Role of endoscopic injection therapy in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer

Devices for drug delivery in the gastrointestinal tract: A review of systems physically interacting with the mucosa for enhanced delivery

The delivery of macromolecules via the gastrointestinal (GI) tract remains a significant challenge. A variety of technologies using physical modes of drug delivery have been developed and investigated to overcome the epithelial cell layer of the GI tract for local and systemic delivery. These technologies include direct injection, jetting, ultrasound, and iontophoresis, which have been largely adapted from transdermal drug delivery. Direct injection of agents using needles through endoscopy has been used clinically for over a century. Jetting, a needle-less method of drug delivery where a high-speed stream of fluid medication penetrates tissue, has been evaluated pre-clinically for delivery of agents into the buccal mucosa. Ultrasound has been shown to be beneficial in enhancing delivery of macromolecules, including nucleic acids, in pre-clinical animal models. The application of an electric field gradient to drive drugs into tissues through the technique of iontophoresis has been shown to deliver highly toxic chemotherapies into GI tissues. Here in, we provide an in-depth overview of these physical modes of drug delivery in the GI tract and their clinical and preclinical uses.

Hemostatic powder spray: a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. The management of gastrointestinal bleeding is often challenging, depending on its location and severity. To date, widely accepted hemostatic treatment options include injection of epinephrine and tissue adhesives such as cyanoacrylate, ablative therapy with contact modalities such as thermal coagulation with heater probe and bipolar hemostatic forceps, noncontact modalities such as photodynamic therapy and argon plasma coagulation, and mechanical hemostasis with band ligation, endoscopic hemoclips, and over-the-scope clips. These approaches, albeit effective in achieving hemostasis, are associated with a 5-10% rebleeding risk. New simple, effective, universal, and safe methods are needed to address some of the challenges posed by the current endoscopic hemostatic techniques. The use of a novel hemostatic powder spray appears to be effective and safe in controlling upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Although initial reports of hemostatic powder spray as an innovative approach to manage gastrointestinal bleeding are promising, further studies are needed to support and confirm its efficacy and safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, clinical efficacy, and safety of hemostatic powder spray (Hemospray, Cook Medical, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA) as a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding. In this review article, we performed an extensive literature search summarizing case reports and case series of Hemospray for the management of gastrointestinal bleeding. Indications, features, technique, deployment, success rate, complications, and limitations are discussed. The combined technical and clinical success rate of Hemospray was 88.5% (207/234) among the human subjects and 81.8% (9/11) among the porcine models studied. Rebleeding occurred within 72 hours post-treatment in 38 patients (38/234; 16.2%) and in three porcine models (3/11; 27.3%). No procedure-related adverse events were associated with the use of Hemospray. Hemospray appears to be a safe and effective approach in the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.

Hemostatic powder spray: a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. The management of gastrointestinal bleeding is often challenging, depending on its location and severity. To date, widely accepted hemostatic treatment options include injection of epinephrine and tissue adhesives such as cyanoacrylate, ablative therapy with contact modalities such as thermal coagulation with heater probe and bipolar hemostatic forceps, noncontact modalities such as photodynamic therapy and argon plasma coagulation, and mechanical hemostasis with band ligation, endoscopic hemoclips, and over-the-scope clips. These approaches, albeit effective in achieving hemostasis, are associated with a 5-10% rebleeding risk. New simple, effective, universal, and safe methods are needed to address some of the challenges posed by the current endoscopic hemostatic techniques. The use of a novel hemostatic powder spray appears to be effective and safe in controlling upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Although initial reports of hemostatic powder spray as an innovative approach to manage gastrointestinal bleeding are promising, further studies are needed to support and confirm its efficacy and safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, clinical efficacy, and safety of hemostatic powder spray (Hemospray, Cook Medical, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA) as a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding. In this review article, we performed an extensive literature search summarizing case reports and case series of Hemospray for the management of gastrointestinal bleeding. Indications, features, technique, deployment, success rate, complications, and limitations are discussed. The combined technical and clinical success rate of Hemospray was 88.5% (207/234) among the human subjects and 81.8% (9/11) among the porcine models studied. Rebleeding occurred within 72 hours post-treatment in 38 patients (38/234; 16.2%) and in three porcine models (3/11; 27.3%). No procedure-related adverse events were associated with the use of Hemospray. Hemospray appears to be a safe and effective approach in the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.

