Controlled trial of Nd-YAG laser photocoagulation in bleeding peptic ulcers

Placebo comparator group selection and use in surgical trials: the ASPIRE project including expert workshop

BACKGROUND

The use of placebo comparisons for randomised trials assessing the efficacy of surgical interventions is increasingly being considered. However, a placebo control is a complex type of comparison group in the surgical setting and, although powerful, presents many challenges.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a summary of knowledge on placebo controls in surgical trials and to summarise any recommendations for designers, evaluators and funders of placebo-controlled surgical trials.

DESIGN

To carry out a state-of-the-art workshop and produce a corresponding report involving key stakeholders throughout.

SETTING

A workshop to discuss and summarise the existing knowledge and to develop the new guidelines.

RESULTS

To assess what a placebo control entails and to assess the understanding of this tool in the context of surgery is considered, along with when placebo controls in surgery are acceptable (and when they are desirable). We have considered ethics arguments and regulatory requirements, how a placebo control should be designed, how to identify and mitigate risk for participants in these trials, and how such trials should be carried out and interpreted. The use of placebo controls is justified in randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions provided that there is a strong scientific and ethics rationale. Surgical placebos might be most appropriate when there is poor evidence for the efficacy of the procedure and a justified concern that results of a trial would be associated with a high risk of bias, particularly because of the placebo effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of placebo controls is justified in randomised controlled trials of surgical interventions provided that there is a strong scientific and ethics rationale. Feasibility work is recommended to optimise the design and implementation of randomised controlled trials. An outline for best practice was produced in the form of the Applying Surgical Placebo in Randomised Evaluations (ASPIRE) guidelines for those considering the use of a placebo control in a surgical randomised controlled trial.

LIMITATIONS

Although the workshop participants involved international members, the majority of participants were from the UK. Therefore, although every attempt was made to make the recommendations applicable to all health systems, the guidelines may, unconsciously, be particularly applicable to clinical practice in the UK NHS.

FUTURE WORK

Future work should evaluate the use of the ASPIRE guidelines in making decisions about the use of a placebo-controlled surgical trial. In addition, further work is required on the appropriate nomenclature to adopt in this space.

FUNDING

Funded by the Medical Research Council UK and the National Institute for Health Research as part of the Medical Research Council-National Institute for Health Research Methodology Research programme.

Doppler endoscopic probe as a guide to risk stratification and definitive hemostasis of peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

For more than 4 decades endoscopists have relied on ulcer stigmata for risk stratification and as a guide to hemostasis. None used arterial blood flow underneath stigmata to predict outcomes. For patients with severe peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB), we used a Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP) for (1) detection of blood flow underlying stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH), (2) quantitating rates of residual arterial blood flow under SRH after visually directed standard endoscopic treatment, and (3) comparing risks of rebleeding and actual 30-day rebleed rates for spurting arterial bleeding (Forrest [F] IA) and oozing bleeding (F IB).

METHODS

Prospective cohort study of 163 consecutive patients with severe PUB and different SRH.

RESULTS

All blood flow detected by the DEP was arterial. Detection rates were 87.4% in major SRH-spurting arterial bleeding (F IA), non-bleeding visible vessel (F IIA), clot (F IIB)-and were significantly lower at 42.3% (P < .0001) for an intermediate group of oozing bleeding (F IB) or flat spot (F IIC). For spurting bleeding (F IA) versus oozing (F IB), baseline DEP arterial flow was 100% versus 46.7%, residual blood flow detected after endoscopic hemostasis was 35.7% versus 0%, and 30-day rebleed rates were 28.6% versus 0% (all P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

(1) For major SRH versus oozing or spot, the arterial blood flow detection rate by the DEP was significantly higher, indicating a higher rebleed risk. (2) Before and after endoscopic treatment, spurting (F IA) PUB had significantly higher rates of blood flow detection than oozing (F IB) PUB and a significantly higher 30-day rebleed rate. (3) The DEP is recommended as a new endoscopic guide with SRH to improve risk stratification and potentially definitive hemostasis for PUB.

Clinical Risk Characteristics of Upper Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Severity: A Multivariable Risk Analysis

Background

Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage (UGIH) is one of the common clinical manifestations encountered in most emergency departments. Patient characteristics indicating UGIH severity in developing countries may be different from those in developed countries. The present study was designed to explore clinical prognostic indicators for UGIH severity.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a university affiliated tertiary hospital in Kamphaeng Phet, Thailand. Medical folders of patients with UGIH were reviewed. Patients were grouped into 3 severity levels, based on criteria proposed by The American College of Surgeon. Pre-defined prognostic indicators were compared. The prognostic indicators for UGIH severity were analyzed by a multivariable continuation ratio ordinal logistic regression and presented with odds ratios.

