Endoscopic vs. Medical Therapy for Bleeding Peptic Ulcers with Adherent Clot: a Randomized Comparative Trial

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is the most common and potentially life threatening emergency. Despite great advances in the field of medicine, the optimal management of bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot on endoscopy is still controversial. The aim of this study is to compare the combined endoscopic and medical therapy with medical therapy alone for bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot (Forrest type IIB). During two-year study period, around 342 patients presented to our tertiary care hospital with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Out of these, 81 patients were noted to have adherent clot (Forrest type IIB) during endoscopy and were included in study. 40 patients received combined endoscopic and medical treatment, whereas 41 patients received medical treatment only. The base line characteristics of patients in two groups were comparable. Primary Outcome being recurrence of bleeding within 7 days of treatment was less in combined therapy group compared to medical therapy group (2.5% vs. 17.1%). This was statistically significant. Secondary outcome like recurrence of bleed in 30 days and need for repeat endoscopy were less in combined group compared to medical therapy group. These were statistically significant as well. Other secondary outcomes like necessity for surgery and mortality were fewer in combined group, but these were not statistically significant. In conclusion combination endoscopic therapy consisting of epinephrine injection, removal of the adherent clot, and treatment of underlying stigmata is more effective than medical therapy alone.

Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding (UGIB) is common and potentially life-threatening gastrointestinal emergency. The annual incidence of hospitalization for acute UGIB is 1 per 1000 people in America [1] with a mortality rate of 7% to 10% [2]. Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (EGD) is the prime diagnostic and therapeutic tool for UGIB [3]. It precisely delineates the bleeding site and determines the specific cause. EGD is 90% to 95% diagnostic for acute UGIB [4]. Patients after initial resuscitation should undergo early endoscopy (within 24 hours). It helps to identify Stigmata of Recent Hemorrhage (SRH), in patients with underlying peptic ulcer disease. Patient with high risk SRH like active bleed or visible vessel needs endoscopic intervention to reduce morbidity and mortality [5-7]. Ulcers with a clean base or with a flat pigmented spot have a low risk of rebleeding and do not require endoscopic-therapy [7-9]. Ulcers with adherent clot carry 8 to 36 percent risk of rebleeding [7,10]. The optimal management of ulcers with adherent clot is controversial. Endoscopic therapies include injection, ablation, and mechanical therapy. The above three endoscopic therapies are effective as monotherapies, but combined therapies increase the efficacy [11-15].

Proton Pump Inhibitor (PPI) therapy is recommended for patients with acute UGIB. This therapy reduces the severity of SRH at endoscopy and reduces the need for endoscopic therapy as compared with no treatment or histamine-2 antagonist (H2 Blocker) therapy [16,17]. PPI therapy modestly reduces the risk for rebleeding, need for surgery, and blood transfusions, however so far hasn’t shown to reduce mortality [18]. The benefit is greatest in patients who have high risk SRH, such as a visible vessel. Although intravenous infusion is ideal, oral PPI therapy provides much of the benefit [19]. The rationale for PPI therapy is that most common causes of UGIB, including ulcers, gastritis, duodenitis, and hemorrhagic reflux esophagitis, are medically treated with acid-suppressive therapy. PPI therapy is also useful for hemostasis by neutralization of intraluminal gastric acid it promotes stabilizing of blood clots [20]. Omeprazole has been the most extensively studied intravenous PPI, others are pantoprazole and esomeprazole. The suggested dose of intravenous pantoprazole is 80 mg bolus followed by 8 mg/ hr infusion. Omeprazole and esomeprazole have also been used as 80 mg boluses followed by 8 mg/ hr infusions. The infusion is usually continued for 72 hours. If there is no rebleeding the patient may be switched to oral pantoprazole 40 mg/ day or omeprazole 20 mg/ day.

