Over-the-Scope Clips Are More Effective Than Standard Endoscopic Therapy for Patients With Recurrent Bleeding of Peptic Ulcers.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic hemostasis is effective in treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers. However, rebleeding is difficult to treat and associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. We performed a prospective randomized trial to determine whether over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) are more effective than standard treatment of severe recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding. METHODS: We performed our study at 9 academic referral centers (in Germany, Switzerland, and Hong Kong) from March 2013 through September 2016. Adult patients with recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding following initially successful hemostasis (66 patients in the intent-to-treat analysis) were randomly assigned to groups (1:1) that underwent hemostasis with either OTSC or standard therapy. Standard therapy was defined as hemostasis with through-the-scope clips (TTSC, n = 31) or thermal therapy plus injection with diluted adrenaline (n = 2). The primary endpoint was further bleeding (a composite endpoint of a persistent bleeding despite endoscopic therapy according to the protocol or recurrent bleeding within 7 days after successful hemostasis). Patients with further bleeding were allowed to cross over to OTSC therapy. Main secondary endpoints were mortality, necessity of surgical or angiographic salvage therapy, duration of stay in the hospital or intensive care, number of blood units transfused, and complications associated with endoscopic therapy. RESULTS: Persistent bleeding after per-protocol hemostasis was observed in 14 patients (42.4%) in the standard therapy group and 2 patients (6.0%) in the OTSC group (P = .001). Recurrent bleeding within 7 days occurred in 5 patients (16.1%) in the standard therapy group vs 3 patients (9.1%) in the OTSC group (P = .468). Further bleeding occurred in 19 patients (57.6%) in the standard therapy group and in 5 patients (15.2%) in the OTSC group (absolute difference 42.4%; 95% confidence interval 21.6-63.2; P = .001) Within 30 days of follow-up, 1 patient in the standard therapy group (3.0%) and 1 patient in the OTSC group (3.0%) required surgical therapy (P = .999). Within 30 days of the procedure, 2 patients died in the standard therapy group (6.3%) and 4 patients died in the OTSC group (12.1%) (P = .672). There were no significant differences in the other secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: In prospective randomized trial, we found endoscopic treatment with OTSCs to be superior to standard therapy with TTSCs for patients with recurrent peptic ulcer bleeding. STING Study, Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT1836900.

Detection and characterization of colorectal polyps using high-definition white light and i-Scan: Evidence-based consensus recommendations using a modified Delphi process.

BACKGROUND: i-Scan is an image enhancement modality, which provides enhanced views of mucosal structures and vascular patterns. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was used to develop a series of evidence-based statements on the role of high-definition white light (HDWL) and i-Scan for the detection and diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms. Each statement was voted to achieve consensus (i.e. >80% agreement). RESULTS: Seven proposed statements achieved consensus: (1) HDWL is recommended rather than standard definition (SD) for detection and diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms; (2) HDWL colonoscopy with i-Scan improves polyp and adenoma detection rates when compared with SD colonoscopy; (3) HDWL + i-Scan is superior to HDWL alone for the optical diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms; (4) HDWL + i-Scan in expert hands meets American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) in the Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations (PIVI) standards for optical diagnosis of diminutive neoplasms; (5) HDWL + i-Scan in non-expert hands does not meet ASGE PIVI standards for optical diagnosis of diminutive neoplasms; (6) optical diagnosis of polyps with i-Scan has a learning curve and needs systematic training; and (7) the performance of i-Scan for the in vivo diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms is similar to Narrow Band Imaging (NBI) and Fuji Intelligent Chromo Endoscopy (FICE). CONCLUSIONS: Seven proposed statements on the use of HDWL and i-Scan for the detection and diagnosis of colorectal neoplasms achieved consensus.