Jensen D M, Machicado G A
UCLA Center for the Health Sciences, Wadsworth Veterans Administration Medical Center.
Gastroenterology. 1988 Dec;95(6):1569-74. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5085(88)80079-9.
The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate (a) the diagnosis and treatment of 80 consecutive patients with severe, ongoing hematochezia from unknown source and (b) the effectiveness and safety of urgent colonoscopy after oral purge. Fifty-two men and 28 women (mean age, 64.5 yr) received a mean of 6.5 U of blood and had negative anoscopy, rigid sigmoidoscopy, and nasogastric tube aspiration before our evaluation. Because of ongoing severe hematochezia in the intensive care unit, urgent diagnosis and treatment was recommended by the attending physicians and surgeons. Emergency panendoscopy was performed before purge. Urgent colonoscopy was performed in the intensive care unit after patients received oral purge and their gut was cleared of blood, clots, and stool. The final diagnosis in these patients was 74% colonic lesions (30% angiomata, 17% diverticulosis, 11% polyps or cancer, 9% focal ulcers, 7% other), 11% upper gastrointestinal lesions, and 9% presumed small bowel lesions. No lesion site was identified in 6%. Clinically significant fluid retention (medically controlled) occurred in 4% of patients after purge. Sixty-four percent of patients had intervention for control of bleeding: 39% had therapeutic endoscopy, 24% surgery, and 1% therapeutic angiography. For 22 patients who also had emergency visceral angiography, the diagnostic yield was 14% and the complication rate was 9%. Our conclusions for patients with severe ongoing hematochezia from an unknown site were as follows. (a) Oral purge was effective and safe for cleansing the colon of stool, clots, and blood. Sulfate purge appeared to be safer than saline purge. (b) Before urgent colonoscopy and purge, emergency panendoscopy was indicated to exclude an upper gastrointestinal bleeding source. (c) Urgent colonoscopy after purge was effective, safe, and often diagnostic. (d) Compared with urgent colonoscopy, urgent visceral angiography was often nondiagnostic. However, the examinations may be complementary. (e) Hemostasis via colonoscopy has a definitive role in the treatment of some focal colonic lesions such as bleeding angiomata.
(a) 连续80例不明原因严重持续性便血患者的诊断与治疗;(b) 口服泻药后急诊结肠镜检查的有效性和安全性。52例男性和28例女性(平均年龄64.5岁)在我们评估前平均接受了6.5单位的输血,肛门镜检查、硬式乙状结肠镜检查和鼻胃管抽吸均为阴性。由于重症监护病房中持续性严重便血,主治医生和外科医生建议进行紧急诊断和治疗。在泻药治疗前进行了急诊全消化道内镜检查。患者接受口服泻药且肠道内血液、血凝块和粪便清除后,在重症监护病房进行急诊结肠镜检查。这些患者的最终诊断为74%为结肠病变(30%为血管畸形、17%为憩室病、11%为息肉或癌症、9%为局灶性溃疡、7%为其他),11%为上消化道病变,9%推测为小肠病变。6%未发现病变部位。4%的患者在泻药治疗后出现具有临床意义的液体潴留(通过药物控制)。64%的患者接受了控制出血的干预措施:39%接受了治疗性内镜检查,24%接受了手术,1%接受了治疗性血管造影。对于22例同时进行了急诊内脏血管造影的患者,诊断率为14%,并发症发生率为9%。对于不明部位严重持续性便血患者,我们得出的结论如下:(a) 口服泻药对于清除结肠内的粪便、血凝块和血液有效且安全。硫酸盐泻药似乎比盐水泻药更安全。(b) 在急诊结肠镜检查和泻药治疗前,应进行急诊全消化道内镜检查以排除上消化道出血源。(c) 泻药治疗后进行急诊结肠镜检查有效、安全且常能明确诊断。(d) 与急诊结肠镜检查相比,急诊内脏血管造影常无法明确诊断。然而,这些检查可能具有互补性。(e) 通过结肠镜检查止血在治疗某些局灶性结肠病变(如出血性血管畸形)中具有决定性作用。