Over-the-scope clip as a rescue treatment for massive bleeding due to Dieulafoy lesion at the colorectal anastomosis: A case report.

RATIONALE: The bleeding of Dieulafoy lesion predominantly involves the proximal stomach and leads to severe gastrointestinal bleeding. However, these lesions have also been reported in the whole gastrointestinal tract. Bleeding of Dieulafoy lesions at the anastomosis was seldomly reported and was very easy to be ignored clinically. PATIENT CONCERNS: We describe a 72-year-old woman with a past history of surgery for rectal carcinoma hospitalized with chief complaint of massive rectal bleeding. No gross bleeding lesion was found during the first emergency colonoscopy. Despite multiple blood transfusions, her hemoglobin rapidly dropped to 5.8 g/dL. DIAGNOSIS: She was diagnosed with Dieulafoy lesion at the colorectal anastomosis during the second emergency colonoscopy. INTERVENTIONS: Primary hemostasis was achieved by endoscopic hemostatic clipping. However, she experienced another large volume hematochezia 3 days later, and then received another endoscopic hemostatic clipping. She was improved and discharged. However, this patient underwent hematochezia again 1 month later. Bleeding was arrested successfully after the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) was placed during the fourth emergency colonoscopy. OUTCOMES: This patient underwent 4 endoscopic examinations and treatments during 2 hospitalizations. The lesion was overlooked during the first emergency colonoscopy. The second and third endoscopes revealed Dieulafoy lesion at the colorectal anastomosis and performed endoscopic hemostatic clippings, but delayed rebleeding occurred. The bleeding was stopped after the fourth emergency colonoscopy using OTSC. There was no further rebleeding during hospitalization and after 2-year of follow-up. LESSONS: As far as we know, there is no reported case of lower gastrointestinal bleeding caused by Dieulafoy lesion at the colorectal anastomosis, OTSC is a safe and effective rescue treatment for Dieulafoy lesions.

Life-threatening Gastrointestinal Bleeding from a Dieulafoy's Lesion in the Duodenum: A Case Report.

Dieulafoy's lesion is a rare cause of gastrointestinal bleeding, accounting for approximately 1-2% of all cases of gastrointestinal bleeding. Dieulafoy's lesion usually occurs in the lesser curvature of the stomach within six centimeters of the gastroesophageal junction. On the other hand, extragastric Dieulafoy's lesions are uncommon. Diagnosing an extragastric Dieulafoy's lesion by endoscopy can be challenging because of its small size and obscure location. The key elements for an accurate diagnosis include heightened awareness and a careful early endoscopic evaluation following a bleeding episode. Various endoscopic hemostatic techniques can be used for treatment. This paper presents a case of successful hemostasis using argon plasma coagulation for a life-threatening duodenal Dieulafoy's lesion.

High risk stigmata and treatment strategy for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding: a nationwide study in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The rebleeding risks and outcomes of endoscopic treatment for acute lower gastrointestinal bleeding (ALGIB) may differ depending on the bleeding location, type, and etiology of stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) but have yet to be fully investigated. We aimed to identify high risk endoscopic SRH and to propose an optimal endoscopic treatment strategy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 2699 ALGIB patients with SRH at 49 hospitals (CODE BLUE-J Study), of whom 88.6 % received endoscopic treatment. RESULTS: 30-day rebleeding rates of untreated SRH significantly differed among locations (left colon 15.5 % vs. right colon 28.6 %) and etiologies (diverticular bleeding 27.5 % vs. others [e. g. ulcerative lesions or angioectasia] 8.9 %), but not among bleeding types. Endoscopic treatment reduced the overall rebleeding rate (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.69; 95 %CI 0.49-0.98), and the treatment effect was significant in right-colon SRH (AOR 0.46; 95 %CI 0.29-0.72) but not in left-colon SRH. The effect was observed in both active and nonactive types, but was not statistically significant. Moreover, the effect was significant for diverticular bleeding (AOR 0.60; 95 %CI 0.41-0.88) but not for other diseases. When focusing on treatment type, the effectiveness was not significantly different between clipping and other modalities for most SRH, whereas ligation was significantly more effective than clipping in right-colon diverticular bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: A population-level endoscopy dataset allowed us to identify high risk endoscopic SRH and propose a simple endoscopic treatment strategy for ALGIB. Unlike upper gastrointestinal bleeding, the rebleeding risks for ALGIB depend on colonic location, bleeding etiology, and treatment modality.

Medical therapy has similar hemostatic efficacy with endoscopic treatment for PUB patients with adherent clot (FIIb ulcers).

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no clear consensus on whether medical treatment or endoscopic treatment should be used for peptic ulcer bleeding patients with adherent clot. The aim of this study is to investigate the hemostatic effects of medical treatment, single endoscopic treatment, and combination endoscopic treatment for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB) patients with adherent clot. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed PUB patients with adherent clot who underwent endoscopic examination or treatment in our center from March 2014 to January 2023 and received intravenous administration of proton pump inhibitors. Patients were divided into medical treatment (MT) group, single endoscopic treatment (ST) group, and combined endoscopic treatment (CT) group. Subsequently, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was performed to calculate the rebleeding rate. RESULTS: A total of 605 eligible patients were included in this study. After IPTW, the rebleeding rate in the MT group on days 3, 7, 14, and 30 were 13.3 (7.3), 14.2 (7.8), 14.5 (7.9), and 14.5 (7.9), respectively; the rebleeding rates in the ST group were 17.4 (5.1), 20.8 (6.1), 20.8 (6.1), and 20.8 (6.1), respectively; the rebleeding rates in the CT group were 0.4 (0.9), 1.7 (3.3), 2.3 (4.5), and 2.3 (4.5), respectively. Although the rebleeding rate in the medical treatment group was higher, there was no significant difference among the three groups on days 3, 7, 14, and 30 (P = 0.132, 0.442, 0.552, and 0.552). CONCLUSIONS: Medical therapy has similar hemostatic efficacy with endoscopic treatment for PUB patients with adherent clot (FIIb ulcers). However, for patients with more risk factors and access to well-equipped endoscopy centers, endoscopic treatment may be considered. The choice of treatment approach should be based on the individual conditions of the patient, as well as other factors such as medical resources available.

A Novel Hemostatic Peptide Solution for Common Acute Gastrointestinal Bleeding Diseases: First Case Series Study on the Treatment Results of Endoscopic Hemostasis by Nonexpert Endoscopists.

INTRODUCTION: We investigated the hemostatic effect and safety of a hemostatic peptide solution for the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding requiring emergency endoscopy. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the patient backgrounds, hemostatic results, and procedural safety in patients who were treated with a hemostatic peptide solution for hemostasis during emergency endoscopies for gastrointestinal bleeding. All hemostatic procedures were performed by nonexpert physicians with less than 10 years of endoscopic experience. All of the cases were treated at a single institution over the months from January 2022 to January 2023. RESULTS: Twenty-six consecutive patients (17 males and 9 females) with a median age of 74 (45-95) years were included. Their conditions requiring emergency endoscopy were melena in 8 patients, hematochezia in 2, hematemesis in 8, anemia in 6, and bleeding during esophagogastroduodenoscopy in 2. The sites of bleeding were the esophagus in 3 patients, the stomach in 17, the duodenum in 3, the small intestine in 2, and the colon in 1. Hemostasis was obtained with another hemostasis device used in conjunction with the hemostatic peptide solution in 13 cases and with the hemostatic peptide solution alone in 13 cases. The hemostasis success rate was 100%, with no complications. Rebleeding occurred within 1 week in 4 cases. CONCLUSION: Hemostasis with the hemostatic peptide solution was safe and provided a temporary high hemostatic effect in emergency gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Patient Outcomes of Definitive Diverticular Hemorrhage After Colonoscopic, Medical, Surgical, or Embolization Treatment.

