Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
1.
Dig Endosc ; 32(1): 96-105, 2020 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31365756

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Acute gastrointestinal bleeding carries poor outcomes unless prompt endoscopic hemostasis is achieved. Mortality in these patients remains significant. Hemospray is a novel intervention that creates a mechanical barrier over bleeding sites. We report the largest dataset of patient outcomes after treatment with Hemospray from an international multicenter registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective data (Jan 2016-May 2018) from 12 centers across Europe were collected. Immediate hemostasis was defined as endoscopic cessation of bleeding within 5 min after application of Hemospray. Rebleeding was defined as subsequent drop in hemoglobin, hematemesis, persistent melena with hemodynamic compromise post-therapy. RESULTS: Three hundred and fourteen cases were recruited worldwide (231 males, 83 females). Median pretreatment Blatchford score was 11 (IQR: 8-14) and median complete Rockall score (RS) was 7 (IQR: 6-8) for all patients. Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) was the most common pathology (167/314 = 53%) and Forrest Ib the most common bleed type in PUD (100/167 = 60%). 281 patients (89.5%) achieved immediate hemostasis after successful endoscopic therapy with Hemospray. Rebleeding occurred in 29 (10.3%) of the 281 patients who achieved immediate hemostasis. Seven-day and 30-day all-cause mortality were 11.5% (36/314) and 20.1% (63/314), respectively (lower than the predicted rates as per the RS). Similar hemostasis rates were noted in the Hemospray monotherapy (92.4%), combination therapy (88.7%) and rescue therapy (85.5%) groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data show high rates of immediate hemostasis overall and in all subgroups. Rebleeding and mortality rates were in keeping/lower than predicted rates.


Asunto(s)
Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/terapia , Hemostasis Endoscópica/métodos , Hemostáticos/administración & dosificación , Minerales/administración & dosificación , Enfermedad Aguda , Administración Tópica , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiología , Gastroscopía , Humanos , Internacionalidad , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Úlcera Péptica Hemorrágica/etiología , Úlcera Péptica Hemorrágica/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Recurrencia , Sistema de Registros , Medición de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento
2.
Ann Gastroenterol ; 37(4): 418-426, 2024.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38974074

RESUMEN

Background: Hemostatic powders are used as second-line treatment in acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (AGIB). Increasing evidence supports the use of TC-325 as monotherapy in specific scenarios. This prospective, multicenter study evaluated the performance of TC-325 as monotherapy for AGIB. Methods: Eighteen centers across Europe and USA contributed to a registry between 2016 and 2022. Adults with AGIB were eligible, unless TC-325 was part of combined hemostasis. The primary endpoint was immediate hemostasis. Secondary outcomes were rebleeding and mortality. Associations with risk factors were investigated (statistical significance at P≤0.05). Results: One hundred ninety patients were included (age 51-81 years, male: female 2:1), with peptic ulcer (n=48), upper GI malignancy (n=79), post-endoscopic treatment hemorrhage (n=37), and lower GI lesions (n=26). The primary outcome was recorded in 96.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.6-98.5) with rebleeding in 17.4% (95%CI 11.9-24.1); 9.9% (95%CI 5.8-15.6) died within 7 days, and 21.7% (95%CI 15.6-28.9) within 30 days. Regarding peptic ulcer, immediate hemostasis was achieved in 88% (95%CI 75-95), while 26% (95%CI 13-43) rebled. Higher ASA score was associated with mortality (OR 23.5, 95%CI 1.60-345; P=0.02). Immediate hemostasis was achieved in 100% of cases with malignancy and post-intervention bleeding, with rebleeding in 17% and 3.1%, respectively. Twenty-six patients received TC-325 for lower GI bleeding, and in all but one the primary outcome was achieved. Conclusions: TC-325 monotherapy is safe and effective, especially in malignancy or post-endoscopic intervention bleeding. In patients with peptic ulcer, it could be helpful when the primary treatment is unfeasible, as bridge to definite therapy.