Results

From 1,043 eligible medical folders, 984 (94.3%) complete folders were used in analysis. There were 241, 631 and 112 patients in the mild, moderate and severe UGIH groups. Six independent indicators of severe UGIH were, hemoglobin < 100 g/dL (OR = 13.82, 95% CI = 9.40 to 20.33, P < 0.001), systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg (OR = 11.01, 95% CI = 7.41 to 16.36, P < 0.001), presence of hepatic failure (OR = 5.50, 95% CI = 1.14 to26.64, P = 0.037), presence of cirrhosis (OR = 2.03, 95% CI = 1.32 to 3.11, P = 0.001), blood urea nitrogen ≥ 35 mmol/L (OR = 1.73, 95% CI = 1.25 to 2.40, P = 0.001), and pulse rate ≥ 100 per minute (OR = 1.72, 95% CI = 1.21 to 2.45, P = 0.003).

Conclusions

Pulse rate ≥ 100 per minute, systolic blood pressure < 100 mmHg, hemoglobin < 10 g/dL, blood urea nitrogen ≥ 35 mmol/L, presence of cirrhosis and presence of hepatic failure are prognostic indicators for an increase in UGIH severity levels. They are potentially useful in UGIH risk stratification.

When and why do ulcers bleed and what can be done about it?

This article reviews the pathophysiology and management of bleeding peptic ulcer. Ulcers bleed when and because they erode into a blood vessel, and bleed massively when they erode into a medium- or large-sized artery. Focal pathology at the bleeding point (such as arteritis, aneurysmal dilatation or recanalized thrombus) contributes to the timing and clinical pattern of ulcer bleeding. Big bleeds are probably associated with erosion into big arteries. The identification of a visible vessel in the floor of an ulcer that has recently bled is predictive of further bleeding, while the absence of a visible vessel or stigmata of recent haemorrhage is strongly predictive that further bleeding will not occur. Unfortunately, no conventional method of managing gastrointestinal bleeding from ulcers has been convincingly shown to be better than placebo in controlled clinical trials. The value of transfusion and surgery has never been tested in controlled trials, while many small studies of drug therapy, especially of H2-receptor blocking agents, and a few small studies of early surgery afford generally negative or equivocal results. There is some evidence that new physical methods such as lasers or bipolar probes applied at endoscopy are superior to placebo though negative trials have also been reported. Studies randomizing larger numbers of patients with bleeding ulcers are required if therapeutic benefit of any aspect of management is to be demonstrated or refuted.

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: standard and new treatment

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding remains a challenging problem with a significant morbidity and mortality. In recent years endoscopic techniques have evolved, resulting in improved primary hemostasis and a reduction in the risk of rebleeding. Combination endoscopic therapy followed by high-dose proton pump inhibitor shows improved outcomes. Innovative endoscopic therapies hold promise but are as yet unproved. An aging population with significant medical comorbidities has a major influence on the overall outcome from upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

Endoscopic therapy versus medical therapy for bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The optimal management of bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot is controversial and may include endoscopic therapy or medical therapy.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, BIOSIS, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library to identify all randomized controlled trials comparing the 2 interventions. Outcomes evaluated in the meta-analysis were recurrent bleeding, need for surgical intervention, length of hospitalization, transfusion requirement, and mortality.

RESULTS

Six studies were identified that included 240 patients from the United States, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Spain. Patients in the endoscopic therapy group underwent endoscopic clot removal and treatment of the underlying lesion with thermal energy, electrocoagulation, and/or injection of sclerosants. Rebleeding occurred in 5 of 61 (8.2%) patients in the endoscopic therapy group, compared with 21 of 85 (24.7%) in the medical therapy group (P = .01), for a pooled relative risk of 0.35 (95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.83; number needed to treat, 6.3). There was no difference between endoscopic therapy and medical therapy in length of hospital stay (mean, 6.8 vs 5.6 days; P = .27), transfusion requirement (mean, 3.0 vs 2.8 units of packed red blood cells; P = .75), or mortality (9.8% vs 7%; P = .54). Patients in the endoscopic therapy group were less likely to undergo surgery (pooled relative risk, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.98; number needed to treat, 13.3); however, this outcome became nonsignificant when only peer-reviewed studies were considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic therapy is superior to medical therapy for preventing recurrent hemorrhage in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers and adherent clots. The interventions are comparable with respect to the need for surgical intervention, length of hospital stay, transfusion requirement, and mortality.