Till date, the management of ulcers containing adherent clots has been controversial. Some investigators do not recommend endoscopic therapy for patients with non-bleeding adherent clots because of the potential to induce severe hemorrhage [21,22]. In contrast, others advocate removal of the overlying clot and treatment of underlying stigmata for patients with adherent clot in an ulcer base [1,23]. Two recently published randomized, controlled trials have shown that injection of epinephrine followed by removal of adherent clot and treatment of underlying stigmata significantly reduced the rate of recurrent ulcer bleeding when compared with leaving the clot undisturbed [24,25]. However later on meta-analysis found no clear evidence for need of specific endoscopic interventions in patients with an adherent clot [5].

The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of combined therapy vs. medical therapy alone for the patients with bleeding peptic ulcers with an adherent clot.

This prospective randomized single center study was conducted in the Division of Gastroenterology, Sheri-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Science, and Srinagar, India over a period of two years from Nov 2011 to Nov 2013. The study was approved by post graduate clinical research and ethics committee of institute. Patients who presented with UGIB, after initial resuscitation underwent Upper GI endoscopy. Patients with adherent clot (which was defined as a lesion that was red, maroon, or black and amorphous in texture and that could not be dislodged by suction or forceful water irrigation) on endoscopy were randomized into two groups. Randomization was done by computer generated random numbers. One group with adherent clot received medical therapy only i.e. intravenous pantoprazole 80 mg boluses followed by 8 mg/ hr infusions for 72 hours. The other group received endoscopic therapy in addition to medical therapy. The endoscopic therapy involved injection of 1:10,000 solution of epinephrine into and around the clot, followed by removal of clot with polypectomy snare. After the removal of the clot, ulcers with underlying stigmata were treated with multipolar electrocoagulation (generator setting of 15W) applied for a moderate amount of time (10 secs) with moderate pressure on the bleeding site until formation of white coagulum appears. All patients in the two groups were monitored for 72 hours after endoscopy. Patients who remained stable at 72 hours were discharged on oral omeprazole 20 mg daily and followed weekly for 30 days.

The primary outcome of the study was to assess the rate of rebleeding within 7 days of treatment in two groups. Secondary outcomes included 30-day rate of recurrent bleeding, need for repeat endoscopy or surgery and rate of mortality.

Exclusion criteria

1. Age less than 15 years.

2. Pregnant and lactating women.

3. Patients not giving written Informed consent.

4. Patients with comorbidities like Liver Disease, GI Malignancy, CKD, Systemic infection, Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Disease.

5. Patients with previous gastric acid reducing surgeries (vagotomy, gastric resection)

6. Patients on anticoagulants.

Statistical analysis

Data analysis was performed using the SPSSversion 20 (IBM).Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± SD. Independent-Sample T Test was performed for continuous variables and chi square test (or Fisher’s exact test when appropriate) for discrete variables. A value of P≤0.05 was considered statistically significant.

During the study period, around 342 patients presented to our hospital with acute upper gastrointestinal bleed. Out of these, 81 patients were noticed to have adherent clot (Forrest type IIB) on endoscopy and were included in study. 40 patients received endoscopic treatment in combination with medical treatment; whereas 41 patients received medical treatment only. The base line characteristics of patients in two groups were comparable (Table 1). During endoscopy, gastric ulcer was found in 38 and duodenal ulcer in 43 patients. Underlying stigmata, after removal of clot, in endoscopic group revealed visible vessel in 16(40%), flat red spot in 10(25%), active bleed-ooze/spurt in 6(15%) and Clean base ulcer in 8(20%) patients (Table 2).

Recurrence of bleed within 1 week of treatment

Recurrence of bleeding within 7 days of treatment occurred in 9 (11.1%) patients. Recurrence was lower in the combined therapy group compared to medical therapy group (2.5% vs. 19.5%) This was statistically significant with P value of 0.029 (Table 3).

Secondary outcome

Recurrence of bleed within 30 days of treatment: Recurrent bleeding within 30 days was less in combination therapy group compared to medical therapy group (5% vs. 22%). This was statistically significant with P value of 0.026 (Table 3).

