Second-look endoscopy with thermal coagulation or injections for peptic ulcer bleeding: A meta-analysis

Background and Aims: In the management of peptic ulcer bleeding, the benefits of second‐look endoscopic treatment with thermal coagulation or injections in controlling recurrent bleeding is unsure. This study set out to compare efficacy of routine second‐look endoscopy with treatment using either t...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology Vol. 25; no. 1; pp. 8 - 13
Main Authors:	Tsoi, Kelvin KF, Chan, Heyson CH, Chiu, Philip WY, Pau, Carol YY, Lau, James YW, Sung, Joseph J Y
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Melbourne, Australia Blackwell Publishing Asia 01-01-2010 Wiley-Blackwell
Subjects:	Aged Biological and medical sciences Electrocoagulation endoscopic hemostasis Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal Evidence-Based Medicine Female Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen Hemostasis, Endoscopic Humans Injections Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Other diseases. Semiology Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - mortality Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - therapy Proton Pump Inhibitors - administration & dosage Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Risk Assessment second-look endoscopy Secondary Prevention Stomach. Duodenum. Small intestine. Colon. Rectum. Anus thermo-coagulation Treatment Outcome upper gastrointestinal bleeding injections second-look endoscopy Coagulation Peptic ulcer endoscopic hemostasis upper gastrointestinal bleeding Gastroduodenal Gastrointestinal bleeding Hemostasis Gastroenterology Digestive diseases Intestinal disease Endoscopy thermo-coagulation Gastric disease
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Background and Aims: In the management of peptic ulcer bleeding, the benefits of second‐look endoscopic treatment with thermal coagulation or injections in controlling recurrent bleeding is unsure. This study set out to compare efficacy of routine second‐look endoscopy with treatment using either thermal coagulation or injections versus single endoscopy by pooling data from published work. Methods: Full publications in the English‐language published work as well as s in major international conferences were searched over the past 10 years, and six trials fulfilling the search criteria were found. Outcome measurements included: (i) recurrent bleeding; (ii) requirement of surgical intervention; and (iii) mortality. We examined heterogeneity of trials and pooled the effects by meta‐analysis. The quality of studies was graded according to the prospective randomization, methods of patient allocation, the list of exclusion criteria, outcome definitions and the predefined salvage procedures for uncontrolled bleeding. Results: Among 998 patients recruited in these five randomized trials, 119 received routine second‐look endoscopy with thermal coagulation, and 374 received second‐look with endoscopic injection and 505 had single endoscopic therapy. Less recurrent bleeding was reported after thermal coagulation (4.2%) than single endoscopy (15.7%) (relative risk [RR] = 0.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.11–0.73), but no reduction was reported for the requirement of surgical intervention and all‐cause mortality. Injection therapy did not reduce re‐bleeding (17.6%) when compared to single endoscopy (20.8%; RR = 0.85; 95% CI = 0.63–1.14), requirement for surgery and mortality. Conclusion: Routine second‐look endoscopy with thermal coagulation, but not injection therapy, reduced recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding. There is no proven benefit in reducing surgical intervention and overall mortality.
Bibliography:	istex:ED08A6FCDDADE3C24673BE7A7308A50F6C19D27A ark:/67375/WNG-40XGGS86-2 ArticleID:JGH6129 ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 ObjectType-Review-3 content type line 23
ISSN:	0815-9319 1440-1746
DOI:	10.1111/j.1440-1746.2009.06129.x