Acute endoscopic intervention in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is one of the commonest emergencies encountered by general physicians. Once haemodynamic stability has been achieved, therapeutic endoscopy is vital in control and arrest of bleeding. Various methods are available and the evidence is reviewed as to the most optimal approach. Clinical parameters including timing of endoscopy, risk stratification, and predictors of failure will also be discussed together with a summary of recommendations based on current available evidence.

A randomized trial comparing heater probe plus thrombin with heater probe plus placebo for bleeding peptic ulcer

BACKGROUND & AIMS

This multicenter, double-blind, controlled trial compared the efficacy of combined endoscopic hemostatic treatment using the heater probe plus thrombin injection with that of the heater probe plus placebo injection as treatment for peptic ulcers with active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels. Efficacy was defined in terms of primary hemostasis, prevention of rebleeding, and need for urgent surgery.

METHODS

Two hundred forty-seven patients presenting with major peptic ulcer bleeding were randomized to heater probe plus thrombin or to heater probe plus placebo. The groups were well matched for all risk categories including age, endoscopic stigmata, shock, and severity of comorbid diseases. Endoscopic therapy was applied using the heater probe followed by injection of thrombin or placebo.

RESULTS

Successful primary hemostasis was achieved in 97% of patients. Rebleeding developed in 19 (15%) of thrombin plus heater probe patients and 17 (15%) of placebo plus heater probe patients. Emergency surgery was necessary in 16 and 13 patients, respectively. Eight patients in the thrombin group had adverse events compared with 4 in the placebo group. Eight (6%) of thrombin plus heater probe patients and 14 (12%) of placebo plus heater probe patients died (P = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of thrombin and the heater probe does not confer an additional benefit over heater probe and placebo as endoscopic treatment for bleeding peptic ulcer. Our trial does not support the use of this combination of hemostatic therapy.

Recent advances in the endoscopic diagnosis and therapy of upper gastrointestinal, small intestinal, and colonic bleeding

Endoscopy has become the first and primary diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the management of patients with severe gastrointestinal bleeding. Panendoscopy, push enteroscopy, and colonoscopy provide the diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic elements to improve patient outcomes and to reduce morbidity and mortality from severe GI hemorrhage. Recent improvements in endoscopic hemostatic techniques and in imaging modalities using wireless capsule endoscopy suggest that diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy will be even more important in determining patient outcomes in the future.

Randomized trial of medical or endoscopic therapy to prevent recurrent ulcer hemorrhage in patients with adherent clots

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Treatment of high-risk patients with nonbleeding adherent clots on ulcers is controversial. In a previous randomized trial, there was no benefit to endoscopic therapies compared with medical therapy for prevention of ulcer rebleeding. Our purpose was to test the hypothesis that patients treated with combination endoscopic therapy would have significantly lower rebleeding rates than those treated with medical therapy.

METHODS

In this randomized, controlled trial, 32 high-risk patients with severe ulcer hemorrhage and nonbleeding adherent clots resistant to target irrigation were randomized to medical therapy or to combination endoscopic therapy (with epinephrine injection, shaving down the clot with cold guillotining, and bipolar coagulation on the underlying stigmata). Physicians blinded to the endoscopic therapy managed all patients.

RESULTS

Patients were similar at study entry, except for older age in the medical group and lower platelet count in the endoscopic group. By hospital discharge, significantly more medically treated patients (6/17; 35.3%) than endoscopically treated patients (0/15; 0%) rebled (P = 0.011). There were no complications of endoscopic treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Combination endoscopic therapy of nonbleeding adherent clots significantly reduced early ulcer rebleeding rates in high-risk patients compared with medical therapy alone. This endoscopic treatment was safe.

Recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer associated with adherent clot: a randomized study comparing endoscopic treatment with medical therapy

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic therapy reduces the recurrence of bleeding from actively bleeding peptic ulcers and those with visible vessels. However, the use of endoscopic therapy for ulcers with adherent clots remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine whether removal of clot from an ulcer and endoscopic therapy reduces the frequency of recurrent bleeding.

METHODS

Patients with acute upper GI bleeding from peptic ulcers with adherent clots and no active bleeding were enrolled in a multicenter study. At each center patients were stratified for age, use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and ulcer location, and were randomized to endoscopic or medical management. Endoscopic therapy consisted of injection of the base of the adherent clot with a solution of epinephrine and mechanical removal of the clot. The base of the ulcer and any stigmata of bleeding were then coagulated until cavitation and adequate coagulation were obtained. Patients in both groups received standard medical therapy for peptic ulcer. Patients were evaluated for recurrence of bleeding for 1 month.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients were enrolled. Rates of recurrent bleeding were 34.3% (12/35) in the medical treatment arm versus 4.8% (1/21) in the endoscopic treatment arm (p < 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with GI bleeding caused by gastric or duodenal ulcers with an adherent clot found on endoscopy, endoscopic therapy with injection of the base of the clot, clot removal, and heat probe coagulation significantly reduces the rate of recurrent bleeding compared with medical therapy alone.