Surgical therapy within 30 days: Surgical therapy for treatment of bleeding ulcer within 30 days was less in combined therapy group compared to medical therapy group (0% vs. 2.4%). But this was statistically insignificant with P value of > 0.999 (Table 3).

Mortality within 30 days: Mortality within 30 days was less in combined therapy group compared to medical therapy group (0% vs. 2.4%) and again statistically insignificant with P value of >0.999 (Tables 3).

The management of non-variceal UGIB has evolved immensely over a period of decade or so, with the availability of PPIs and endoscopic therapy. But the optimal management of bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot is still controversial. The purpose of our study was to address the controversies in the management of bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot. The present study is the largest randomized prospective study to compare combination endoscopic and medical therapy with medical treatment only of peptic ulcers with adherent clots and to evaluate the effectiveness of combination endoscopic therapy in a clinical setting.

Non-bleeding adherent clots are commonly identified when endoscopy is performed for acute upper GI bleed. The study by Laine L, Stein C, et al. [26] consisted of young, low-risk patients and found that the rates of recurrent bleeding for patients with adherent clots treated with medical therapy were as low as 8%. Laine L, Mc Quaid, et al. [5] found that Endoscopic therapy was effective for active bleeding and a non-bleeding visible vessel but not for a clot. In a randomized controlled study of 27 patients with adherent clots, Jensen, et al. [27] noted recurrent bleeding rates of 33% for patients treated with a heat probe, 37.5% with injection therapy, and 30.0% with medical therapy. Based on these findings, these investigators recommended that adherent clots should not be forcibly removed and be managed with medical therapy. Recent study by Jensen, et al. [11] randomized 32 high-risk patients with severe upper GI Bleed due to ulcer and non-bleeding adherent clot resistant to target irrigation to combination endoscopic or medical therapy. Combination endoscopic therapy consisted of epinephrine injection, shaving the clot down with cold guillotining, and multipolar electro coagulation of the underlying stigmata. The frequency of recurrent hemorrhage during hospitalization was significantly lower in patients treated with combination endoscopic therapy than in those treated with medical therapy alone (0% vs. 35.3%; p = 0.01). Similar findings were reported by Bleau, et al. [12] who randomized 56 high-risk patients with severe GI Bleed due to ulcer and non-bleeding adherent clots resistant to target irrigation to receive combination endoscopic treatment or medical therapy. The frequency of recurrent hemorrhage within 1 month was significantly lower in the combination endoscopic treatment study group compared with the medical therapy only group (4.8% vs. 34.3%; p < 0.02). Edmund J, et al. [28] during their study found rates of recurrent bleeding within 7 days of endoscopy in high-risk patients treated with combination endoscopic therapy were significantly lower than those treated with medical therapy group (8.7% vs. 27.4%; p < 0.001). Combination endoscopic therapy was also associated with a significant decrease in the length of hospitalization, less number of packed red blood cell transfusions after endoscopy, the need for repeat endoscopy, and recurrent bleeding within 30 days compared with medical therapy only. Si Hye Kim, Jin Tae Jung, et al. [29], in their study on adherent clot found that endoscopic therapy significantly reduced bleeding related mortality (1.2% vs. 10%; p = 0.018) and all-cause mortality (3.7% vs. 20.0%; p = 0.005). However, there was no difference between endoscopic therapy and medical therapy regarding rebleeding (7.1% vs. 9.5%; p = 0.641).

Our results were similar with most of the recent studies [11,12]. The rates of recurrent bleeding in patients treated within 7 days with combination endoscopic therapy were significantly lower than those treated with medical therapy only (2.5% vs. 17.1%: P Value 0.031). In addition, combination endoscopic therapy was associated with a significant decrease in recurrence of bleed within 30 days and the need for repeat endoscopy compared with medical therapy only. The need for surgical intervention for ulcer and the 30-day mortality rates were also lower in the endoscopic therapy group in the study, but these differences were not statistically significant.

Combination endoscopic and medical therapy is more effective than medical therapy alone for bleeding peptic ulcers with adherent clot. Any patient presenting with non-variceal UGIB should be immediately started on PPIs, preferably I.V bolus followed by infusion for 72 hrs. After initial resuscitation, patients with bleeding peptic ulcer with adherent clot should be taken for early endoscopic intervention followed by medical therapy.

None

Financial Disclosures

None

Author Contribution

Ajaz Ahmad Telwani: Data gathering, Compiled Data, Extensively Reviewed literature and drafted manuscript.

Azhar Hafeez Baba, Mohammed Yasin Mujoo, Younis Ashraf: Reviewed literature.

Khalid Rasheed: Reviewed and Edited final draft

1. Boonpongmanee S, Fleischer DE, Pezzullo JC, Collier K, Mayoral W, Al-Kawas F, et al. The frequency of peptic ulcer disease as a cause of upper-GI bleeding is exaggerated. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 59: 788–94. https://goo.gl/9R5iQh
2. Palmer K. Acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Br Med Bull. 2007; 83: 307–24. https://goo.gl/abkvAF
3. Adler DG, Leighton JA, Davila RE, Hirota WK, Jacobson BC, Qureshi WA, et al. ASGE guideline: the role of endoscopy in acute non-variceal upper-GI hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 497–504. https://goo.gl/nRCVK8
4. Chak A, Cooper GS, Lloyd LE, Kolz CS, Barnhart BA, Wong RC. Effectiveness of endoscopy in patients admitted to the intensive care unit with upper GI hemorrhage. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001; 53: 6–13. https://goo.gl/ALu1bP
5. Laine L, McQuaid KR. Endoscopic therapy for bleeding ulcers: an evidence-based approach based on meta-analyses of randomized controlledtrials. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009; 7: 33 – 47. https://goo.gl/QFKA2o
6. Katschinski B, Logan R, Davies J, Faulkner G, Pearson J, LangmanM. Prognostic factors in upper gastrointestinal bleeding. DigDis Sci. 1994; 39: 706–712. https://goo.gl/Arufdj
7. Laine L, Peterson WL. Bleeding peptic ulcer. N Engl J Med. 1994; 331: 717-27. https://goo.gl/9JCJak
8. Cipolletta L, Bianco MA, Rotondano G, Marmo R, Piscopo R. Outpatient management for low-risk nonvariceal upper GI bleeding: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002; 55: 1-5. https://goo.gl/PEFwpR
9. Lai KC, Hui WM, Wong BC, Ching CK, Lam SK. A retrospective and prospective study on the safety of discharging selected patients with duodenal ulcer bleeding on the same day as endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997; 45: 26–30. https://goo.gl/s58XCY
10. Laine L. Management of ulcers with adherent clots. Gastroenterology. 2002; 123: 632–636. https://goo.gl/aeoFVP
11. Jensen DM, Kovacs TO, Jutabha R, Machicado GA, Gralnek IM, Savides TJ, et al. Randomized trial of medical or endoscopic therapy to prevent recurrent ulcer hemorrhage in patients with adherent clots. Gastroenterology. 2002; 123: 407. https://goo.gl/NMqH12
12. Bleau BL, Gostout CJ, Sherman KE, Shaw MJ, Harford WV, Keate RF, et al. Recurrent bleeding from peptic ulcer associated with adherent clot: a randomized study comparing endoscopic treatment with medical therapy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2002; 56: 1. https://goo.gl/RfimFd
13. Jensen DM, Smith J, Savides TJ, et al. Randomized controlled study of combination epinephrine injection and gold probe compared to gold probe alone for hemostasis of actively bleeding peptic ulcers (abstract). Gastrointest Endosc. 2000; 51: AB130.
14. Park CH, Joo YE, Kim HS, Choi SK, Rew JS, Kim SJ, et al. A prospective, randomized trial comparing mechanical methods of hemostasis plus epinephrine injection to epinephrine injection alone for bleeding peptic ulcer. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 60: 173. https://goo.gl/A5H4kx
15. Bianco MA, Rotondano G, Marmo R, Piscopo R, Orsini L, Cipolletta L, et al. Combined epinephrine and bipolar probe coagulation vs. bipolar probe coagulation alone for bleeding peptic ulcer: a randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 60: 910. https://goo.gl/qmDLMe
16. Andrews CN, Levy A, Fishman M, Hahn M, Atkinson K, Kwan P, et al. Intravenous proton pump inhibitors in bleeding peptic ulcer disease with high-risk stigmata: a multicenter comparative study. Can J Gastro-enterol 2005; 19: 667- 71. https://goo.gl/jbvy49
17. Jensen DM, Pace SC, Soffer E, et al. 315 study Group. Continuous infusion of pantoprazole versus ranitidine for prevention of ulcer rebleeding: a US multicenter randomized double-blind study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006; 101: 1991-9. https://goo.gl/tXtruk
18. Leontiadis GI, Sharma VK, Howden CW. Systematic review and meta-analysis: proton-pump inhibitor treatment for ulcer bleeding reduces transfusion requirements and hospital stay-results from the Cochrane Collaboration. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005; 22: 169-74. https://goo.gl/3UmBuf
19. Khuroo MS, Yattoo GN, Javid G, Khan BA, Shah AA, Gulzar GM, et al. A comparision of omeprazole and placebo for bleeding peptic ulcer disease. N Engl J Med 1997; 336: 1054-8. https://goo.gl/pfjpTx
20. Green FW Jr, Kaplan MM, Curtis LE, Levine PH, et al. Effect of acid and pepsin on blood coagulation and platelet aggregation: a possible contributor prolonged gastroduodenal mucosal hemor-rhage. Gastroenterology. 1978; 74: 38–43. https://goo.gl/cEE8kB
21. Fallah MA, Prakash C, Edmundowicz S. Acute gastrointestinal bleeding. Med Clin North Am. 2000; 84: 1183 – 208. https://goo.gl/SHpxae
22. Kaplan RC, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, Furberg CD, Polak JF, Schoen RE, et al. Risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding among older patients. Cardiovascular Health Study Investigators. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001; 49: 126–33. https://goo.gl/vfgnfo
23. Peter DJ, Doughtery JM. Evaluation of the patient with gastrointestinal bleeding: an evidence based approach. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 1999; 17: 239–61. https://goo.gl/HYmorw
24. Jutabha R, Jensen DM. Management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in the patient with chronic liver disease. Med Clin North Am. 1996; 80: 1035–68. https://goo.gl/f2Sx2y
25. Bayyurt N, Abasiyanik MF, Sander E, Salih BA, et al. Canonical analysis of factors involved in the occurrence of peptic ulcers. Dig Dis Sci. 2007; 52: 140–6. https://goo.gl/YicgCP
26. Laine L, Stein C, and Sharma V A. Prospective outcome study of patients with clot in an ulcer and the effect of irrigation. Gastrointest Endosc. 1996; 43: 107-10. https://goo.gl/5sxVEp
27. Jensen DM, Kovacs TO, Jutabha R, Randall GM, Cheng S, Jensen ME, et al. Final results and cost assessment of endoscopic vs. medical therapies for prevention of recurrent ulcer hemorrhage from adherent clots in a randomized, controlled trial.  Gastrointest Endosc. 1995; 41: 365. https://goo.gl/mJjkfe
28. Bini EJ, Cohen J. Endoscopic treatment compared with medical therapy for the prevention of recurrent ulcer hemorrhage in patients with adherent clots. Gastrointest Endosc. 2003; 58: 707-14. https://goo.gl/s8DZx4
29. Kim SH, Jung JT, Kwon JG, Kim EY, Lee DW, Jeon SW,  et al. Comparison between Endoscopic Therapy and Medical Therapy in Peptic Ulcer Patients with Adherent Clot: A Multicenter Prospective Observational Cohort Study. Korean J Gastroenterol. 2015; 66: 98-105. https://goo.gl/8BJucZ