Endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
40
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2016
Editora
SPRINGER
Indexadores
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Autor de Grupo de pesquisa
Editores
Coordenadores
Organizadores
Citação
SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, v.30, n.6, p.2155-2168, 2016
Resumo
Background Peptic ulcer represents the most common cause of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Endoscopic therapy can reduce the risks of rebleeding, continued bleeding, need for surgery, and mortality. The objective of this review is to compare the different modalities of endoscopic therapy. Methods Studies were identified by searching electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, LILACS, DARE, and CINAHL. We selected randomized clinical trials that assessed contemporary endoscopic hemostatic techniques. The outcomes evaluated were: initial hemostasis, rebleeding rate, need for surgery, and mortality. The possibility of publication bias was evaluated by funnel plots. An additional analysis was made, including only the higher-quality trials. Results Twenty-eight trials involving 2988 patients were evaluated. Injection therapy alone was inferior to injection therapy with hemoclip and with thermal coagulation when evaluating rebleeding and the need for emergency surgery. Hemoclip was superior to injection therapy in terms of rebleeding; there were no statistically significant differences between hemoclip alone and hemoclip with injection therapy. There was considerable heterogeneity in the comparisons between hemoclip and thermal coagulation. There were no statistically significant differences between thermal coagulation and injection therapy, though their combination was superior, in terms of rebleeding, to thermal coagulation alone. Conclusions Injection therapy should not be used alone. Hemoclip is superior to injection therapy, and combining hemoclip with an injectate does not improve hemostatic efficacy above hemoclip alone. Thermal coagulation has similar efficacy as injection therapy; combining these appears to be superior to thermal coagulation alone. Therefore, we recommend the application of hemoclips or the combined use of injection therapy with thermal coagulation for the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding.
Palavras-chave
Non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding, Gastrointestinal hemorrhage, Peptic ulcer, Endoscopy, Endoscopic hemostasis
Referências
- Adler DG, 2004, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V60, P497
- Arima S, 2010, J GASTROENTEROL, V45, P501, DOI 10.1007/s00535-009-0186-8
- Barkun A, 2003, ANN INTERN MED, V139, P843
- Barkun AN, 2009, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V69, P786, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.031
- Bianco MA, 2004, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V60, P910, DOI 10.1016/S0016-5107(04)02232-1
- Blatchford O, 1997, BRIT MED J, V315, P510
- Bleau BL, 2002, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V56, P1, DOI 10.1067/mge.2002.125365
- Blocksom JM, 2004, SURG ENDOSC, V18, P186, DOI 10.1007/s00464-003-8155-4
- Calvet X, 2004, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V126, P441, DOI 10.1053/j.gastro.2003.11.006
- Cappell MS, 2008, MED CLIN N AM, V92, P491, DOI 10.1016/j.mcna.2008.01.005
- Chou YC, 2003, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V57, P324, DOI 10.1067/mge.2003.103
- CHOUDARI CP, 1992, GUT, V33, P1159, DOI 10.1136/gut.33.9.1159
- Chung IK, 1999, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V49, P13, DOI 10.1016/S0016-5107(99)70439-6
- CHUNG SCS, 1991, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V100, P33
- Chung SSC, 1997, BRIT MED J, V314, P1307
- Cipolletta L, 2001, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V53, P147, DOI 10.1067/mge.2001.111386
- Gevers AM, 2002, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V55, P466, DOI 10.1067/mge.2002.112613
- Giday SA, 2011, ENDOSCOPY, V43, P296, DOI 10.1055/s-0030-1256125
- Gralnek IM, 1997, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V46, P105, DOI 10.1016/S0016-5107(97)70056-7
- Gralnek M, 1998, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V93, P2047
- Grgov S, 2013, VOJNOSANIT PREGL, V70, P824, DOI 10.2298/VSP110411009G
- Higgins JPT, 2003, BRIT MED J, V327, P557, DOI 10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557
- Jadad AR, 1996, CONTROL CLIN TRIALS, V17, P1, DOI 10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4
- Jubicic L, 2004, HEPATO-GASTROENTEROL, V51, P408
- Kovacs Thomas O G, 2008, Curr Gastroenterol Rep, V10, P535, DOI 10.1007/s11894-008-0099-3
- Laine L, 2002, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V55, P6, DOI 10.1067/mge.2002.120390
- LAINE L, 1990, GASTROENTEROLOGY, V99, P1303
- Laine L, 2009, CLIN GASTROENTEROL H, V7, P33, DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2008.08.016
- Liberati A, 2009, PLOS MED, V6, DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100
- LIN HJ, 1988, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V83, P283
- Lin HJ, 2003, DIGEST LIVER DIS, V35, P898, DOI 10.1016/j.dld.2003.07.006
- Lin HJ, 1999, GUT, V44, P715
- Lin HJ, 2002, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V97, P2250
- LIN HJ, 1990, GUT, V31, P753, DOI 10.1136/gut.31.7.753
- Ljubicic N, 2012, WORLD J GASTROENTERO, V18, P2219, DOI 10.3748/wjg.v18.i18.2219
- Llach J, 1996, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V43, P117, DOI 10.1016/S0016-5107(06)80111-2
- Lo CC, 2006, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V63, P767, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2005.11.048
- Lu YD, 2014, GASTROENTEROL CLIN N, V43, P677, DOI 10.1016/j.gtc.2014.08.003
- Moher D, 2009, COMMUNICATION
- [Anonymous], REVMAN COMP PROGR VE
- PANES J, 1991, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V37, P611, DOI 10.1016/S0016-5107(91)70865-1
- Pedroto I, 2012, ENDOSCOPY, V44, P721, DOI 10.1055/s-0032-1310064
- ROCKALL TA, 1995, BRIT MED J, V311, P222
- Shimoda R, 2003, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V98, P2198, DOI 10.1016/S0002-9270(03)00698-1
- Simoens M, 2001, BEST PRACT RES CL GA, V15, P121, DOI 10.1053/bega.2000.0159
- Skok P, 2004, HEPATO-GASTROENTEROL, V51, P165
- Smith LA, 2014, J CLIN GASTROENTEROL, V48, P89
- SOLLANO JD, 1991, GASTROENTEROL JPN, V26, P83
- Sung J, 2006, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V63, P774, DOI 10.1016/j.gie.2005.12.026
- Sung JJY, 2011, ENDOSCOPY, V43, P291, DOI 10.1055/s-0030-1256311
- Taghavi SA, 2009, CAN J GASTROENTEROL, V23, P699
- Vergara M, 2014, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD005584.pub3
- WARING JP, 1991, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V37, P295
- Wilcox CM, 1997, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V92, P231
- YAVORSKI RT, 1995, AM J GASTROENTEROL, V90, P568