Mechanical endoscopic methods of haemostasis for bleeding peptic ulcers: a review

Re-bleeding following endoscopic therapy for gastrointestinal bleeding remains common probably because injection and thermal methods for treating bleeding are of limited efficacy, especially in the presence of a large bleeding artery. This chapter reviews mechanical methods of endoscopic haemostasis. The design of clips, which can be delivered through flexible endoscopes, is reviewed with experimental and clinical data of their efficacy. The need for improvements in clip design is stressed. Experimental studies and preliminary clinical data where available on a variety of other mechanical methods of haemostasis are presented, including band ligation, endoloops, sewing machines, stapling machines, ulcer clamps, corkscrews, balloon tamponade and ferromagnetic tamponade. New, less invasive, surgical methods which might have a place in ulcer haemostasis, including transgastric endoluminal surgery and flexible endoscopic ulcer excision with wound closure, are discussed. Mechanical methods offer the best prospect for improvements in security of endoscopic haemostasis for bleeding peptic ulcer. More development is required if the results are to improve.

Thermal probes alone or with epinephrine for the endoscopic haemostasis of ulcer haemorrhage

In the last two decades, significant progress has been made in the diagnosis, prognostication and treatment of patients with severe peptic ulcer haemorrhage. Patients can now be risk stratified by clinical presentation and endoscopic stigmata of ulcer haemorrhage. The purposes of this chapter are to discuss: (1) the techniques of thermal probe with or without epinephrine for haemostasis of ulcers with major stigmata of haemorrhage and (2) the outcomes of treatment of patients with ulcer haemorrhage treated with endoscopic thermal probes or other therapies, medical therapy and/or surgery. Compared to medical therapy alone, patients with major stigmata actively bleeding ulcers, non-bleeding visible vessels and non-bleeding adherent clots have been shown to benefit from endoscopic haemostasis with bipolar probe, heater probe, lasers or epinephrine injection. Outcomes showing significant improvement include blood transfusions, emergency surgery rates and length of hospital stay. Meta-analyses have also reported improvements in mortality for endoscopic compared with medical therapy of patients with severe ulcer haemorrhage and major stigmata. Patients with minor stigmata of ulcer haemorrhage (such as flat spots) or no stigmata (clean-based ulcers) do not benefit from endoscopic haemostasis. Thermal probes have the advantages of good coaptive coagulation, target irrigation, portability and relative inexpense. Recently, patients with active arterial bleeding, non-bleeding adherent clots or non-bleeding visible vessels have been reported to have better results with combination epinephrine injection and thermal probe compared to monotherapy alone (such as injection, bipolar or heater probe). In addition, repeat endoscopic combination therapy has been reported to be as effective but safer than emergency surgery for management of recurrent ulcer haemorrhage.

Stigmata of hemorrhage in bleeding peptic ulcers: an interobserver agreement study among international experts

BACKGROUND

Stigmata of hemorrhage predict rebleeding and outcome of patients with bleeding peptic ulcers. There are variabilities in reported incidences of stigmata and their respective rebleeding risks. We sought to study the interobserver agreement among experts.

METHODS

Between June 1994 and July 1994, 100 consecutive patients with bleeding peptic ulcers underwent videoendoscopy within 24 hours of their admissions. An edited videotape of these ulcers was compiled and sent to an international panel of 14 experts. They independently rated these ulcers exclusively into one of the six categories: spurting, oozing, nonbleeding visible vessel, adherent clot, flat pigmented spot, or clean based. Agreement between any two experts was expressed by a kappa estimate (kappa). Agreements over individual stigmata and a composite kappa estimate (kappa(w)) signifying overall agreement were also computed.

RESULTS

Out of the possible 91 pairwise kappa estimates among 14 experts, 35 (38.5%) were less than or equal to 0.40, indicating poor agreement. None of the kappa estimates was greater than 0.75. Composite kappa estimates for individual stigmata were as follows: spurting kappa = 0.664, oozing kappa = 0.420, nonbleeding visible vessel kappa = 0.342, adherent clot kappa = 0.426, flat pigmented spot kappa = 0.393, and clean-based ulcer kappa = 0.371. The weighted kappa estimate was 0.426.

CONCLUSION

Agreement between experts was poor in more than a third of occasions. Although the overall interobserver agreement was fair (0.4 < kappa < 0.75), agreements for nonbleeding visible vessels, flat pigmented spots, and clean-based ulcers were poor.

The effect of endoscopic injection therapy on the clinical outcome of patients with benign peptic ulcer bleeding

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to investigate the effect of endoscopic injection therapy on the clinical outcome of patients with benign peptic ulcer bleeding.