BACKGROUND: There are few reports of clinical outcomes or the natural history of definitive diverticular hemorrhage (DDH). AIMS: To describe 1-year clinical outcomes of patients with documented DDH treated with colonoscopic hemostasis, angioembolization, surgery, or medical treatment. METHODS: DDH was diagnosed when active bleeding or other stigmata of hemorrhage were found in a colonic diverticulum during urgent colonoscopy or extravasation on angiography or red blood cell (RBC) scanning. This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of DDH patients from two referral centers between 1993 and 2022. Outcomes were compared for the four treatment groups. The Kaplan-Meier analysis was for time-to-first diverticular rebleed. RESULTS: 162 patients with DDH were stratified based on their final treatment before discharge-104 colonoscopic hemostasis, 24 medical treatment alone, 19 colon surgery, and 15 angioembolization. There were no differences in baseline characteristics, except for a higher Glasgow-Blatchford score in the angioembolization group vs. the colonoscopic group. Post-treatment, the colonoscopic hemostasis group had the lowest rate of RBC transfusions and fewer hospital and ICU days compared to surgical and embolization groups. The medical group had significantly higher rates of rebleeding and reintervention. The surgical group had the highest postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Medically treated DDH patients had significantly higher 1-year rebleed and reintervention rates than the three other treatments. Those with colonoscopic hemostasis had significantly better clinical outcomes during the index hospitalization. Surgery and embolization are recommended as salvage therapies in case of failure of colonoscopic and medical treatments.

EUS-guided coil injection therapy in the management of gastric varices: the first U.S. multicenter experience (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Despite the significant morbidity associated with gastric variceal bleeding, there is a paucity of high-quality data regarding optimal management. EUS-guided coil injection therapy (EUS-COIL) has recently emerged as a promising endoscopic modality for the treatment of gastric varices (GV), particularly compared with traditional direct endoscopic glue injection. Although there are data on the feasibility and safety of EUS-COIL in the management of GV, these have been limited to select centers with particular expertise. The aim of this study was to report the first U.S. multicenter experience of EUS-COIL for the management of GV. METHODS: This retrospective analysis included patients with bleeding GV or GV at risk of bleeding who underwent EUS-COIL at 10 U.S. tertiary care centers between 2018 and 2022. Baseline patient and procedure-related information was obtained. EUS-COIL entailed the injection of .018 inch or .035 inch hemostatic coils using a 22-gauge or 19-gauge FNA needle. Primary outcomes were technical success (defined as successful deployment of coil into varix under EUS guidance with diminution of Doppler flow), clinical success (defined as cessation of bleeding if present and/or absence of bleeding at 30 days' postintervention), and intraprocedural and postprocedural adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were included (mean age 60.4 ± 12.8 years; 41.5% female). The most common etiology of GV was cirrhosis (71.7%), with alcohol being the most common cause (43.4%). Overall, 71.7% presented with acute GV bleeding requiring intensive care unit stay and/or blood transfusion. The most common GV encountered were isolated GV type 1 (60.4%). A mean of 3.8 ± 3 coils were injected with a total mean length of 44.7 ± 46.1 cm. Adjunctive glue or absorbable gelatin sponge was injected in 82% of patients. Technical success and clinical success were 100% and 88.7%, respectively. Intraprocedural adverse events (pulmonary embolism and GV bleeding from FNA needle access) occurred in 2 patients (1.8%), and postprocedural adverse events occurred in 5 (4.7%), of which 3 were mild. Recurrent bleeding was observed in 15 patients (14.1%) at a mean of 32 days. Eighty percent of patients with recurrent bleeding were successfully re-treated with repeat EUS-COIL. No significant differences were observed in outcomes between high-volume (>15 cases) and low-volume (<7 cases) centers. CONCLUSIONS: This U.S. multicenter experience on EUS-COIL for GV confirms high technical and clinical success with low adverse events. No significant differences were seen between high- and low-volume centers. Repeat EUS-COIL seems to be an effective rescue option for patients with recurrent bleeding GV. Further prospective studies should compare this modality versus other interventions commonly used for GV.

