Panés J, Viver J, Forné M
Service of Gastroenterology, Hospital Mutua de Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain.
Gastrointest Endosc. 1991 Nov-Dec;37(6):611-6. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(91)70865-1.
We conducted a prospective randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic microwave coagulation in comparison to endoscopic sclerosis in the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. Over 15 months 127 ulcer-bleeding patients with an actively bleeding vessel (N = 21), a non-bleeding vessel (N = 53), oozing hemorrhage (N = 25), or an adherent clot (N = 28) in the ulcer base were randomly assigned during endoscopy to receive treatment with endoscopic sclerosis or with microwave coagulation. There were no significant differences in effectiveness between endoscopic sclerosis and microwave coagulation in any of the assessed parameters: the percentage of patients with major recurrent hemorrhage (5 vs. 12), the percentage who needed emergency surgery (5 vs. 9), the mean (+/- SD) transfusion requirements (0.32 +/- 0.89 vs. 0.78 +/- 1.65), the mean number of hospital days (10.3 +/- 3.5 vs. 10.7 +/- 4.1), and the number of deaths due to bleeding (0 vs. 2) were similar in both groups. No case of perforation occurred in either group. The data suggest that microwave coagulation is as effective and safe as endoscopic sclerosis in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers.
我们进行了一项前瞻性随机试验，以评估内镜下微波凝固术与内镜下硬化疗法相比，在治疗消化性溃疡出血方面的有效性和安全性。在15个月的时间里，127例溃疡出血患者，其溃疡底部有活动性出血血管（21例）、非出血血管（53例）、渗血（25例）或附着血栓（28例），在内镜检查期间被随机分配接受内镜下硬化疗法或微波凝固术治疗。在内镜下硬化疗法和微波凝固术之间，在任何评估参数上的有效性均无显著差异：两组主要再出血患者的百分比（5%对12%）、需要急诊手术的患者百分比（5%对9%）、平均（±标准差）输血需求量（0.32±0.89对0.78±1.65）、平均住院天数（10.3±3.5对10.7±4.1）以及出血导致的死亡人数（0对2）相似。两组均未发生穿孔病例。数据表明，微波凝固术在治疗出血性消化性溃疡方面与内镜下硬化疗法同样有效且安全。