Clinical evaluation of emergency endoscopic hemostasis with bipolar forceps in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

The present study was designed to evaluate the usefulness and safety of bipolar hemostatic forceps, known as a less invasive and highly safe means of thermal coagulation used for hemostasis in cases of non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. This technique of bipolar forceps is simple, safe and unlikely to induce complications, and is therefore promising as a new technique of endoscopic hemostasis. The study involved 39 cases where hemostasis was attempted with bipolar forceps to deal with non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, including 28 cases of gastric ulcer, six cases of duodenal ulcer, three cases of bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), one case of Mallory-Weiss syndrome and one case of postoperative bleeding from the anastomosed area. There were 34 males and five females, with a mean age of 63.6 years. Bipolar forceps were the first-line means of hemostasis in cases of oozing bleeding (venous bleeding), pulsatile or spurting bleeding (arterial bleeding) and exposed vessels without active bleeding. The primary hemostasis success rate was 92.3%, and the re-bleeding rate was 0%. In cases where the bleeding site was located along the tangential line or in cases where large respiration-caused motions hampered identification of the bleeding site, hemostasis by means of coagulation was easily effected by application of electricity while the forceps were kept open and compressed the bleeding area. In addition, there were no complications. This technique of bipolar forceps is simple, safe and unlikely to induce complications, and is therefore promising as a new technique of endoscopic hemostasis.

Therapeutic endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Endoscopy is the primary diagnostic and therapeutic tool for upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB). The performance of endoscopic therapy depends on findings of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH). For peptic ulcer disease-the most common etiology of UGIB-endoscopic therapy is indicated for findings of major SRH, such as active bleeding, oozing, or the presence of a nonbleeding visible vessel, but not indicated for minor SRH, such as a pigmented flat spot or a simple ulcer with a homogeneous clean base. Endoscopic therapies include injection, ablation, and mechanical therapy. Monotherapy reduces the risk of rebleeding in patients with peptic ulcer disease with major SRH to about 20%. Combination therapy, especially injection followed by either ablation or mechanical therapy, is generally recommended to further reduce the risk of rebleeding to about 10%. Endoscopic dual hemostasis by an experienced endoscopist reduces the risk of rebleeding, the need for surgery, the number of blood transfusions required, and the length of hospital stay. This Review article comprehensively analyzes the principles, indications, instrumentation, techniques, and efficacy of endoscopic hemostasis.

Endoscopic hemostasis by using the TriClip for peptic ulcer hemorrhage: a pilot study

BACKGROUND

The feasibility, efficacy, and safety of the TriClip in the management of peptic ulcer hemorrhage in human beings are scarcely reported in the literature.

OBJECTIVE

A pilot study was conducted to assess the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of the TriClip endoscopic clipping device in the control of peptic ulcer hemorrhage.

DESIGN

Prospective evaluation.

SETTING

Regional government hospital.

PATIENTS

From July 2004 to January 2005, patients older than 16 years and with Forrest type I and IIa peptic ulcer hemorrhages were included in the study.

INTERVENTIONS

TriClips were used for initial hemostasis. Salvage procedures, including adrenalin injection, heat probe application, argon plasma coagulation, or surgery will be carried out appropriately if TriClip failed to control bleeding alone. An endoscopy was repeated 24 hours later for the security of the TriClip and for any endoscopic evidence of recurrent bleeding. A follow-up endoscopy was performed 8 weeks later to assess ulcer healing.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Procedure time, successful hemostatic rate, number of clips used, ulcer recurrent bleeding rate, complications, and ulcer healing rate were measured.

LIMITATIONS

No comparative arm; pilot study only.

RESULT

A total of 27 cases (11 women, 16 men) were included in the study, with a median age of 70 years (range 18-88 years). There were 19 cases of duodenal ulcer and 8 cases of gastric ulcer, with median size of 8 mm (range 2-20 mm). The rate of successful hemostasis in the first endoscopy by TriClips alone was 81.5% (22/27), with a median procedure time of 10 minutes (range 3-30 minutes). In the second endoscopy, the endoscopic recurrent bleeding rate was 14.8% (4/27) and the TriClips were found dislodged in 11 patients (40.7%). The permanent hemostasis rate was 67% (18/27). The overall failure rate was 33% (9/27). Three patients required blood transfusion before the first endoscopy. There was no morbidity or mortality observed in all cases. All ulcers healed after 8 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the TriClip is feasible in the initial control of peptic ulcer hemorrhage. However, we could not detect any obvious advantages in arresting bleeding vessels by using this new clipping device.

Endoscopic hemoclip versus triclip placement in patients with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

Hemoclip placement is an effective endoscopic therapy for peptic ulcer bleeding. Triclip is a novel clipping device with three prongs over the distal end. So far, there is no clinical study concerning the hemostatic effect of triclip placement.

AIM

To determine the hemostatic effect of the triclip as compared with that of the hemoclip.

METHODS

A total of 100 peptic ulcer patients with active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels received endoscopic therapy with either hemoclip (N = 50) or triclip placement (N = 50). After obtaining initial hemostasis, they received omeprazole 40 mg intravenous infusion every 12 h for 3 days. The main outcome assessment was hemostatic rate and rebleeding rate at 14 days.

RESULTS

Initial hemostasis was obtained in 47 patients (94%) of the hemoclip group and in 38 patients (76%) of the triclip group (P= 0.011). Rebleeding episodes, volume of blood transfusion, the hospital stay, numbers of patients requiring urgent operation, and mortality were not statistically different between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Hemoclip is superior to triclip in obtaining primary hemostasis in patients with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding. In bleeders located over difficult-to-approach sites, hemoclip is more ideal than triclip.

Which types of non-bleeding visible vessels in gastric peptic ulcers should be treated by endoscopic hemostasis?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Because non-bleeding visible vessels (NBVV) of gastric peptic ulcers have the potential to re-bleed, endoscopic hemostatic treatment may be necessary during the first emergency endoscopy. However, not all NBVV re-bleed, and endoscopic hemostasis sometimes causes fatal side-effects. Therefore, we have evaluated the risk of re-bleeding from various NBVV in gastric peptic ulcers to determine which types should be treated by endoscopy to prevent re-bleeding.

METHODS

A total of 227 NBVV in 202 patients with gastric peptic ulcers that were endoscopically followed without endoscopic hemostatic procedures were classified by the following factors: vessel color, form, location of the NBVV in the ulcer crater, and location of the ulcer in the stomach. The re-bleeding rate was then analyzed for each type of NBVV.

RESULTS

Significantly high rates of re-bleeding were observed in cases with white, protruded and peripheral NBVV. In particular, white NBVV located in the peripheral zone of the ulcer crater were frequent re-bleeding sources. The location of the ulcer in the stomach was not a statistically significant factor in determining re-bleeding rates.

CONCLUSION

We found that white, protruded and peripherally located NBVV in gastric ulcers have a higher chance of re-bleeding if preventive endoscopic hemostatic procedures are not performed.

Endoscopic haemoclip versus heater probe thermocoagulation plus hypertonic saline-epinephrine injection for peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

Treating patients of bleeding peptic ulcers with heater probe thermocoagulation and haemoclip is considered to be safe and very effective. Yet, there is no report comparing the haemostatic effects of endoscopic haemoclip versus heater probe thermocoagulation plus hypertonic saline-epinephrine injection in these patients.

AIM

To compare the clinical outcomes of both therapeutic modalities in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.

METHODS

A total of 93 patients with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessels were randomised to receive either endoscopic haemoclip (n = 46) or heater probe thermocoagulation plus hypertonic saline-epinephrine injection (n = 47). Five patients from the haemoclip group were excluded because of the inability to place the haemoclip.

