Management of bleeding peptic duodenal ulcer refractory to endoscopic treatment: surgery or transcatheter arterial embolization as first-line therapy? A retrospective single-center study and systematic review.

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare the results of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) with surgery in terms of efficacy in the context of bleeding duodenal ulcer (BDU) refractory to endoscopic treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2006 to December 2016, all patients treated for a BDU refractory to endoscopic treatment were included in this observational, comparative, retrospective, single-center study. Primary endpoint was the overall success of treatment of BDU requiring surgical and/or TAE. The secondary endpoints were pre-interventional data, recurrence rates, feasibility of secondary treatment, morbidity and mortality of surgical and radiological treatment, intensive care unit and length of stay. A systematic review of the literature was performed to compare results of surgery and TAE.

RESULTS

59 out of 396 patients (14.9%) treated for BDU required embolization and/or surgery: 15 patients underwent surgery (group S) including 7 patients after embolization failure and 44 patients underwent TAE (group TAE). The overall treatment success in intention to treat (85.7% vs 67.3%), per protocol (80% vs 79.5%) and bleeding recurrence rates (20% vs 15.9%) were also identical. Mortality (14.2% vs 15.3%) was similar between the two groups. Our study data were pooled with data from eight published studies and suggest that surgery have significant increased overall success (68.3% vs. 55.4%, p < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

The overall success rate was in favour of surgery according our meta-analysis. Our single-center study highlights the fact that predictive factors for recurrent bleeding after TAE must be identified to select good candidates for TAE and/or surgery.