Endoclips

Novel endoscopic multi-firing-clip applicator for endoscopic closure of large colonic perforations

BACKGROUND

Existing endoclip closure devices have difficulty in closing large colonic perforation. We developed a novel endoscopic multi-firing-clip applicator (EMFCA) system to address these limitations, and report on its initial evaluation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The functionality and efficacy of the prototype EMFCA equipped with re-openable clamp and preloaded with four clips were assessed using standardized 1.5 cm incisions created in ex-vivo porcine colonic segments. Endoscopic closure of the lacerations with two, three and four clips (n = five for each group) was followed by measurement of the leakage pressure of the three groups. Finite element analysis (FEA) was performed to validate the clip behavior and reliability during deployment.

RESULTS

All 15 perforations were sealed without leakage until fully distended. The leakage pressures of colonic lacerations sealed with two, three, and four clips were 26.1 ± 2.8 mmHg, 37.3 ± 7.3 mmHg and 42.3 ± 7.4 mmHg, respectively. The mean operation time to deploy one clip was 25.4 ± 5.2 seconds. On FEA, the deformation of the shape of the clip matched that of the intended design, with each clip sustaining a maximum stress of 648.5 MPa without any material failure during deployment.

CONCLUSIONS

These initial results confirm the efficacy of the EMFCA prototype system for endoscopic closure of colonic perforations.

Endoscopic management of peptic ulcer bleeding

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common medical emergency around the world and the major cause is peptic ulcer bleeding. Endoscopic treatment is fundamental for the management of peptic ulcer bleeding. Despite recent advances in endoscopic treatment, mortality from peptic ulcer bleeding has still remained high. This is because the disease often occurs in elderly patients with frequent comorbidities and are taking ulcerogenic medications. Therefore, the management of peptic ulcer bleeding is still a challenge for clinicians. This article reviews the various endoscopic methods available for management of peptic ulcer bleeding and the techniques in using these methods.

Covered self-expanding metal stents for the treatment of refractory esophageal nonvariceal bleeding: a case series

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of covered self-expanding metal stents for the treatment of nonvariceal esophageal bleeding in patients for whom routine therapies have failed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with esophageal bleeding in our hospital. Data on hemostatic effects and complications were collected from patients who underwent esophageal stenting.

RESULTS

In total, 4 patients were treated with five stents. In all 4 patients, the placement of esophageal stents immediately stopped the ongoing bleeding. One patient experienced recurrent bleeding 4 days after the removal of the first stent. Hemostasis was achieved after the insertion of a second stent. No stent-related complications occurred during or after stent implantation in the other 3 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The implantation of a covered self-expandable metal stent is a safe and effective alternative to treat acute, nonvariceal esophageal bleeding after routine therapies have failed.

Endoscopic treatment of ulcer bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding secondary to ulcer disease occurs commonly and results in significant patient morbidity and medical expense. After initial resuscitation, carefully performed endoscopy provides an accurate diagnosis of the source of the UGI hemorrhage and can reliably identify those high-risk subgroups that may benefit most from endoscopic hemostasis. Large-channel therapeutic endoscopes are recommended. Endoscopists should be very experienced in management of patients with UGI hemorrhage, including the use of various hemostatic devices. For patients with major stigmata of ulcer hemorrhage--active arterial bleeding, nonbleeding visible vessel, and adherent clot--combination therapy with epinephrine injection and either thermal coaptive coagulation (with multipolar or heater probe) or endoclips is recommended. High-dose intravenous proton-pump inhibitors are recommended as concomitant therapy with endoscopic hemostasis of major stigmata. Patients with minor stigmata or clean-based ulcers will not benefit from endoscopic therapy and should be triaged to less intensive care and be considered for early discharge. Effective endoscopic hemostasis of ulcer bleeding can significantly improve outcomes by reducing rebleeding, transfusion requirement, and need for surgery, as well as reduce cost of medical care.

Endoscopic clipping for acute nonvariceal upper-GI bleeding: a meta-analysis and critical appraisal of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Acute nonvariceal upper-GI bleeding (NVUGIB) is common, with a high rate of recurrent bleeding and substantial mortality rate. Endoscopic clipping has the theoretical advantage of minimizing tissue injury and is increasingly used.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate any potential benefits of clipping over other endoscopic techniques for NVUGIB.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trials (RCT) that compared clipping with other endoscopic hemostatic methods to treat NVUGIB were included. Summary effect size was estimated by odds ratio (OR) with a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs met inclusion criteria. For peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB), the hemoclip (n = 351 patients) was compared with the heat probe alone, thermal therapy plus injection, and injection alone in 2, 2, and 5 studies, respectively (n = 348 patients). The rate of the initial hemostasis was nonsignificantly increased in the control group compared with the hemoclip group (92% vs 96%, OR 0.58 [95% CI, 0.19-1.75]). The rebleeding rate was nonsignificantly decreased with hemoclips compared with controls (8.5% vs 15.5%, OR 0.56 [95% CI, 0.30-1.05]). Emergency surgery and the mortality rate were not significantly different between the hemoclip and controls. Subgroup analysis conducted in studies that compared hemoclips with injection alone show similar results. Two studies and one study reported outcomes of interest for Dieulafoy's lesions and Mallory-Weiss syndrome, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs that compared clipping alone with other endoscopic hemostatic techniques for NVUGIB were limited. Current evidence suggests that the hemoclip is not superior to other endoscopic modalities in terms of initial hemostasis, rebleeding rate, emergency surgery, and the mortality rate for treatment of PUB.