Hemostatic Spray TC-325 (Hemospray®) and Unexpected Esophageal Entrapment of Gastroscope With Airway Management Considerations: A Case Report.

Bleeding from the upper gastrointestinal tract is responsible for approximately 2% of all hospital admissions annually, with an up to 17% mortality rate. Therapeutic endoscopic interventions are often indicated for establishing hemostasis. These interventions include but are not limited to thermal coagulation with cautery, mechanical methods using band ligation or hemostatic clips, and hemostatic spray. Anesthesia providers are frequently involved in providing sedation for those endoscopic procedures. In 2018, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved a hemostatic spray, Hemospray® TC-325 (Cook Medical, Winston- Salem, NC, USA) for controlling nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The inorganic, mineral-based powder forms a mechanical tamponade by absorbing water and attracting clotting factors to the bleeding site. Adverse events associated with using the product are reported as rare but have included perforation and difficulty in removing the gastroscope. This case presents unexpected entrapment of the gastroscope in a patient's esophagus after the bleeding site was treated with Hemospray. Potential difficulties with airway management strategies are discussed.

New Alternative? Self-Assembling Peptide in Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a common and potentially fatal condition with all-cause mortality ranging from 3 to 10%. Endoscopic therapy traditionally involves mechanical, thermal, and injection therapies. Recently, self-assembling peptide (SAP) has become increasingly available in the United States. When applied to an affected area, this gel forms an extracellular matrix-type structure allowing for hemostasis. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of this modality in GIB. METHODS: We performed a comprehensive literature search of major databases from inception to Nov 2022. The primary outcomes assessed were the success of hemostasis, rebleeding rates, and adverse events. The secondary outcomes assessed were successful hemostasis with monotherapy with SAP and combined therapy, which may include mechanical, injection, and thermal therapies. Pooled estimates were calculated using random-effects models with a 95% confidence interval (CI). RESULTS: The analysis included 7 studies with 427 patients. 34% of the patients were on anticoagulation or antiplatelet agents. SAP application was technically successful in all patients. The calculated pooled rate of successful hemostasis was 93.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 84.7-97.0, I2 = 73.6), and rebleeding rates were 8.9% (95% CI 5.3-14.4, I2 = 55.8). The pooled rates of hemostasis with SAP monotherapy and combined therapy were similar. No adverse events were noted related to SAP. CONCLUSION: SAP appears to be a safe and effective treatment modality for patients with GIB. This modality provides an added advantage of improved visualization over the novel spray-based modalities. Further, prospective, or randomized controlled trials are needed to validate our findings.

Hemostatic Powder vs Standard Endoscopic Treatment for Gastrointestinal Tumor Bleeding: A Multicenter Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Current guidelines vary as to their recommendations addressing the role of hemostatic powders when managing patients with malignant gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding because these are based on very-low- to low-quality evidence, in large part due to a paucity of randomized trial data. METHODS: This was a patient- and outcome assessor-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Patients presenting with active bleeding from an upper or lower GI lesion suspected to be malignant at index endoscopy between June 2019 and January 2022 were randomly allocated to receive either TC-325 alone or standard endoscopic treatment (SET). The primary outcome was 30-day rebleeding, and secondary objectives included immediate hemostasis and other clinically relevant endpoints. RESULTS: Overall, 106 patients made up the study population (55 TC-325 and 51 SET, after 1 exclusion in the TC-325 group and 5 in the SET group). Baseline characteristics and endoscopic findings did not differ between the groups. Thirty-day rebleeding was significantly lower in the TC-325 (2.1% TC-325 vs 21.3% SET; odds ratio, 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.80; P = .003). Immediate hemostasis rates were 100% in the TC-325 group vs 68.6% in the SET group (odds ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.93-2.29; P < .001). Other secondary outcomes did not differ between the 2 groups. Independent predictors of 6-month survival included the Charlson comorbidity index (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32; P = .007) and receiving an additional nonendoscopic hemostatic or oncologic treatment during 30 days after the index endoscopy (hazard ratio, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.43; P < .001) after adjustment for functional status, Glasgow-Blatchford score, and an upper GI source of bleeding. CONCLUSION: The TC-325 hemostatic powder results in greater immediate hemostasis rates followed by lower 30-day rebleeding rates when compared to contemporary SET. (ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03855904).