RESULTS

Initial haemostasis was achieved in 39 patients (95.1%) of the haemoclip group and 47 patients (100%) of the heater probe group (P > 0.1). Rebleeding occurred in four patients (10.3%) of the haemoclip group and three patients (6.4%) of the heater probe group (P > 0.1). The volume of blood transfused after entry into the study, duration of hospital stay, number of patients requiring urgent surgery and the mortality rates were not statistically different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

If the haemoclip can be applied properly, the clinical outcomes of the haemoclip group would be similar to those of the heater probe group in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding. However, if the bleeders are located at the difficult-to-approach sites, heater probe plus hypertonic saline injection is the first choice therapy.

[Acute upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Diagnosis and management]

Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage calls for a team approach. Early endotracheal intubation of unconscious patients helps to prevent aspiration. Erythromycin i.v. 20 min. before emergency endoscopy improves the diagnostic yield. Patients without increased risk of rebleeding may be treated on an outpatient basis. Band ligation is the gold standard for acute variceal bleeding. Terlipressin, somatostatin and octreotide are equally effective but require additional measures for prevention of late recurrence. Somatostatin and analogues used as adjunct to ligation slightly reduce the risk of rebleeding but not of death. Three to seven days of prophylactic antibiotics decrease the risk of uncontrolled or recurrent bleeding. Therapeutic failures are rescued by transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting (TIPS). Patients with nonvaricose bleeding should only be treated when active hemorrhage or a "visible vessel" is found. First line treatment is endoscopic injection of diluted adrenalin or isotonic saline. Thermal coagulation is an alternative. Tissue-destructing sclerosants should be avoided. Clipping and injection of fibrin glue are second and third line measures. Proton pump inhibitors improve endoscopic hemostasis, however, it is unclear whether high i.v. doses are required. H. pylori must be eradicated to prevent late recurrence. Rebleeding is treated endoscopically with angiographic intervention or surgery as rescue measures.

A prospective, randomized trial of endoscopic hemoclip versus heater probe thermocoagulation for peptic ulcer bleeding

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic heater probe thermocoagulation and hemoclip are considered to be safe and very effective in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer. So far, there are only few reports concerning hemostasis with endoscopic hemoclip. The aims of this study were to compare the hemostatic effects of both therapeutic modalities in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.

METHODS

A total of 80 patients with active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels were randomized to receive endoscopic hemoclip (n = 40) or heater probe thermocoagulation (n = 40).

RESULTS

Initial hemostasis was achieved in 34 patients (85%) in the hemoclip group and 40 patients (100%) in the heater probe group (p = 0.01277). Rebleeding occurred in three patients (8.8%) in the hemoclip group and two patients (5%) in the heater probe group (p > 0.1). Among patients with difficult-to-approach bleeding, we obtained a better hemostatic rate in the heater probe group (nine of 11 patients vs three of 10, p = 0.02417). The volume of blood transfused after entry into the study, duration of hospital stay, number of patients requiring urgent surgery, and the mortality rate were not statistically significantly different between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with peptic ulcer bleeding, heater probe thermocoagulation offers an advantage in achieving hemostasis than hemoclip. In difficult-to-approach bleeders, heater probe is a more suitable therapeutic modality.

A prospective, randomized trial of large- versus small-volume endoscopic injection of epinephrine for peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic injection of epinephrine in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer is considered highly effective, safe, inexpensive, and easy to use. However, bleeding recurs in 6% to 36% of patients. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal dose of epinephrine for endoscopic injection in the treatment of patients with bleeding peptic ulcer.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-six patients with active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels were randomized to receive small- (5-10 mL) or large-volume (13-20 mL) injections of a 1:10,000 solution of epinephrine.

RESULTS

The mean volume of epinephrine injected was 16.5 mL (95% CI [15.7, 17.3 mL]) in the large-volume group and 8.0 mL (95% CI [7.5, 8.4 mL]) in the small-volume group. Initial hemostasis was achieved in all patients studied. The number of episodes of recurrent bleeding was smaller in the large-volume group (12/78, 15.4%) compared with the small-volume group (24/78, 30.8%, p = 0.037). The volume of blood transfused after entry into the study, duration of hospital stay, numbers of patients requiring urgent surgery, and mortality rates were not statistically different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Injection of a large volume (>13 mL) of epinephrine can reduce the rate of recurrent bleeding in patients with high-risk peptic ulcer and is superior to injection of lesser volumes of epinephrine when used to achieve sustained hemostasis.

Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Severe upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains a common medical emergency. In the last two decades endoscopy has become the cornerstone of diagnosis, risk stratification and treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. Clinical assessment and endoscopic recognition of the stigmata of recent haemorrhage can allow the identification of patients with a high risk of rebleeding. Patients with active bleeding at the time of endoscopy and with non-bleeding visible vessels should receive endoscopic treatment. Studies comparing different treatment modalities are mostly single centre studies with relatively small groups of patients and therefore lack statistical power. Furthermore most of those trials were heterogeneous because of differences in the end points, differences in the risk factors for rebleeding and differences in the levels of experience of the endoscopists in both recognition and treatment of bleeding ulcers. Recently different treatment modalities have been studied. The injection of clot-inducing factors, a combination of injection and thermal therapies, repeat endoscopies and the use of mechanical devices such as clips and ligatures are promising new techniques. However, there are, at present, no convincing data to suggest that any one of these treatment modalities is superior when looking at the overall group of patients with bleeding peptic ulcer. Larger randomized controlled trials must focus on tailoring therapies and using the optimal therapy for different subgroups of patients.

Risk factors related to operative mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing emergency gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Emergency gastric resection for complicated peptic ulcer and gastric cancer is a major challenge for general surgeons. This study aimed to evaluate the results of emergency gastrectomy and to examine the factors that predict the operative outcome.

METHODS

A total of 82 consecutive patients who underwent emergency gastrectomy were studied. The following variables were assessed: pathology, mortality rate, morbidity, reasons for reoperation and factors related to the outcome.

RESULTS

There were 64 men and 18 women with a median age of 62 (range 30-90) years. The indications were bleeding and perforated gastric or duodenal ulcers in 45 and 20 patients respectively, and bleeding and perforated gastric tumours in seven and ten patients respectively. The overall mortality rate was 17 per cent (n = 14). The complication rate was 63 per cent and 11 patients (13 per cent) required reoperation. By multivariate analysis, age greater than 65 years and blood haemoglobin level less than 10 g/dl on admission were predictive of complications after emergency gastrectomy. Postoperative pulmonary and cardiac complications and hypotension on admission were independent risk factors associated with operative death.

CONCLUSION

Age more than 65 years, haemoglobin level less than 10 g/dl and hypotension on admission were associated with a poor outcome after emergency gastrectomy. The operative result was not affected by the underlying gastric pathology.

Acid suppression in peptic ulcer haemorrhage: a 'meta-analysis'

BACKGROUND

The use of acid-decreasing agents in the management of peptic ulcer haemorrhage continues to be controversial. Most clinical trials examining the efficacy of these drugs contain small numbers of patients, making it difficult to draw conclusions about their efficacy.

METHODS

We report a meta-analysis that examined the effect of these drugs in the management of peptic ulcer haemorrhage. Included studies were located using a search of the Medline database between 1980 and 1999. Studies were published in English, randomized and controlled by a placebo group. Mantel-Haenszel and blinded random models were used in conducting the statistical processing of this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one randomized placebo-controlled trials were included. The total number of patients was 3566 and the mean study size was 170 (range 20-1005). Seventeen of the papers assessed the efficacy of H2-antagonists, three assessed proton pump inhibitors and one was concerned with antacid therapy. The meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in re-bleeding rates (odds ratio, OR 0.727, 0.618-0.855, P < 0.001) and surgery rates (OR 0.707, 0.582-0.859, P < 0.001) when acid decreasing agents are used for acute peptic ulcer haemorrhage. Mortality rates appear to be unaffected (OR 1.140, 0.818-1.588, P=0. 49).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrates a significant beneficial effect of acid-decreasing agents in lowering re-bleeding and surgery rates, but demonstrated no effect upon mortality.

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding is a significant worldwide medical problem. Despite modern measures for diagnosis and treatment, morbidity and mortality rates associated with gastrointestinal bleeding remain largely unchanged. Aggressive medical resuscitation while initiating an evaluation to localize the site of blood loss remains the key to successful management of acute gastrointestinal bleeding. A multidisciplinary approach with early involvement of a gastroenterologist, surgeon, and radiologist can be extremely helpful in the management of these patients. With the logical and direct approach to the evaluation of patients with gastrointestinal bleeding described in this article, most episodes can be managed successfully.

Endoscopic hemoclip treatment for bleeding peptic ulcer

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic hemoclip in the t reatment of bleeding peptic ulcer.

METHODS: Totally, 40 patients with F1a and F1b hemorrhagic activity of peptic ulcers were enrolled in this uncontrolled prospective study for e ndoscopic hemoclip treatment. We used a newly developed rotatable clip-device for the application of hemoclip (MD850) to stop bleeding. Endoscopy was repeated if there was any sign or suspicion of rebleeding, and re-clipping was performed if necessary and feasible.

RESULTS: Initial hemostatic rate by clipping was 95%, and rebl eeding rate was only 8%. Ultimate hemostatic rates were 87%, 96%, and 93% in the F1a and F1b subgroups, and total cases, respectively. In patients with shock on admission, hemoclipping achieved ultimate hemostasis of 71% and 83% in F1a and F1b subgroups, respectively. Hemostasis reached 100% in patients without shock regardless of hemorrhagic activity being F1a or F1b. The average number of clips used per case was 3.0 (range 2-5). Spurting bleeders required more clips on av erage than did oozing bleeders (3.4 versus 2.8). We observed no obvious co mplications, no tissue injury, or impairment of ulcer healing related to hemocli pping.

CONCLUSION: Endoscopic hemoclip placement is an effective and safe method. With the improvement of the clip and application device, the procedu re has become easier and much more efficient. Endoscopic hemoclipping deserves further study in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers.

Is endoscopic paravascular injection of sclerosing agents reasonable in the control of GI bleeding?

BACKGROUND

The pharmacologic response and microvascular effects associated with the endoscopic injection of sclerosing agents around vessels (paravascular injection) to stop bleeding from the digestive tract remain to be clarified.

METHODS

Using in vivo microscopy, we directly visualized submucosal microvessels of the rat stomach and intestine. We studied differences among sclerosing agents in thrombus formation and vascular diameter change that occur through a pharmacologic response and/or local compression after topical application or paravascular injection of the agents.

RESULTS

Except for absolute ethanol, topical application of the agents did not cause constriction or thrombi in either arterioles or venules. Polidocanol topical application and paravascular injection significantly dilated arterioles. Injecting ethanolamine oleate near venules constricted them the longest and most effectively, but vasoconstriction in arterioles was transient. Injecting absolute ethanol formed long-lasting thrombi and caused vasoconstriction in venules, but arteriole thrombi persisted no more than 3 minutes. The vascular response to thrombin did not significantly differ from that to physiologic saline.

CONCLUSION

The paravascular injection of ethanolamine oleate, because of its long-lasting vasoconstriction, or of absolute ethanol, because of its thrombogenic effect, is a valid therapeutic approach to treating venous bleeding. The efficacy of paravascular injection of sclerosing agents for treating acute arterial bleeding, however, is not supported in this experimental model.

Bleeding peptic ulcer: An evolving role for surgical intervention

Early surgical intervention was previously advocated in patients > 60 years with bleeding peptic ulcer presenting with haemodynamic instability or ongoing transfusion requirements. It is, however, well recognized that emergency surgical intervention with its inherent risks must be reserved for highly selected patients in whom endoscopy initially fails to control exsanquinating haemorrhage or in whom life-threatening bleeding recurs. Therapeutic endoscopy for bleeding ulcer has led to a remarkable decline in rebleeding rates, the need for emergency surgery and mortality. Octogenarians are at risk, particularly when ulcer size exceeds 2 cm. Poor surgical candidates make up two-thirds of patients with major ulcer bleeding and operation is to be avoided if at all possible. Medical therapy with proton pump inhibitor and subsequent eradication of Helicobacter pylori following endoscopic treatment has been shown to be beneficial to outcomes. Should surgery be deemed necessary, it is likely that laparoscopic techniques to control bleeding, with or without the addition of an acid-reducing procedure, will find a role in haemodynamically stable patients undergoing operation on an early elective basis.