Endoscopic hemostasis followed by preventive transarterial embolization in high-risk patients with bleeding peptic ulcer
- PDF / 591,523 Bytes
- 6 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 100 Downloads / 221 Views
(2019) 14:45
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Open Access
Endoscopic hemostasis followed by preventive transarterial embolization in high-risk patients with bleeding peptic ulcer: 5-year experience Aleksejs Kaminskis1* , Patricija Ivanova1, Aina Kratovska1, Sanita Ponomarjova1, Margarita Ptašņuka2, Jevgenijs Demičevs3, Renate Demičeva3, Viesturs Boka3 and Guntars Pupelis1,2
Abstract Background: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) due to peptic ulcer disease is one of the leading causes of death in patients with non-variceal bleeding, resulting in up to 10% mortality rate, and the patient group at high risk of rebleeding (Forrest IA, IB, and IIA) often requires additional therapy after endoscopic hemostasis. Preventive transarterial embolization (P-TAE) after endoscopic hemostasis was introduced in our institution in 2014. The aim of the study is an assessment of the intermediate results of P-TAE following primary endoscopic hemostasis in patients with serious comorbid conditions and high risk of rebleeding. Methods: During the period from 2014 to 2018, a total of 399 patients referred to our institution with a bleeding peptic ulcer, classified as type Forrest IA, IB, or IIA with the Rockall score ≥ 5, after endoscopic hemostasis was prospectively included in two groups—P-TAE group and control group, where endoscopy alone (EA) was performed. The P-TAE patients underwent flow-reducing left gastric artery or gastroduodenal artery embolization according to the ulcer type. The rebleeding rate, complications, frequency of surgical interventions, transfused packed red blood cells (PRBC), amount of fresh frozen plasma (FFP), and mortality rate were analyzed. Results: From 738 patients with a bleeding peptic ulcer, 399 were at high risk for rebleeding after endoscopic hemostasis. From this cohort, 58 patients underwent P-TAE, and 341 were allocated to the EA. A significantly lower rebleeding rate was observed in the P-TAE group, 3.4% vs. 16.2% in the EA group; p = 0.005. The need for surgical intervention reached 10.3% vs. 20.6% in the P-TAE and EA groups accordingly; p = 0.065. Patients that underwent PTAE required less FFP, 1.3 unit vs. 2.6 units in EA; p = 0.0001. The mortality rate was similar in groups with a tendency to decrease in the P-TAE group, 5.7% vs. 8.5% in EA; p = 0.417. Conclusion: P-TAE is a feasible and safe procedure, and it may reduce the rebleeding rate and the need for surgical intervention in patients with a bleeding peptic ulcer when the rebleeding risk remains high after primary endoscopic hemostasis. Keywords: Non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding, Transarterial embolization, Preventive
* Correspondence: [email protected] 1 Riga East University Hospital, University of Latvia, Riga, Latvia Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
Data Loading...