Comparison of Over-the-Scope Clips to Standard Endoscopic Treatment as the Initial Treatment in Patients With Bleeding From a Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Cause : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Current endoscopic methods in the control of acute nonvariceal bleeding have a small but clinically significant failure rate. The role of over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) as the first treatment has not been defined. OBJECTIVE: To compare OTSCs with standard endoscopic hemostatic treatments in the control of bleeding from nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal causes. DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03216395). SETTING: University teaching hospitals in Hong Kong, China, and Australia. PATIENTS: 190 adult patients with active bleeding or a nonbleeding visible vessel from a nonvariceal cause on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. INTERVENTION: Standard hemostatic treatment (n = 97) or OTSC (n = 93). MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was 30-day probability of further bleeds. Other outcomes included failure to control bleeding after assigned endoscopic treatment, recurrent bleeding after initial hemostasis, further intervention, blood transfusion, and hospitalization. RESULTS: The 30-day probability of further bleeding in the standard treatment and OTSC groups was 14.6% (14 of 97) and 3.2% (3 of 93), respectively (risk difference, 11.4 percentage points [95% CI, 3.3 to 20.0 percentage points]; P = 0.006). Failure to control bleeding after assigned endoscopic treatment in the standard treatment and OTSC groups was 6 versus 1 (risk difference, 5.1 percentage points [CI, 0.7 to 11.8 percentage points]), respectively, and 30-day recurrent bleeding was 8 versus 2 (risk difference, 6.6 percentage points [CI, -0.3 to 14.4 percentage points]), respectively. The need for further interventions was 8 versus 2, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 4 versus 2, respectively. In a post hoc analysis with a composite end point of failure to successfully apply assigned treatment and further bleeds, the event rate was 15 of 97 (15.6%) and 6 of 93 (6.5%) in the standard and OTSC groups, respectively (risk difference, 9.1 percentage points [CI, 0.004 to 18.3 percentage points]). LIMITATION: Clinicians were not blinded to treatment and the option of crossover treatment. CONCLUSION: Over-the-scope clips, as an initial treatment, may be better than standard treatment in reducing the risk for further bleeding from nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal causes that are amenable to OTSC placement. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: General Research Fund to the University Grant Committee, Hong Kong SAR Government.

Comparison between traumatic and atraumatic over-the-scope clips in patients with duodenal ulcer bleeding: a retrospective analysis with propensity score-based matching.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) substantially improved the endoscopic armamentarium for the treatment of severe GI bleeding and can potentially overcome limitations of standard clips. Data indicate a superiority of OTSCs in hemostasis as first- and second-line therapy. However, the impact of the OTSC designs, in particular the traumatic (-t) or atraumatic (-a) type, in duodenal ulcer bleeding has not been analyzed so far. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective collected database from 2009 to 2020 of 6 German endoscopic centers. All patients who underwent emergency endoscopy and were treated using an OTSC for duodenal ulcer bleeding were included. OTSC-t and OTSC-a patients were compared by the Fisher exact test, χ2 test, or Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate. A propensity score-based 1:1 matching was performed to obtain equal distribution of baseline characteristics in both groups. RESULTS: The entire cohort comprised 173 patients (93 OTSC-a, 80 OTSC-t). Age, gender, anticoagulant therapy, Rockall score, and treatment regimen had similar distributions in the 2 groups. However, the OTSC-t group showed significantly more active bleeding ulcers (Forrest Ia/b). Matching identified 132 patients (66 in both groups) with comparable baseline characteristics. Initial bleeding hemostasis (OTSC-a, 90.9%; OTSC-t, 87.9%; P = .82) and 72-hour mortality (OTSC-a, 4.5%; OTSC-t, 6.0%; P > .99) were not significantly different, but the OTSC-t group revealed a clearly higher rate of recurrent bleeding (34.9% vs 7.6%, P < .001) and necessity of red blood cell transfusions (5.1 ± 3.4 vs 2.5 ± 2.4 concentrates, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: For OTSC use, the OTSC-a should be the preferred option for duodenal ulcer bleeding.

