Randomised comparison between adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment for actively bleeding ulcers
Abstract Objective: To compare endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe for the treatment of actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Design: Randomised prospective study of patients admitted with actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Setting: One university hospital. Subjec...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | BMJ 1997-05, Vol.314 (7090), p.1307-1311 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1311 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7090 |
container_start_page | 1307 |
container_title | BMJ |
container_volume | 314 |
creator | Chung, Sydney S C Lau, James Y W Sung, Joseph J Y Chan, Angus C W Lai, C W Ng, Enders K W Chan, Francis K L Yung, M Y Li, Arthur K C |
description | Abstract Objective: To compare endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe for the treatment of actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Design: Randomised prospective study of patients admitted with actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Setting: One university hospital. Subjects: 276 patients with actively bleeding ulcers detected by endoscopy within 24 hours of admission: 136 patients were randomised to endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and 140 to adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment. Main outcome measures: Initial endoscopic haemostasis; clinical rebleeding; requirement for operation; requirement for blood transfusion; hospital stay, ulcer healing at four weeks; and mortality in hospital. Results: Initial haemostasis was achieved in 131/134 patients (98%) who received adrenaline injection alone and 135/136 patients (99%) who received additional heat probe treatment (P = 0.33). Outcome as measured by clinical rebleeding (12 v 5), requirement for emergency operation (14 v 8), blood transfusion (2 v 3 units), hospital stay (4 v 4 days), ulcer healing at four weeks (79.1% v 74%), and in hospital mortality (7 v 8) were not significantly different in the two groups. In the subgroup of patients with spurting haemorrhage 8/27 (29.6%; 14.5% to 50.3%) patients from the adrenaline injection alone group and 2/31 (6.5%; 1.1% to 22.9%) patients from the dual treatment group required operative intervention. The relative risk of this was lower in the dual treatment group (0.17; 0.03 to 0.87). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the dual treatment group than the adrenaline injection alone group (4 v 6 days, P = 0.01). Conclusion: The addition of heat probe treatment after endoscopic adrenaline injection confers an advantage in ulcers with spurting haemorrhage. Key messages Endoscopic injection of adrenaline alone is effective in stopping bleeding peptic ulcers Further bleeding after adrenaline injection alone, however, occurs in 15-20% of patients, and the addition of heat probe thermocoagulation may improve permanent haemostasis and therefore patient outcome When compared with adrenaline injection alone the dual treatment significantly reduced the requirement for operative intervention and the length of hospital stay in the subgroup of patients with spurting ulcer haemorrhage In the endoscopic treatment of spurting ulcer haemorrhage heat probe thermocoagulation should be added after adrenaline injection |
doi_str_mv | 10.1136/bmj.314.7090.1307 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2126544</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>25174457</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>25174457</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b575t-fc93da9e90f267b30473b3606cd65e523c5ce58c1a0d3c9b3bc619730d3f173d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkttu1DAQhiMEKqvSB-ACyQLEFVnsOLbjGyS04qStikDAreU4k9aLYy920sMb8Ng42tUWEIgrH_5vxjPjvygeErwkhPIX7bBZUlIvBZb5hmJxp1iQmjclayi9WyywZLJsCG3uFycpbTDGFRWN5OyoOJKENTVni-LHJ-27MNgEHTJh2OpoU_CohfEKwCPdRfDaWQ_I-g2Y0WZRu5DPOe7v8tZNCV2AHtE2hhbQGPN-AD-iPkSkM3QJ7ga1DqCz_hxNzkBMD4p7vXYJTvbrcfHlzevPq3fl6Ye371evTsuWCTaWvZG00xIk7isuWoprQVvKMTcdZ8AqapgB1hiicUeNbGlrOJGC5lNPBO3ocfFyl3c7tQN0JtcVtVPbaAcdb1TQVv2ueHuhzsOlqkjFWV3nBM_2CWL4PkEaVZ6eAee0hzAlJSTGPA86g4__ADdhinlcSVWYSol5JTL05F8QEUIwSho8v0l2lIkhpQj9oV6C1WwGlc2gshnUbAY1myHHPPq10UPE_uuz_nSv62S066P2xqYDlpvNVfLbNJs0hngrMyLqms3PlDvdphGuD7qO3xQXVDB19nWlzj6uybrma4Uz_3zHzxX_v4ufsazl3g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1777531804</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Randomised comparison between adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment for actively bleeding ulcers</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Chung, Sydney S C ; Lau, James Y W ; Sung, Joseph