3.
United European Gastroenterol J ; 8(10): 1155-1162, 2020 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32588788

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: With increasing advances in minimally invasive endoscopic therapies and endoscopic resection techniques for luminal disease, there is an increased risk of post-procedure bleeding. This can contribute to significant burden on patient's quality of life and health resources when reintervention is required. Hemospray (Cook Medical, North Carolina, USA) is a novel haemostatic powder licensed for gastrointestinal bleeding. The aim of this single-arm, prospective, non-randomised multicentre international study is to look at outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeds following elective endoscopic therapy treated with Hemospray to achieve haemostasis. METHODS: Data was prospectively collected on the use of Hemospray from 16 centres (January 2016-November 2019). Hemospray was used during the presence of progressive intraprocedural bleeding post-endoscopic therapy as a monotherapy, dual therapy with standard haemostatic techniques or rescue therapy once standard methods had failed. Haemostasis was defined as the cessation of bleeding within 5 min of the application of Hemospray. Re-bleeding was defined as a sustained drop in haemoglobin (>2 g/l), haematemesis or melaena with haemodynamic instability after the index endoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients were analysed with bleeding post-endoscopic therapy. The median Blatchford score at baseline was five (interquartile range 0-9). The median Rockall score was six (interquartile range 5-7). Immediate haemostasis following the application of Hemospray was achieved in 73/73 (100%) of patients. Two out of 57 (4%) had a re-bleed post-Hemospray, one was following oesophageal endoscopic mucosal resection and the other post-duodenal endoscopic mucosal resection. Both patients had a repeat endoscopy and therapy within 24 h. Re-bleeding data was missing for 16 patients, and mortality data was missing for 14 patients. There were no adverse events recorded in association with the use of Hemospray. CONCLUSION: Hemospray is safe and effective in achieving immediate haemostasis following uncontrolled and progressive intraprocedural blood loss post-endoscopic therapy, with a low re-bleed rate.


Asunto(s)
Pérdida de Sangre Quirúrgica/prevención & control , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/efectos adversos , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/terapia , Hemostasis Endoscópica/métodos , Hemostáticos/administración & dosificación , Minerales/administración & dosificación , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/efectos adversos , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/métodos , Mucosa Esofágica/irrigación sanguínea , Mucosa Esofágica/diagnóstico por imagen , Mucosa Esofágica/efectos de los fármacos , Mucosa Esofágica/cirugía , Femenino , Mucosa Gástrica/irrigación sanguínea , Mucosa Gástrica/diagnóstico por imagen , Mucosa Gástrica/efectos de los fármacos , Mucosa Gástrica/cirugía , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/etiología , Humanos , Cuidados Intraoperatorios/métodos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Recurrencia , Resultado del Tratamiento
4.
Frontline Gastroenterol ; 11(4): 259-271, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32587669

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic therapy for the management of patients with Barrett's oesophagus (BE) neoplasia has significantly developed in the past decade; however, significant variation in clinical practice exists. The aim of this project was to develop expert physician-lead quality indicators (QIs) for Barrett's endoscopic therapy. METHODS: The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was used to combine the best available scientific evidence with the collective judgement of experts to develop quality indicators for Barrett's endotherapy in four subgroups: pre-endoscopy, intraprocedure (resection and ablation) and postendoscopy. International experts, including gastroenterologists, surgeons, BE pathologist, clinical nurse specialist and patient representative, participated in a three-round process to develop 15 QIs that fulfilled the RAND/UCLA definition of appropriateness. RESULTS: 17 experts participated in round 1 and 20 in round 2. Of the 24 proposed QIs in round 1, 20 were ranked as appropriate (put through to round 2) and 4 as uncertain (discarded). At the end of round 2, a final list of 15 QIs were scored as appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: This UK national consensus project has successfully developed QIs for patients undergoing Barrett's endotherapy. These QIs can be used by service providers to ensure that all patients with BE neoplasia receive uniform and high-quality care.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA