al (2018) Clinical observation of emergency endoscopic treatment of non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Guide China Med 16(11):203–204
2.
go back to reference Li Y (2019) Discussion of the efficacy of emergency endoscopy in the treatment of non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Contemp Med 25(14):135–136 Li Y (2019) Discussion of the efficacy of emergency endoscopy in the treatment of non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Contemp Med 25(14):135–136
3.
go back to reference Karstensen JG, Ebigbo A, Aabakken L, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Gralnek I, Le Moine O, Vilmann P, Ijoma U, Anigbo G, Afihene M, Duduyemi B, Ponchon T, Hassan C (2018) Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Cascade Guideline. Endosc Int Open 6:E1256–E1263CrossRef Karstensen JG, Ebigbo A, Aabakken L, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Gralnek I, Le Moine O, Vilmann P, Ijoma U, Anigbo G, Afihene M, Duduyemi B, Ponchon T, Hassan C (2018) Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Cascade Guideline. Endosc Int Open 6:E1256–E1263CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Sung JJ, Chiu PW, Chan FKL et al (2018) Asia-Pacific working group consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an update 2018. Gut 67:1757–1768CrossRef Sung JJ, Chiu PW, Chan FKL et al (2018) Asia-Pacific working group consensus on non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: an update 2018. Gut 67:1757–1768CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hwang JH, Shergill AK, Acosta RD et al (2014) The role of endoscopy in the management of variceal hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc 80(2):111–111CrossRef Hwang JH, Shergill AK, Acosta RD et al (2014) The role of endoscopy in the management of variceal hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc 80(2):111–111CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Elif Yaka E, Serkan Yılmaz MD, Nurettin Özgür Doğan MD, Murat Pekdemir MD (2015) Comparison of the glasgow blatchford and AIMS 65 scoring systems for risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 22(1):22–30CrossRef Elif Yaka E, Serkan Yılmaz MD, Nurettin Özgür Doğan MD, Murat Pekdemir MD (2015) Comparison of the glasgow blatchford and AIMS 65 scoring systems for risk stratification in upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 22(1):22–30CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Zhang Y (2019) Analysis of therapeutic effect of two kinds of different hemostasis methods on acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding under gastroscope. Renowned Dr 05:54 Zhang Y (2019) Analysis of therapeutic effect of two kinds of different hemostasis methods on acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding under gastroscope. Renowned Dr 05:54
8.
go back to reference Chung IK et al (2012) How can we maximize skills for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: injection, clipping, burning, or others. Clin Endosc 45(3):230–234CrossRef Chung IK et al (2012) How can we maximize skills for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: injection, clipping, burning, or others. Clin Endosc 45(3):230–234CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Conway JD, Adler DG et al (2008) Endoscopic hemostatic devices. Gastrointest Endosc 69(6):987–996CrossRef Conway JD, Adler DG et al (2008) Endoscopic hemostatic devices. Gastrointest Endosc 69(6):987–996CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Liu H, Zhang D (2008) Current status of endoscopic treatment of non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Med Recapitul 07:1052–1053 Liu H, Zhang D (2008) Current status of endoscopic treatment of non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Med Recapitul 07:1052–1053
11.
go back to reference Kataoka M, Kawai T, Yagi K et al (2010) Clinical evaluation of emergency endoscopic hemostasis with bipolar forceps in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Dig Endosc 22(2):151–155CrossRef Kataoka M, Kawai T, Yagi K et al (2010) Clinical evaluation of emergency endoscopic hemostasis with bipolar forceps in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Dig Endosc 22(2):151–155CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Sugiyama T, Dozaiku T, Toyonaga T et al (2006) The usefulness of 4 + 1 contact method using soft coagulation for bleeding gastric ulcers. Gastroenterol Endosc 48:204–211 (in Japanese with English abstract) Sugiyama T, Dozaiku T, Toyonaga T et al (2006) The usefulness of 4 + 1 contact method using soft coagulation for bleeding gastric ulcers. Gastroenterol Endosc 48:204–211 (in Japanese with English abstract)
13.
go back to reference Nie L, Zhang X, Li M (2016) Analysis of risk factors of death in patients with acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal rebleeding. Med Innov China 13(08):60–63 Nie L, Zhang X, Li M (2016) Analysis of risk factors of death in patients with acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal rebleeding. Med Innov China 13(08):60–63
14.
go back to reference Qian O, Lanying X, Guan J, Pan Y (2020) Retrospective control study of endoscopic hemostasis for acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Chin Foreign Med Res 18(17):150–152 Qian O, Lanying X, Guan J, Pan Y (2020) Retrospective control study of endoscopic hemostasis for acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Chin Foreign Med Res 18(17):150–152
Metadata
Title
Endoscopic thermocoagulation hemostasis for acute non-varicose upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a randomized controlled study
Authors
Ou Qian
Qiaoxian Zhang
Yufeng Pan
Chiyue Cheng
Lanying Xu
Jinhui Guan
Ze-Hao Zhuang
Publication date
01-02-2022
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2022
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08448-4

Other articles of this Issue 2/2022

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2022 Go to the issue