A prospective, randomized trial comparing mechanical methods of hemostasis plus epinephrine injection to epinephrine injection alone for bleeding peptic ulcer - 24/08/11
Riassunto |
Background |
The hemostatic efficacy of mechanical methods of hemostasis, together with epinephrine injection, was compared with that of epinephrine injection alone in bleeding peptic ulcer.
Methods |
Ninety patients with a peptic ulcer with active bleeding or a non-bleeding visible vessel were randomly assigned to undergo a mechanical method of hemostasis (23 hemoclip application, 22 band ligation) plus epinephrine injection, or epinephrine injection alone.
Results |
The two groups were similar with respect to all background variables. Initial hemostasis was achieved in 44/45 (97.8%) patients in both groups. The mean number of hemoclips and elastic bands applied were 2.8: 95% CI[2.5, 3.1] and 1.1: 95% CI[1.0, 1.2], respectively, and the mean volume of epinephrine injected was 19.9mL: 95% CI[19.3mL, 20.5mL]. The rate of recurrent bleeding in the combination group (2/44, 4.5%) was significantly lower in comparison with the injection group (9/44, 20.5%, p<0.05). The mean number of therapeutic endoscopic sessions needed to achieve permanent hemostasis in the combination group (1.04: 95% CI[1.01, 1.07]) was significantly lower vs. the injection group (1.22: 95% CI[1.15, 1.30]).
Conclusions |
The combination of an endoscopic mechanical method of hemostasis plus epinephrine injection is more effective than epinephrine injection alone for the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer. (Gastrointest Endosc 2004;60:173-9.)
Il testo completo di questo articolo è disponibile in PDF.Mappa
Vol 60 - N° 2
P. 173-179 - agosto 2004 Ritorno al numeroBenvenuto su EM|consulte, il riferimento dei professionisti della salute.
L'accesso al testo integrale di questo articolo richiede un abbonamento.
Già abbonato a @@106933@@ rivista ?
