Ji Jeong-Seon, Kim Hyung-Keun, Kim Sung Soo, Chae Hiun-Suk, Cho Hyunjung, Cho Young-Seok
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Incheon St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 56 Dongsu-ro, Incheon, 21431, Korea.
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, 271 Cheonbo-ro, Uijeongbu, 11765, Korea.
Surg Endosc. 2016 Aug;30(8):3526-31. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4642-7. Epub 2015 Nov 3.
The most appropriate type of endoscopic hemostasis for bleeding due to duodenal Dieulafoy's lesions (DLs) is not yet established. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of mechanical endoscopic hemostasis for duodenal DLs and long-term outcome after successful hemostasis, as well as to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic band ligation (EBL) and endoscopic hemoclip placement (EHP).
Patients admitted to the emergency unit with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding from duodenal DLs were enrolled in this study. The data were collected prospectively, but data analysis was performed retrospectively. Twenty-four patients with duodenal DLs were treated with EBL (n = 11) or EHP (n = 13).
There were no significant differences between groups with respect to clinical or endoscopic characteristics, apart from the number of epinephrine (three cases with EBL vs. 11 cases with EHP; p = 0.011). Primary hemostasis was achieved in all patients. Recurrent bleeding was observed in one patient (9.1 %) from the EBL group and in five patients (38.5 %) from the EHP group (p = 0.166). The recurrent bleeding in the patient from the EBL group was treated by EHP. In the EHP group, all five patients achieved successful secondary hemostasis by endoscopic treatment (EBL in two patients and EHP in three patients). There were no differences in secondary outcomes between the two groups, including the number of endoscopic sessions required, need for angiographic embolization or emergent surgery, transfusion requirements, or length of hospital stay. No complications occurred, and there was no recurrence of bleeding in either group during the follow-up period.
Mechanical endoscopic treatments are effective and safe for the treatment of bleeding duodenal DLs. A large-scale, randomized, controlled study is required to confirm the efficacy and safety of EBL and EHP for the management of bleeding duodenal DLs.
十二指肠Dieulafoy病变(DLs)所致出血的最适宜内镜止血类型尚未确定。本研究旨在评估机械内镜止血治疗十二指肠DLs的疗效及止血成功后的长期结局,同时比较内镜下套扎术(EBL)和内镜下止血夹放置术(EHP)的疗效及安全性。
纳入因十二指肠DLs导致急性上消化道出血而入住急诊科的患者。前瞻性收集数据,但进行回顾性数据分析。24例十二指肠DLs患者接受了EBL(n = 11)或EHP(n = 13)治疗。
除肾上腺素使用次数外(EBL组3例 vs. EHP组11例;p = 0.011),两组在临床或内镜特征方面无显著差异。所有患者均实现了初步止血。EBL组有1例患者(9.1%)出现复发性出血,EHP组有5例患者(38.5%)出现复发性出血(p = 0.166)。EBL组的复发性出血患者接受了EHP治疗。在EHP组,所有5例患者通过内镜治疗均实现了成功的二次止血(2例患者接受EBL,3例患者接受EHP)。两组在次要结局方面无差异,包括所需的内镜检查次数、血管造影栓塞或急诊手术的需求、输血需求或住院时间。未发生并发症,随访期间两组均未出现出血复发。
机械内镜治疗对十二指肠DLs出血的治疗有效且安全。需要开展大规模、随机、对照研究以证实EBL和EHP治疗十二指肠DLs出血的疗效及安全性。