J Y ; Chan, Angus C W ; Lai, C W ; Ng, Enders K W ; Chan, Francis K L ; Yung, M Y ; Li, Arthur K C</creator><creatorcontrib>Chung, Sydney S C ; Lau, James Y W ; Sung, Joseph J Y ; Chan, Angus C W ; Lai, C W ; Ng, Enders K W ; Chan, Francis K L ; Yung, M Y ; Li, Arthur K C</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective: To compare endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe for the treatment of actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Design: Randomised prospective study of patients admitted with actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Setting: One university hospital. Subjects: 276 patients with actively bleeding ulcers detected by endoscopy within 24 hours of admission: 136 patients were randomised to endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and 140 to adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment. Main outcome measures: Initial endoscopic haemostasis; clinical rebleeding; requirement for operation; requirement for blood transfusion; hospital stay, ulcer healing at four weeks; and mortality in hospital. Results: Initial haemostasis was achieved in 131/134 patients (98%) who received adrenaline injection alone and 135/136 patients (99%) who received additional heat probe treatment (P = 0.33). Outcome as measured by clinical rebleeding (12 v 5), requirement for emergency operation (14 v 8), blood transfusion (2 v 3 units), hospital stay (4 v 4 days), ulcer healing at four weeks (79.1% v 74%), and in hospital mortality (7 v 8) were not significantly different in the two groups. In the subgroup of patients with spurting haemorrhage 8/27 (29.6%; 14.5% to 50.3%) patients from the adrenaline injection alone group and 2/31 (6.5%; 1.1% to 22.9%) patients from the dual treatment group required operative intervention. The relative risk of this was lower in the dual treatment group (0.17; 0.03 to 0.87). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the dual treatment group than the adrenaline injection alone group (4 v 6 days, P = 0.01). Conclusion: The addition of heat probe treatment after endoscopic adrenaline injection confers an advantage in ulcers with spurting haemorrhage. Key messages Endoscopic injection of adrenaline alone is effective in stopping bleeding peptic ulcers Further bleeding after adrenaline injection alone, however, occurs in 15-20% of patients, and the addition of heat probe thermocoagulation may improve permanent haemostasis and therefore patient outcome When compared with adrenaline injection alone the dual treatment significantly reduced the requirement for operative intervention and the length of hospital stay in the subgroup of patients with spurting ulcer haemorrhage In the endoscopic treatment of spurting ulcer haemorrhage heat probe thermocoagulation should be added after adrenaline injection</description><edition>International edition</edition><identifier>ISSN: 0959-8138</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0959-8146</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-5833</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1756-1833</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/bmj.314.7090.1307</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9158465</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BMJOAE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: British Medical Journal Publishing Group</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bleeding ; Blood transfusion ; Blood vessels ; Duodenal Ulcer - complications ; Duodenal Ulcer - drug therapy ; Duodenal Ulcer - therapy ; Endoscopy ; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal ; Epinephrine - administration & dosage ; Female ; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen ; Hemorrhage ; Hemostasis ; Hospital admissions ; Hospital Mortality ; Humans ; Hyperthermia, Induced - instrumentation ; Injections ; Length of Stay ; Male ; Medical procedures ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Mortality ; Other diseases. Semiology ; Peptic ulcer ; Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - drug therapy ; Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - therapy ; Prospective Studies ; Recurrence ; Stomach Ulcer - complications ; Stomach Ulcer - drug therapy ; Stomach Ulcer - therapy ; Stomach. Duodenum. Small intestine. Colon. Rectum. Anus ; Treatment Outcome ; Ulcers</subject><ispartof>BMJ, 1997-05, Vol.314 (7090), p.1307-1311</ispartof><rights>1997 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright 1997 British Medical Journal</rights><rights>1997 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright: 1997 (c) 1997 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright British Medical Association May 3, 