METHODS

In this study 1203 patients admitted with peptic ulcer bleeding over a 5-year period (January 1987 to April 1991) before endoscopic therapy and 1028 patients admitted with peptic ulcer bleeding after introduction of endoscopic therapy (May 1991 to March 1996) were assessed. Endoscopic therapy was performed in all patients with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessels during emergency endoscopy with injection of adrenaline, 1:10,000 in 0.9% saline.

RESULTS

The introduction of injection therapy was associated with a reduction in transfusion requirements (from 5.1 +/- 2.6 to 3.4 +/- 1.8 units), hospitalization days (from 10.8 +/- 6.5 to 7.8 +/- 5.1 days), surgical interventions (from 50.6% to 23.6%), and mortality (from 12.9% to 4.6%) in patients with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessels (P < 0.05) but remained unchanged in the rest. Patients with gastric ulcer had a more pronounced reduction in emergency surgical haemostasis and mortality than patients with duodenal ulcer. There were no deaths or procedure-related complications.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic injection therapy with adrenaline/saline is a simple, low-cost, and safe method that improves the clinical outcome and reduces the mortality in patients with peptic ulcer bleeding.

Epinephrine or epinephrine plus alcohol for injection of bleeding ulcers: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Rebleeding following epinephrine injection of bleeding peptic ulcers occurs in 10% to 20% of all cases. The addition of a sclerosant has the theoretical advantage of inducing vessel thrombosis and permanent hemostasis.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare injections with epinephrine alone or epinephrine plus absolute alcohol in patients with actively bleeding ulcers at endoscopy. Repeat endoscopy was performed 24 hours later; treatment was repeated in the presence of endoscopic signs of rebleeding. Surgery was performed when arterial bleeding could not be controlled endoscopically, clinical rebleeding with hematemesis or shock occurred, or the transfusion total exceeded 8 units.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty patients were enrolled (epinephrine alone, 81; epinephrine and absolute alcohol, 79). They were matched in age, sex, location of ulcers, hemoglobin on admission, shock, and severity of bleeding. Initial hemostasis was comparable: 79 of 81 with epinephrine alone (97.5%) versus 75 of 79 with epinephrine and absolute alcohol (94.9%). No difference was observed between the two with respect to either rebleeding (9 vs 6), need for emergency operation (12 vs 9), transfusion requirement (median, three units vs two units), hospital stay (median, 5 days vs 4 days), mortality (4 vs 7) and ulcer healing at 4 weeks (50 vs 46).

CONCLUSIONS

The additional injection of absolute alcohol after endoscopic epinephrine injection confers no advantage.

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

Of patients with peptic ulceration who are actively bleeding at endoscopy, 80 per cent will continue to bleed or rebleed in hospital; 50 per cent of those who have a non-bleeding visible vessel will also rebleed. Endoscopic injection treatment stops active bleeding and prevents further haemorrhage in most of these patients. The mechanism of action may include tamponade, vasoconstriction, sclerosis, tissue dehydration and thrombogenesis; substances injected include adrenaline, sclerosants, alcohol, thrombin, or a combination of agents. Although trials often define the need for surgery as an injection treatment failure, an alternative view is that endoscopic control may facilitate safe, early, elective surgery. A successful outcome may require a combination of endoscopic and operative approaches.

A cost-effective approach to the patient with peptic ulcer bleeding

The average hospital cost to manage patients hospitalized at Virginia Mason Hospital who bleed from a peptic ulcer is approximately $5000 per patient in our series of 30 patients. Because there are 150,000 admissions per year in the United States for peptic ulcer bleeding, the total hospital cost can be estimated to be $750 million. The actual cost may be higher because our 30 patients had minimal complications and were discharged on average in less than 4 days. The majority of hospital cost is incurred by the intensive care unit or the hospital nursing floor. There is a close to linear relation between the length of stay and the total hospital cost. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is a major advance in the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. It can provide significant cost savings by identifying some patients with bleeding peptic ulcers who have clean bases on endoscopy who are then eligible for prompt discharge from the hospital. In addition, endoscopic thermal therapy (with multipolar electrocautery or heater probe) and injection therapy cost less than $50 in incremental cost and can reduce further bleeding by 43%, reduce the need for urgent surgery by 63%, and reduce the mortality rate by 60%. Some patients still require urgent surgical intervention, which is substantially more costly than endoscopic hemostasis but is highly effective. Preliminary studies show promise in predicting further bleeding, with clinical scoring systems such as the Baylor Bleeding Score and with the use of Doppler ultrasonography. Better prediction of further bleeding should guide the choice of durable hemostasis early in the hospitalization. Additional studies should clarify the role of NSAID avoidance and H. pylori eradication in the long-term prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding.

Prevention of recurrent bleeding from gastric ulcer with a nonbleeding visible vessel by endoscopic injection of absolute ethanol: a prospective, controlled trial

We performed a prospective, randomized trial to assess the efficacy of endoscopic injection therapy with absolute ethanol in preventing recurrent bleeding in patients with nonbleeding visible vessels in gastric ulcers. During the period of 1990 to 1993, 62 patients who bled were found to have gastric ulcers with nonbleeding visible vessels; all of them were enrolled for this trial. The 62 patients were randomly divided into two groups, which were comparable at entry. In group I (33 patients), we performed endoscopic injection therapy with absolute ethanol. In group II (29 patients), we sprayed the ulcers with 0.1% epinephrine and thrombin. Endoscopic injection therapy with ethanol was performed at the second endoscopy in the patients in both groups who had recurrent bleeding. Among the 33 patients in group I, 4 patients (12.1%) rebled after the initial ethanol injection therapy, whereas 10 of 29 patients (34.5%) rebled in the control group (p < .05). No patients in group I required surgical intervention, and ultimate hemostasis was achieved in all 33 group I patients (100%), indicating that endoscopic ethanol injection therapy achieves ultimate hemostasis and prevents recurrent bleeding in patients with gastric ulcers and nonbleeding visible vessels.

Age-related mortality in patients treated endoscopically for bleeding peptic ulcer

Before the widespread use of endoscopic therapy, mortality from peptic ulcer hemorrhage was highest in elderly patients, and many deaths in this group were a consequence of postoperative complications. Endoscopic intervention greatly reduces the need for an emergency surgical operation, and consequently increasing age may no longer be a risk factor for death from bleeding ulcer. To examine this hypothesis, the outcome of 326 patients undergoing endoscopic therapy for bleeding peptic ulcer was related to age. One hundred two patients were less than 60 years of age (group I), 116 were 61 to 74 years of age (group II), and 108 were older than 75 years (group III). More group III patients were women (p < .0001) and were receiving nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p < .0001). Associated concomitant diseases were significantly more common in group II and group III patients (p < .001). Forty-nine (45%) group III patients bled from gastric ulcers. More of group II patients were receiving anticoagulant drugs (p < .005). A previous history of peptic ulcer was most common in group I (p < .005), and duodenal ulcer was usually the cause of bleeding in this group. The three groups were well matched in terms of endoscopic stigmata (active bleeding and nonbleeding vessel), admission hemoglobin concentration, the presence of shock, and total transfusion requirements. Endoscopic therapy (injection or heater probe) was possible in 95% of all patients. The need for surgical intervention tended to be lowest in group I (11%, 19%, and 18%), whereas hospital mortality (3%, 6%, and 5%) was very similar. In this large group of unselected patients with major peptic ulcer bleeding, age did not significantly influence response to endoscopic therapy or hospital mortality.

Prospective validation of the Baylor bleeding score for predicting the likelihood of rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis of peptic ulcers

Endoscopic therapy is effective in securing hemostasis for bleeding ulcers, but bleeding recurs in 10% to 30% of patients. Prospective identification of patients at increased risk for rebleeding is requisite to reducing rebleeding rates. We previously developed a three-component scoring system that identifies patients at increased risk for rebleeding. In the present study, we prospectively validated our scoring system. Forty-seven men ranging in age from 23 to 95 years in whom endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers was successful were studied. Patients with pre-endoscopy scores greater than 5 or postendoscopy scores greater than 10 were stratified as high-risk, and patients with pre-endoscopy scores of 5 or less and post-endoscopy scores of 10 or less as low-risk. Twenty-six patients were categorized as high-risk and 19 as low-risk. All patients were followed until discharged from the hospital. The rebleeding rate for high-risk patients was 31% (8 of 26), compared with 0 for low-risk patients (p < .05). We conclude that our scoring system accurately predicts patients at increased risk for rebleeding after successful endoscopic therapy of bleeding ulcers.

Applications of lasers in gastroenterology

In this article the clinical uses of lasers in gastroenterology are reviewed. The endoscopic delivery of light for therapeutic as well as diagnostic purposes is discussed. Current research directions in the field are also indicated where appropriate.

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.

A controlled study of ranitidine for the prevention of recurrent hemorrhage from duodenal ulcer

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhage is the most common complication of duodenal ulcer disease, but there is little information about the effectiveness and safety of long-term maintenance therapy with histamine H2-receptor blockers.

