Current status of endoscopic therapy for ulcer bleeding

Carlos Rollhauser, D. E. Fleischer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the therapeutic endoscopic modalities available for the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. The benefits of endoscopic haemostasis have been fully demonstrated by three meta-analyses, which included most of the controlled trials published until 1992. In this review, an emphasis is placed on randomized, prospective comparative trials published during the past 20 years. Using an evidence-based medicine approach, the results of meta-analyses are translated into efficacy measures known as relative and absolute risk reductions, and number needed to treat. Single-modality treatments with injection agents such as epinephrine, sclerosants and thrombogenic substances, or with thermal therapies, are efficacious and comparable. Combination therapy involving injection and thermal techniques may offer an advantage over single-method therapy. The differences in the results between clinical trials and routine clinical practice, and among the various randomized studies, are probably related to operators' experience and variations in technique rather than to inconsistency of endoscopic haemostasis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)391-410
Number of pages20
JournalBailliere's Best Practice and Research in Clinical Gastroenterology
Volume14
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2000
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Ulcer
Hemorrhage
Endoscopic Hemostasis
Numbers Needed To Treat
Meta-Analysis
Therapeutics
Hot Temperature
Sclerosing Solutions
Injections
Evidence-Based Medicine
Peptic Ulcer
Epinephrine
Clinical Trials

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

Current status of endoscopic therapy for ulcer bleeding. / Rollhauser, Carlos; Fleischer, D. E.

In: Bailliere's Best Practice and Research in Clinical Gastroenterology, Vol. 14, No. 3, 01.01.2000, p. 391-410.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{923496cdcebd419eb79eef65dff5f1ea,
title = "Current status of endoscopic therapy for ulcer bleeding",
abstract = "This article provides an overview of the therapeutic endoscopic modalities available for the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. The benefits of endoscopic haemostasis have been fully demonstrated by three meta-analyses, which included most of the controlled trials published until 1992. In this review, an emphasis is placed on randomized, prospective comparative trials published during the past 20 years. Using an evidence-based medicine approach, the results of meta-analyses are translated into efficacy measures known as relative and absolute risk reductions, and number needed to treat. Single-modality treatments with injection agents such as epinephrine, sclerosants and thrombogenic substances, or with thermal therapies, are efficacious and comparable. Combination therapy involving injection and thermal techniques may offer an advantage over single-method therapy. The differences in the results between clinical trials and routine clinical practice, and among the various randomized studies, are probably related to operators' experience and variations in technique rather than to inconsistency of endoscopic haemostasis.",
author = "Carlos Rollhauser and Fleischer, {D. E.}",
year = "2000",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1053/bega.2000.0086",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "391--410",
journal = "Bailliere's Best Practice and Research in Clinical Gastroenterology",
issn = "1521-6918",
publisher = "Bailliere Tindall Ltd",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Current status of endoscopic therapy for ulcer bleeding

AU - Rollhauser, Carlos

AU - Fleischer, D. E.

PY - 2000/1/1

Y1 - 2000/1/1

N2 - This article provides an overview of the therapeutic endoscopic modalities available for the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. The benefits of endoscopic haemostasis have been fully demonstrated by three meta-analyses, which included most of the controlled trials published until 1992. In this review, an emphasis is placed on randomized, prospective comparative trials published during the past 20 years. Using an evidence-based medicine approach, the results of meta-analyses are translated into efficacy measures known as relative and absolute risk reductions, and number needed to treat. Single-modality treatments with injection agents such as epinephrine, sclerosants and thrombogenic substances, or with thermal therapies, are efficacious and comparable. Combination therapy involving injection and thermal techniques may offer an advantage over single-method therapy. The differences in the results between clinical trials and routine clinical practice, and among the various randomized studies, are probably related to operators' experience and variations in technique rather than to inconsistency of endoscopic haemostasis.

AB - This article provides an overview of the therapeutic endoscopic modalities available for the treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding. The benefits of endoscopic haemostasis have been fully demonstrated by three meta-analyses, which included most of the controlled trials published until 1992. In this review, an emphasis is placed on randomized, prospective comparative trials published during the past 20 years. Using an evidence-based medicine approach, the results of meta-analyses are translated into efficacy measures known as relative and absolute risk reductions, and number needed to treat. Single-modality treatments with injection agents such as epinephrine, sclerosants and thrombogenic substances, or with thermal therapies, are efficacious and comparable. Combination therapy involving injection and thermal techniques may offer an advantage over single-method therapy. The differences in the results between clinical trials and routine clinical practice, and among the various randomized studies, are probably related to operators' experience and variations in technique rather than to inconsistency of endoscopic haemostasis.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033891764&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033891764&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1053/bega.2000.0086

DO - 10.1053/bega.2000.0086

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 391

EP - 410

JO - Bailliere's Best Practice and Research in Clinical Gastroenterology

JF - Bailliere's Best Practice and Research in Clinical Gastroenterology

SN - 1521-6918

IS - 3

ER -