1997</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b575t-fc93da9e90f267b30473b3606cd65e523c5ce58c1a0d3c9b3bc619730d3f173d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/25174457$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/25174457$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,799,881,27901,27902,30976,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=2652036$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9158465$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chung, Sydney S C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lau, James Y W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sung, Joseph J Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Angus C W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lai, C W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, Enders K W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Francis K L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yung, M Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Arthur K C</creatorcontrib><title>Randomised comparison between adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment for actively bleeding ulcers</title><title>BMJ</title><addtitle>BMJ</addtitle><description>Abstract Objective: To compare endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe for the treatment of actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Design: Randomised prospective study of patients admitted with actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Setting: One university hospital. Subjects: 276 patients with actively bleeding ulcers detected by endoscopy within 24 hours of admission: 136 patients were randomised to endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and 140 to adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment. Main outcome measures: Initial endoscopic haemostasis; clinical rebleeding; requirement for operation; requirement for blood transfusion; hospital stay, ulcer healing at four weeks; and mortality in hospital. Results: Initial haemostasis was achieved in 131/134 patients (98%) who received adrenaline injection alone and 135/136 patients (99%) who received additional heat probe treatment (P = 0.33). Outcome as measured by clinical rebleeding (12 v 5), requirement for emergency operation (14 v 8), blood transfusion (2 v 3 units), hospital stay (4 v 4 days), ulcer healing at four weeks (79.1% v 74%), and in hospital mortality (7 v 8) were not significantly different in the two groups. In the subgroup of patients with spurting haemorrhage 8/27 (29.6%; 14.5% to 50.3%) patients from the adrenaline injection alone group and 2/31 (6.5%; 1.1% to 22.9%) patients from the dual treatment group required operative intervention. The relative risk of this was lower in the dual treatment group (0.17; 0.03 to 0.87). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the dual treatment group than the adrenaline injection alone group (4 v 6 days, P = 0.01). Conclusion: The addition of heat probe treatment after endoscopic adrenaline injection confers an advantage in ulcers with spurting haemorrhage. Key messages Endoscopic injection of adrenaline alone is effective in stopping bleeding peptic ulcers Further bleeding after adrenaline injection alone, however, occurs in 15-20% of patients, and the addition of heat probe thermocoagulation may improve permanent haemostasis and therefore patient outcome When compared with adrenaline injection alone the dual treatment significantly reduced the requirement for operative intervention and the length of hospital stay in the subgroup of patients with spurting ulcer haemorrhage In the endoscopic treatment of spurting ulcer haemorrhage heat probe thermocoagulation should be added after adrenaline injection</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bleeding</subject><subject>Blood transfusion</subject><subject>Blood vessels</subject><subject>Duodenal Ulcer - complications</subject><subject>Duodenal Ulcer - drug therapy</subject><subject>Duodenal Ulcer - therapy</subject><subject>Endoscopy</subject><subject>Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal</subject><subject>Epinephrine - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</subject><subject>Hemorrhage</subject><subject>Hemostasis</subject><subject>Hospital admissions</subject><subject>Hospital Mortality</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hyperthermia, Induced - instrumentation</subject><subject>Injections</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical procedures</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Other diseases. Semiology</subject><subject>Peptic ulcer</subject><subject>Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - drug therapy</subject><subject>Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - therapy</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Stomach Ulcer - complications</subject><subject>Stomach Ulcer - drug therapy</subject><subject>Stomach Ulcer - therapy</subject><subject>Stomach. Duodenum. Small intestine. Colon. Rectum. Anus</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Ulcers</subject><issn>0959-8138</issn><issn>0959-8146</issn><issn>1468-5833</issn><issn>1756-1833</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkttu1DAQhiMEKqvSB-ACyQLEFVnsOLbjGyS04qStikDAreU4k9aLYy920sMb8Ng42tUWEIgrH_5vxjPjvygeErwkhPIX7bBZUlIvBZb5hmJxp1iQmjclayi9WyywZLJsCG3uFycpbTDGFRWN5OyoOJKENTVni-LHJ-27MNgEHTJh2OpoU_CohfEKwCPdRfDaWQ_I-g2Y0WZRu5DPOe7v8tZNCV2AHtE2hhbQGPN-AD-iPkSkM3QJ7ga1DqCz_hxNzkBMD4p7vXYJTvbrcfHlzevPq3fl6Ye371evTsuWCTaWvZG00xIk7isuWoprQVvKMTcdZ8AqapgB1hiicUeNbGlrOJGC5lNPBO3ocfFyl3c7tQN0JtcVtVPbaAcdb1TQVv2ueHuhzsOlqkjFWV3nBM_2CWL4PkEaVZ6eAee0hzAlJSTGPA86g4__ADdhinlcSVWYSol5JTL05F8QEUIwSho8v0l2lIkhpQj9oV6C1WwGlc2gshnUbAY1myHHPPq10UPE_uuz_nSv62S066P2xqYDlpvNVfLbNJs0hngrMyLqms3PlDvdphGuD7qO3xQXVDB19nWlzj6uybrma4Uz_3zHzxX_v4ufsazl3g</recordid><startdate>19970503</startdate><enddate>19970503</enddate><creator>Chung, Sydney S C</creator><creator>Lau, James Y W</creator><creator>Sung, Joseph J Y</creator><creator>Chan, Angus C W</creator><creator>Lai, C W</creator><creator>Ng, Enders K W</creator><creator>Chan, Francis K L</creator><creator>Yung, M Y</creator><creator>Li, Arthur K C</creator><general>British Medical Journal Publishing Group</general><general>British Medical Association</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19970503</creationdate><title>Randomised comparison between adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment for actively bleeding ulcers</title><author>Chung, Sydney S C ; Lau, James Y W ; Sung, Joseph J Y ; Chan, Angus C W ; Lai, C W ; Ng, Enders K W ; Chan, Francis K L ; Yung, M Y ; Li, Arthur K C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b575t-fc93da9e90f267b30473b3606cd65e523c5ce58c1a0d3c9b3bc619730d3f173d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bleeding</topic><topic>Blood transfusion</topic><topic>Blood vessels</topic><topic>Duodenal Ulcer - complications</topic><topic>Duodenal Ulcer - drug therapy</topic><topic>Duodenal Ulcer - therapy</topic><topic>Endoscopy</topic><topic>Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal</topic><topic>Epinephrine - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen</topic><topic>Hemorrhage</topic><topic>Hemostasis</topic><topic>Hospital admissions</topic><topic>Hospital Mortality</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hyperthermia, Induced - instrumentation</topic><topic>Injections</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical procedures</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Other diseases. Semiology</topic><topic>Peptic ulcer</topic><topic>Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - drug therapy</topic><topic>Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - therapy</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Stomach Ulcer - complications</topic><topic>Stomach Ulcer - drug therapy</topic><topic>Stomach Ulcer - therapy</topic><topic>Stomach. Duodenum. Small intestine. Colon. Rectum. Anus</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Ulcers</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chung, Sydney S C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lau, James Y W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sung, Joseph J Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Angus C W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lai, C W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ng, Enders K W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chan, Francis K L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yung, M Y</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Li, Arthur K C</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BMJ</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chung, Sydney S C</au><au>Lau, James Y W</au><au>Sung, Joseph J Y</au><au>Chan, Angus C W</au><au>Lai, C W</au><au>Ng, Enders K W</au><au>Chan, Francis K L</au><au>Yung, M Y</au><au>Li, Arthur K C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Randomised comparison between adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment for actively bleeding ulcers</atitle><jtitle>BMJ</jtitle><addtitle>BMJ</addtitle><date>1997-05-03</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>314</volume><issue>7090</issue><spage>1307</spage><epage>1311</epage><pages>1307-1311</pages><issn>0959-8138</issn><issn>0959-8146</issn><eissn>1468-5833</eissn><eissn>1756-1833</eissn><coden>BMJOAE</coden><abstract>Abstract Objective: To compare endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe for the treatment of actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Design: Randomised prospective study of patients admitted with actively bleeding peptic ulcers. Setting: One university hospital. Subjects: 276 patients with actively bleeding ulcers detected by endoscopy within 24 hours of admission: 136 patients were randomised to endoscopic adrenaline injection alone and 140 to adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment. Main outcome measures: Initial endoscopic haemostasis; clinical rebleeding; requirement for operation; requirement for blood transfusion; hospital stay, ulcer healing at four weeks; and mortality in hospital. Results: Initial haemostasis was achieved in 131/134 patients (98%) who received adrenaline injection alone and 135/136 patients (99%) who received additional heat probe treatment (P = 0.33). Outcome as measured by clinical rebleeding (12 v 5), requirement for emergency operation (14 v 8), blood transfusion (2 v 3 units), hospital stay (4 v 4 days), ulcer healing at four weeks (79.1% v 74%), and in hospital mortality (7 v 8) were not significantly different in the two groups. In the subgroup of patients with spurting haemorrhage 8/27 (29.6%; 14.5% to 50.3%) patients from the adrenaline injection alone group and 2/31 (6.5%; 1.1% to 22.9%) patients from the dual treatment group required operative intervention. The relative risk of this was lower in the dual treatment group (0.17; 0.03 to 0.87). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the dual treatment group than the adrenaline injection alone group (4 v 6 days, P = 0.01). Conclusion: The addition of heat probe treatment after endoscopic adrenaline injection confers an advantage in ulcers with spurting haemorrhage. Key messages Endoscopic injection of adrenaline alone is effective in stopping bleeding peptic ulcers Further bleeding after adrenaline injection alone, however, occurs in 15-20% of patients, and the addition of heat probe thermocoagulation may improve permanent haemostasis and therefore patient outcome When compared with adrenaline injection alone the dual treatment significantly reduced the requirement for operative intervention and the length of hospital stay in the subgroup of patients with spurting ulcer haemorrhage In the endoscopic treatment of spurting ulcer haemorrhage heat probe thermocoagulation should be added after adrenaline injection</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>British Medical Journal Publishing Group</pub><pmid>9158465</pmid><doi>10.1136/bmj.314.7090.1307</doi><tpages>5</tpages><edition>International edition</edition><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0959-8138 |
ispartof | BMJ, 1997-05, Vol.314 (7090), p.1307-1311 |
issn | 0959-8138 0959-8146 1468-5833 1756-1833 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_2126544 |
source | Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Jstor Complete Legacy; MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Biological and medical sciences Bleeding Blood transfusion Blood vessels Duodenal Ulcer - complications Duodenal Ulcer - drug therapy Duodenal Ulcer - therapy Endoscopy Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal Epinephrine - administration & dosage Female Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen Hemorrhage Hemostasis Hospital admissions Hospital Mortality Humans Hyperthermia, Induced - instrumentation Injections Length of Stay Male Medical procedures Medical sciences Middle Aged Mortality Other diseases. Semiology Peptic ulcer Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - drug therapy Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage - therapy Prospective Studies Recurrence Stomach Ulcer - complications Stomach Ulcer - drug therapy Stomach Ulcer - therapy Stomach. Duodenum. Small intestine. Colon. Rectum. Anus Treatment Outcome Ulcers |
title | Randomised comparison between adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment for actively bleeding ulcers |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T23%3A36%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Randomised%20comparison%20between%20adrenaline%20injection%20alone%20and%20adrenaline%20injection%20plus%20heat%20probe%20treatment%20for%20actively%20bleeding%20ulcers&rft.jtitle=BMJ&rft.au=Chung,%20Sydney%20S%20C&rft.date=1997-05-03&rft.volume=314&rft.issue=7090&rft.spage=1307&rft.epage=1311&rft.pages=1307-1311&rft.issn=0959-8138&rft.eissn=1468-5833&rft.coden=BMJOAE&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/bmj.314.7090.1307&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E25174457%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1777531804&rft_id=info:pmid/9158465&rft_jstor_id=25174457&rfr_iscdi=true |