METHODS

We conducted a double-blind study in patients with endoscopically documented hemorrhage from duodenal ulcers. Patients were randomly assigned to maintenance therapy with ranitidine (150 mg at night) or placebo and were followed for up to three years. Endoscopy was performed at base line (to document that the ulcers had healed), at exit from the study, and when a patient had persistent ulcer symptoms unrelieved by antacids or had gastrointestinal bleeding. Symptomatic relapses without bleeding were treated with ranitidine; if the ulcer healed within eight weeks, the patient resumed taking the assigned study medication.

RESULTS

The two groups were similar at entry, which usually occurred about three months after the index hemorrhage. After a mean follow-up of 61 weeks, 3 of the 32 patients treated with ranitidine had recurrent hemorrhage, as compared with 12 of the 33 given placebo (P < 0.05). Half the episodes of recurrent bleeding were asymptomatic. One patient in the ranitidine group withdrew from the study because of asymptomatic thrombocytopenia during the first month.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients whose duodenal ulcers heal after severe hemorrhage, long-term maintenance therapy with ranitidine is safe and reduces the risk of recurrent bleeding.

Nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

The approach to nonvariceal UGI bleeding has been reviewed. Therapeutic endoscopy has been shown to be superior to medical therapy in patients with an actively bleeding ulcer and those at high risk of rebleeding. Of endoscopic therapies available to the GI endoscopist, multipolar electrocoagulation, heater probe, and injection therapy are comparable in efficacy and safety.

Lasers in medicine--a review

Laser systems permit very high energy radiation of a single wavelength to be focused on a tiny spot, and have found application in many areas of engineering. They are also currently used in many branches of medicine. The fields reviewed here are ophthalmology, gynaecology, dermatology, otolaryngology, gastroenterology and physiotherapy. Lasers which are in wide use for medical applications include argon, YAG and carbon dioxide types. In many areas, lasers have been found to be more effective than conventional treatment methods with advantages including less blood loss, more accurate removal of unwanted tissue, shorter operating time and less postoperative pain. It is expected that the next decade will see the laser as an everyday tool in many more medical applications.

Endoscopic management of nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding

Endoscopic management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding has been expanded from a purely diagnostic role to a therapeutic role in many patients. In addition to controlling active bleeding, it is an option in a patient who is clinically at a high risk of rebleeding, or in patients who have peptic ulcers with visible vessels or stigmata indicating high risk. Several methods have been studied, and currently the most useful include thermal cautery with the heater probe or bipolar electrocoagulation, and injection using epinephrine and/or sclerosants. Endoscopic hemostasis can effect permanent control of bleeding in many patients, but should be considered complementary to conventional surgical control in other patients, where temporary control to stabilize the patient is a desired end.

Gastrointestinal endoscopy: an accurate and safe primary diagnostic and therapeutic modality

OBJECTIVE

To review the place of gastrointestinal endoscopy in the management of upper and lower gastrointestinal disorders.

DATA SOURCES

We reviewed articles on endoscopy reported over two decades. A Medline search complementing our experience and knowledge of the literature was used to identify the articles.

STUDY SELECTION

Papers were selected which focused on indications, comparison with radiology, including clinical outcome measures, and complications. One hundred papers, including those from radiology journals, were reviewed.

DATA EXTRACTION

Results of studies are referenced as appropriate.

DATA SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopy allows direct visualisation of the mucosa of the upper gastrointestinal tract, colon and terminal ileum. Subtleties of colour change, vascular pattern abnormalities and scarring are easily detected at endoscopy and are often of diagnostic importance. Endoscopy also provides access for tissue biopsy and allows a wide variety of therapeutic interventions. Traditionally barium studies have been the first step in the evaluation of many gastrointestinal symptoms and still retain cost advantages over endoscopy. However, endoscopy is frequently more sensitive and specific than barium studies. Costs associated with incorrect diagnoses may undermine the apparent cost benefits of barium studies. Advances in endoscopic design have allowed wider therapeutic options and increased safety. Gastrointestinal endoscopy should now be the first line of investigation where diagnostic precision is required or where therapeutic intervention is likely.

Laser treatment of esophageal and gastric lesions

Lasers have contributed in a significant way to the evolution of therapeutic endoscopy. Their ability to coagulate and ablate tissue precisely has been applied to a wide variety of lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Meanwhile, the number of nonlaser devices has also continued to expand, making it necessary to frequently reassess their respective roles. Available evidence suggests that current laser equipment is best suited for the palliative ablation of tumors, especially in the esophagus. On the other hand, the hemostatic properties of the laser are still indicated in the control of vascular malformations but have been largely displaced in the management of peptic ulcer disease by other, more convenient and less expensive methods. With a new generation of laser equipment likely to be introduced soon, these comparisons will undoubtedly need to continue for some time.

