Epinephrine injection monotherapy shows similar hemostatic efficacy to epinephrine injection combined therapy in high-risk patients (Forrest Ib) with bleeding ulcers.
Combined therapy
Epinephrine injection monotherapy
Peptic ulcer bleeding
Propensity score analysis
Rebleeding
Journal
Surgical endoscopy
ISSN: 1432-2218
Titre abrégé: Surg Endosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8806653
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
received:
08
03
2023
accepted:
20
05
2023
medline:
31
8
2023
pubmed:
20
6
2023
entrez:
19
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Whether combination therapy has higher hemostatic efficacy than epinephrine injection monotherapy in different Forrest classifications is not clear. This study aimed to compare hemostatic efficacy between epinephrine injection monotherapy (MT) and combination therapy (CT) based on different Forrest classifications. We retrospectively analyzed peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) patients who underwent endoscopic epinephrine injections or epinephrine injections combined with a second therapy between March 2014 and June 2022 in our center, and the patients were divided into MT group or CT group. Subsequently, a propensity score matching analysis (PSM) was performed and rebleeding rates were calculated according to Forrest classifications via a stratified analysis. Overall, 605 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included, and after PSM, 173 patients in each of the CT and MT groups were included. For PUB patients with nonbleeding visible vessels (FIIa), the rebleeding rates by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 after PSM were 8.8%, 17.5%, 19.3%, and 19.3% in the MT group, respectively, and rates were 0%, 4.1%, 5.5%, and 5.5% in the CT group, respectively, with significant differences observed between the two groups by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.015, P = 0.011, P = 0.014, and P = 0.014, respectively). However, for PUB patients with oozing bleeding (FIb), the rebleeding rates by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 after PSM were 14.9%, 16.2%, 17.6%, and 17.6% in the MT group, respectively, and rates were 13.2%, 14.7%, 14.7%, and 16.2% in the CT group, respectively, with no significant differences observed between the two groups by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.78, P = 0.804, P = 0.644 and P = 0.825). Combined therapy has higher hemostatic efficacy than epinephrine injection monotherapy for PUB patients with visible blood vessel (FIIa) ulcers. However, epinephrine injection monotherapy is equally as effective as combined therapy for PUB patients with oozing blood (FIb) ulcers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Whether combination therapy has higher hemostatic efficacy than epinephrine injection monotherapy in different Forrest classifications is not clear. This study aimed to compare hemostatic efficacy between epinephrine injection monotherapy (MT) and combination therapy (CT) based on different Forrest classifications.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) patients who underwent endoscopic epinephrine injections or epinephrine injections combined with a second therapy between March 2014 and June 2022 in our center, and the patients were divided into MT group or CT group. Subsequently, a propensity score matching analysis (PSM) was performed and rebleeding rates were calculated according to Forrest classifications via a stratified analysis.
RESULTS
Overall, 605 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included, and after PSM, 173 patients in each of the CT and MT groups were included. For PUB patients with nonbleeding visible vessels (FIIa), the rebleeding rates by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 after PSM were 8.8%, 17.5%, 19.3%, and 19.3% in the MT group, respectively, and rates were 0%, 4.1%, 5.5%, and 5.5% in the CT group, respectively, with significant differences observed between the two groups by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.015, P = 0.011, P = 0.014, and P = 0.014, respectively). However, for PUB patients with oozing bleeding (FIb), the rebleeding rates by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 after PSM were 14.9%, 16.2%, 17.6%, and 17.6% in the MT group, respectively, and rates were 13.2%, 14.7%, 14.7%, and 16.2% in the CT group, respectively, with no significant differences observed between the two groups by Days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.78, P = 0.804, P = 0.644 and P = 0.825).
CONCLUSION
Combined therapy has higher hemostatic efficacy than epinephrine injection monotherapy for PUB patients with visible blood vessel (FIIa) ulcers. However, epinephrine injection monotherapy is equally as effective as combined therapy for PUB patients with oozing blood (FIb) ulcers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37336844
doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10152-4
pii: 10.1007/s00464-023-10152-4
pmc: PMC10462566
doi:
Substances chimiques
Epinephrine
YKH834O4BH
Hemostatics
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6954-6963Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2019 Oct - Dec;42-43:101610
pubmed: 31785737
Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2019 Oct - Dec;42-43:101608
pubmed: 31785733
Surg Clin North Am. 2018 Oct;98(5):1047-1057
pubmed: 30243446
Gut. 2018 Oct;67(10):1757-1768
pubmed: 29691276
Gut. 2021 May;70(5):818-824
pubmed: 33649044
Lancet. 1974 Aug 17;2(7877):394-7
pubmed: 4136718
Lancet. 1996 Apr 27;347(9009):1138-40
pubmed: 8609747
Am J Gastroenterol. 2017 Mar;112(3):441-446
pubmed: 28094314
Gastroenterology. 2004 Feb;126(2):441-50
pubmed: 14762781
Gastroenterology. 2020 Sep;159(3):1120-1128
pubmed: 32574620
Lancet. 2017 Aug 5;390(10094):613-624
pubmed: 28242110
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Jan;7(1):33-47; quiz 1-2
pubmed: 18986845
Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Dec;74(6):1215-24
pubmed: 21907980
Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2018 Apr 19;4:18020
pubmed: 29671413
Lancet. 2000 Oct 14;356(9238):1318-21
pubmed: 11073021
Endoscopy. 2021 Mar;53(3):300-332
pubmed: 33567467
Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Aug;60(2):173-9
pubmed: 15278040
Lancet. 2013 Jun 8;381(9882):2033-43
pubmed: 23746903
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010 Apr;7(4):214-29
pubmed: 20212504
BMJ. 2019 Mar 25;364:l536
pubmed: 30910853
Gastroenterology. 2022 Feb;162(2):621-644
pubmed: 34678215
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 13;(10):CD005584
pubmed: 25308912
Am J Gastroenterol. 2021 May 1;116(5):899-917
pubmed: 33929377
Ann Intern Med. 2019 Dec 3;171(11):805-822
pubmed: 31634917
Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Apr;81(4):882-8.e1
pubmed: 25484324
BMJ. 1997 May 3;314(7090):1303-6
pubmed: 9158464
BMC Gastroenterol. 2017 Apr 19;17(1):55
pubmed: 28424073