Outcomes and recurrent bleeding risks of detachable snare and band ligation for colonic diverticular bleeding: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Ligation therapy, including endoscopic detachable snare ligation (EDSL) and endoscopic band ligation (EBL), has emerged as an endoscopic treatment for colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB); its comparative effectiveness and risk of recurrent bleeding remain unclear, however. Our goal was to compare the outcomes of EDSL and EBL in treating CDB and identify risk factors for recurrent bleeding after ligation therapy. METHODS: We reviewed data of 518 patients with CDB who underwent EDSL (n = 77) or EBL (n = 441) in a multicenter cohort study named the Colonic Diverticular Bleeding Leaders Update Evidence From Multicenter Japanese Study (CODE BLUE-J Study). Outcomes were compared by using propensity score matching. Logistic and Cox regression analyses were performed for recurrent bleeding risk, and a competing risk analysis was used to treat death without recurrent bleeding as a competing risk. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the 2 groups in terms of initial hemostasis, 30-day recurrent bleeding, interventional radiology or surgery requirements, 30-day mortality, blood transfusion volume, length of hospital stay, and adverse events. Sigmoid colon involvement was an independent risk factor for 30-day recurrent bleeding (odds ratio, 1.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.40; P = .042). History of acute lower GI bleeding (ALGIB) was a significant long-term recurrent bleeding risk factor on Cox regression analysis. A performance status score of 3/4 and history of ALGIB were long-term recurrent bleeding factors on competing risk regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in outcomes between EDSL and EBL for CDB. After ligation therapy, careful follow-up is required, especially in the treatment of sigmoid diverticular bleeding during admission. History of ALGIB and performance status at admission are important risk factors for long-term recurrent bleeding after discharge.

Clinical outcomes of Dieulafoy's lesion compared with peptic ulcer in upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Although Dieulafoy's lesion (DL) is an important cause of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, few studies have investigated the clinico-epidemiological outcomes due to its rarity. Here, we investigated clinical features of upper GI bleeding caused by peptic ulcer (PU) or DL and compared endoscopic treatment outcomes. METHODS: Patients with upper GI bleeding resulting from PU or DL who visited emergency room between January 2013 and December 2017 were eligible. Clinical features and treatment outcomes were retrospectively investigated. RESULTS: Overall, 728 patients with upper GI bleeding due to PU (n = 669) and DL (n = 59) were enrolled. The median age was 64 years (interquartile range [IQR], 56-75 years), and 74.3% were male. Endoscopic intervention was performed in 53.7% (n = 359) and 98.3% (n = 58) of the PU and DL groups, respectively (P < 0.0001). Patients were matched by sex, age, body mass index, comorbidity, and past medical history, and 190 PU and 52 DL were finally selected. The rebleeding rates within 7 (7.37% vs 17.31%, P = 0.037) and 30 (7.37% vs 26.92%, P < 0.001) days after initial endoscopy were significantly lower in the PU than in the DL group after propensity score matching. During the median follow-up period of 52 months (IQR, 34-70 months), there was no difference in overall survival rate (67.9% vs 82.7%, P = 0.518). CONCLUSIONS: Although DL is a rare cause of upper GI bleeding, it requires endoscopic hemostasis more frequently and has a higher rate of rebleeding than PU even after therapeutic endoscopy. Endoscopists should pay attention and perform active endoscopic hemostasis for DL bleeding.

Over-the-scope-clip (OTSC®) as a rescue treatment for gastrointestinal bleeding secondary to peptic ulcer disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: over-the-scope-clips (OTSC®) have been proposed as a rescue treatment for bleeding peptic ulcers. However, their effectiveness has not been evaluated in Spain. METHODS: this retrospective and single-center study (January 2018-December 2021) assessed the technical success, clinical success and safety of the device within 30 days. All patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding due to a peptic ulcer and treated with the OTSC® clip (OVESCO) as a rescue therapy were included in the study. RESULTS: a total of eleven patients were included in the study, nine due to rebleeding and two due to persistent bleeding. Technical success was 81.9 % (9/11, confidence interval [CI] 95 %: 52-95 %). The per-protocol and intention-to-treat clinical success were 88.9 % (8/9, CI 95 %: 57-98 %) and 72.7 % (8/11, CI 95 %: 43-90 %), respectively. No device-related adverse effects were recorded. CONCLUSION: the OTSC® clip was an effective and safe rescue therapy for bleeding peptic ulcers.

Role of the endoscopic Doppler probe in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The effectiveness of the Doppler endoscopic probe (DEP) remains unclear in nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB). We thus performed a systematic review characterizing the effectiveness of DEP in patients with NVUGIB addressing this question. METHODS: A literature search was done until July 2021 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science. A series of meta-analyses were performed assessing outcomes among observational and interventional studies for DEP signal positive and negative lesions as well as DEP-assisted versus standard endoscopies. The primary outcome was "overall rebleeding"; secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, bleeding-related mortality, need for surgery, length of stay, intensive care unit stay, and angiography. RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included from 1911 citations identified. Observational studies compared bleeding lesions with DEP-positive versus DEP-negative signals (11 studies, n = 800 prehemostasis; five studies, n = 148 with posthemostasis data). Three interventional studies (n = 308) compared DEP-assisted to standard endoscopy management. DEP signal positive versus negative lesions either prior to or following any possible hemostasis were at greater risk of overall rebleeding (odds ratio [OR] 6.54 [2.36, 18.11] and OR 25.96 [6.74, 100.0], respectively). The use of DEP during upper endoscopy significantly reduced overall rebleeding rates (OR 0.27 [0.14, 0.54]). When removing outcomes analysis for which only one study was available, all evaluable outcomes were improved with DEP characterization of management guidance except for all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Although with low certainty evidence, DEP-related information improves on sole visual prediction of rebleeding in NVUGIB, with DEP-guided management yielding decreased overall rebleeding, bleeding-related mortality, and need for surgery.

[Endovascular embolization for prevention of recurrent bleeding from the upper gastrointestinal tract]. / Opyt primeneniya endovaskulyarnoi embolizatsii dlya profilaktiki retsidiva krovotecheniya iz verkhnikh otdelov zheludochno-kishechnogo trakta.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the results of preventive endovascular hemostasis in patients with high risk of recurrent bleeding from the upper gastrointestinal tract. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analyzed treatment outcomes in 158 patients with ulcerative gastroduodenal bleeding and high risk of recurrence (≥17 scores), Forrest 1-2 A/B and mortality (SAPS II score ≥30). Endovascular embolization of the left gastric or gastroduodenal artery was performed to prevent recurrent bleeding. RESULTS: Endovascular hemostasis was technically successful in 94.4% of cases (153 patients). Embolization could not be performed due to technical reasons in 5 patients. One patient developed retroperitoneal hematoma as a complication after transcatheter angiography and embolization that required surgical intervention. Recurrent bleeding after technically successful embolization occurred in 11 (7%) patients. The PVA microemboli and spirals were used for embolization of the left gastric and gastroduodenal arteries, respectively. Additional PVA microemboli were also used in gastroduodenal artery in some cases. Twenty-six (16.5%) patients died. CONCLUSION: Endovascular hemostasis in patients with severe comorbidities (SAPS II score ≥30) and high risk of recurrent bleeding (≥17 scores) reduced the incidence of recurrent bleeding to 6.96% and mortality to 17%.