Endoscopic interventional management of bleeding duodenal and gastric ulcers

Bleeding duodenal and gastric ulcers continue to be a common and serious problem. Definition of the precise appearance and location of the ulcer by endoscopy gives important information about the source of bleeding and additional information about the risk of rebleeding and the indications for surgery. Several endoscopic hemostatic methods are available. The nonerosive contact probes (heater and BICAP) are preferred. Injection therapy with vasoconstrictors or sclerosing agents can also be recommended as a safe, efficacious, and economical means of treatment. Several hemostatic modalities should be available for use depending on the anatomic location and type of bleeding ulcers. The collaboration of skilled interventional endoscopists with their traditional surgical colleagues offers the patient with bleeding peptic ulcer disease the optimum probability of a successful outcome, with minimum treatment-associated morbidity.

Endoscopic therapy for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a meta-analysis

Endoscopic hemostatic therapy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding is gaining widespread acceptance despite often conflicting results of randomized controlled trials. To examine the effect of endoscopic therapy in acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage, a meta-analysis was performed using a computerized search of the English-language literature and a bibliographic review. The methodology, population, intervention, and outcomes of each relevant trial were evaluated by duplicate independent review. Thirty randomized controlled trials evaluating hemostatic endoscopic treatment were identified. Endoscopic therapy significantly reduced rates of further bleeding (odds ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.45), surgery (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.45), and mortality (odds ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.76). When analyzed separately, thermal-contact devices (monopolar and bipolar electrocoagulation and heater probe), laser treatment, and injection therapy all significantly decreased further bleeding and surgery rates. The reductions in mortality were comparable for all three forms of therapy, but the decrease reached statistical significance only for laser therapy. Further examination of subgroups indicated that endoscopic treatment decreased rates of further bleeding, surgery, and mortality in patients with high-risk endoscopic features of active bleeding or nonbleeding visible vessels. Rebleeding was not reduced by endoscopic therapy in patients with ulcers containing flat pigmented spots or adherent clots. Endoscopic hemostatic therapy provides a clinically important reduction in morbidity and mortality in patients with acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.

Laser therapy: more smoke than light?

Lasers have been used endoscopically in the management of gastrointestinal (GI) diseases for 15 years. Although the initial use was for therapy of GI bleeding, other more portable less expensive modalities have supplanted the laser in this area. Currently, its primary application is for therapy of GI neoplasms. If lasers are to be used with increased frequency, it will require that its unique property--selective absorption--be more of a focus than simply using it as a thermal device. Pigmented vascular lesions such as angioma or watermelon stomach are ideally suited for laser therapy using a wavelength preferentially absorbed by hemoglobin. The future use of lasers for gastrointestinal diseases--both diagnostically and therapeutically--will depend on taking advantage of this unique characteristic of laser light.

Gastrointestinal tract bleeding. Common dilemmas in management

An accurate diagnosis is the prerequisite in defining gastrointestinal tract bleeding at any level. Flexible endoscopy is the mainstay of diagnosis, and, particularly in the colon, it may be used as a therapeutic tool in conjunction with fulguration. Radionuclide scanning and arteriography have a place in diagnosis when endoscopy fails. The management of variceal bleeding is, in the main, injection sclerotherapy, operation being reserved for patients who rebleed after injection sclerotherapy or in whom a long-term course of sclerotherapy fails. The management of patients with colonic bleeding depends on the accurate pinpointing of bleeding before operation followed by limited excision of the located bleeding site. Some sources of lower gastrointestinal-tract bleeding can be treated by therapeutic endoscopy.

Randomized comparison of endoscopic microwave coagulation and endoscopic sclerosis in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers

We conducted a prospective randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic microwave coagulation in comparison to endoscopic sclerosis in the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. Over 15 months 127 ulcer-bleeding patients with an actively bleeding vessel (N = 21), a non-bleeding vessel (N = 53), oozing hemorrhage (N = 25), or an adherent clot (N = 28) in the ulcer base were randomly assigned during endoscopy to receive treatment with endoscopic sclerosis or with microwave coagulation. There were no significant differences in effectiveness between endoscopic sclerosis and microwave coagulation in any of the assessed parameters: the percentage of patients with major recurrent hemorrhage (5 vs. 12), the percentage who needed emergency surgery (5 vs. 9), the mean (+/- SD) transfusion requirements (0.32 +/- 0.89 vs. 0.78 +/- 1.65), the mean number of hospital days (10.3 +/- 3.5 vs. 10.7 +/- 4.1), and the number of deaths due to bleeding (0 vs. 2) were similar in both groups. No case of perforation occurred in either group. The data suggest that microwave coagulation is as effective and safe as endoscopic sclerosis in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers.