Endoscopic injection therapy for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage--is it too good to be true?

Randomized trial of adrenaline injection and laser photocoagulation in the control of haemorrhage from peptic ulcer

Forty-nine consecutive patients with bleeding from peptic ulcers that would conventionally have required surgical intervention were randomized to receive endoscopic injection of adrenaline (1:10,000) or laser photocoagulation. Patients were included only if they had a visible vessel at endoscopic examination. Five patients proceeded directly to surgery and, of the remaining 44, 21 received laser photocoagulation and 23 injection therapy. Haemostasis was achieved initially in all patients. There was one rebleed in the group of patients who received laser treatment and four in those treated by injection. All five patients underwent further endoscopic haemostasis according to the initial randomization. Haemostasis was again achieved in all cases, but the patient who had undergone laser treatment suffered recurrent haemorrhage after a further 48 h and subsequently died. Overall, one of the 21 patients receiving laser treatment died compared with none of the 23 injected with adrenaline. Injection of adrenaline achieves similar results to laser photocoagulation for bleeding peptic ulcer.

Endoscopic injection therapy for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bledding: Effective and safe

Twenty-nine patients underwent endoscopic injection therapy (EIT) for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal (UGI) bleeding lesions when intensive conservative medical therapy was considered ineffective. Permanent hemostasis was achieved in 23 cases (79.3%) after one session of injection therapy and 27 cases (93.1%) after two sessions. No major complications occurred following EIT and no mortality related to the bleeding nor to the injection therapy occurred. Two patients had to have surgery after the EIT failed to control the bleeding. This study confirms what has been previously reported that injection therapy is a highly effective and safe procedure which could be used in non-variceal UGI bleeding when medical therapy fails.

Endoscopic injection for the arrest of peptic ulcer hemorrhage: final results of a prospective, randomized comparative trial

A prospective, randomized comparative study was performed to compare the hemostatic effect of endoscopic injection with normal saline, 3% NaCl solution, 50% glucose/water solution, and pure alcohol during a period of 2 years. Only patients with peptic ulcers and active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels were considered. Each group comprised 50 patients. The four groups were matched at random for age, sex, location of bleeders, stigmata of recent hemorrhage, shock, hemoglobin, and concomitant illness. No statistically significant difference was observed among patients injected with normal saline, 3% NaCl solution, 50% glucose/water solution, or pure alcohol in achieving initial hemostasis (82%, 90%, 86%, and 92%, respectively); rebleeding rates (7.3%, 24.4%, 14%, and 10.9%, respectively); ultimate hemostasis (78%, 68%, 78%, and 84%, respectively); number of emergency operations (5, 7, 4, and 3, respectively); and average number of days in the hospital (6.7, 6.1, 6.1, and 5.8, respectively). A tendency toward a lower blood transfusion requirement was observed in the pure alcohol group, but this tendency failed to achieve statistical significance. One patient had a perforated ulcer develop 5 days after injection of 3 ml 50% glucose/water. Otherwise, no major complication was observed. We suggest that endoscopic injection with any of the above solutions can be used as the first-line modality for the arrest of peptic ulcer hemorrhage.

Heat probe thermocoagulation and pure alcohol injection in massive peptic ulcer haemorrhage: a prospective, randomised controlled trial

We conducted a prospective randomised controlled trial of 137 patients with massive peptic ulcer haemorrhage over a period of 12 months to compare the haemostatic effects of endoscopic heat probe thermocoagulation and pure alcohol injection. Seventy eight patients (56.9%) were in shock at the time of randomisation to the trial. The age, sex, number of patients in shock, haemoglobin value at the time of entry to the trial, number of patients with severe medical illness, location of bleeders, and stigmata of recent haemorrhage were comparable among the heat probe, pure alcohol, and control groups. The initial haemostatic effect of the heat probe was better than that of the pure alcohol injection (44 of 45 v 31 of 46, p = 0.0004). The ultimate haemostasis achieved by the heat probe group (41 of 45) was better than that of the pure alcohol group (31 of 46, p = 0.012) and of controls (24 of 46, p = 0.0001). The duration of hospital stay was shorter for patients in the heat probe group than for the control group (6.2 days v 13.8 days, p less than 0.05). The incidence of emergency surgery was less for the heat probe than the control group (three of 45 v 12 of 46, p = 0.027). The mortality rate was less in the heat probe than in the control group (one of 45 v seven of 46, p = 0.031). We suggest that heat probe thermocoagulation should be the first treatment of choice for arrest of massive peptic ulcer haemorrhage.

Endoscopic diagnosis and treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Considerable progress has been made in endoscopic hemostasis. Several methods are available. Sclerotherapy of esophageal varices is the procedure of choice for the control of active variceal hemorrhage and for the prevention of recurrent bleeding. For endoscopic treatment of nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding, the nonerosive contact probes (heater probes and BICAP) and injection sclerotherapy are preferred. Several hemostatic modalities should be available and applied depending on the anatomic location and type of bleeding lesions. Advanced endoscopic hemostatic techniques seem to be decreasing the mortality rates in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Endoscopic haemostasis for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage

Endoscopic haemostasis can be effective in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage, and should be regarded as potential front-line treatment. Diverse methods are available, and although no single technique has become firmly established, current evidence favours thermal coagulation and injection therapy.

"Gastrointestinal endoscopy: time for change"

In the thirty years since the flexible fibreoptic gastroscope was introduced, gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy has undergone a spectacular evolution. The explosion in technology and an ever-increasing demand for procedures has left us poorly equipped to provide the quantity and quality of endoscopy required now and into the next century. With increasing sophistication, the risks of GI endoscopy have become appreciable, particularly in therapeutic procedures. These risks can only be contained by adequate training and experience. The present system of higher training in gastroenterology serves endoscopy badly: there is no structure for developing a career interest in GI endoscopy. This is a waste of limited financial and human resources. GI endoscopy should be identified as an area of gastroenterology requiring additional training. New teaching tools such as computer simulation may provide opportunities to learn endoscopy without patient involvement. Research in GI endoscopy, which has been neglected, should be actively encouraged.