Embolization versus surgery for peptic ulcer bleeding after failed endoscopic hemostasis: a meta-analysis

Moe Kyaw, Yee Tse, Daphne Ang, Tiing Leong Ang, James Lau, Moe Kyaw, Yee Tse, Daphne Ang, Tiing Leong Ang, James Lau

Abstract

Background and study aims: A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the efficacy of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) compared with surgery in the management of patients with recurrent nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) after failure of endoscopic hemostasis.

Patients and methods: Publications in English and non-English literatures (OVID, MEDLINE, and EMBASE) and abstracts from major international conferences were searched for studies comparing TAE with surgery for treatment of NVUGIB after endoscopic hemostasis failure. Outcome measures included rebleeding rate, all-cause mortality rate, and need for additional interventions to secure hemostasis.

Results: From 1234 citations, 6 retrospective comparative studies were included that involved 423 patients (TAE, 182, 56 % male; surgery, 241, 68 % male). TAE patients were older (mean age, TAE 75, surgery, 68). The risk of rebleeding was significantly higher in TAE patients compared with surgically treated patients (relative risk [RR] 1.82, 95 % confidence interval [95 %CI] 1.23 - 2.67), with no statistically significant heterogeneity among the included studies (P = 0.66, I (2) = 0.0 %). After sensitivity analysis excluding studies with a large age difference between the two groups, a higher risk of bleeding remained in the TAE group (RR 2.64, 95 %CI] 1.48 - 4.71). No significant difference in mortality (RR 0.87, 95 %CI 0.59 - 1.29) or requirement for additional interventions (RR 1.67, 95 %CI 0.75 - 3.70) was shown between the two groups.

Conclusion: A higher rebleeding rate was observed after TAE, suggesting surgery more definitively secured hemostasis, with no significant difference in mortality rate or requirement of additional interventions. The TAE patients were older and in poorer health, thus future randomized studies are needed for accurate comparison of the two modalities.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Meta-analysis of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) versus surgery for peptic ulcer bleeding after failed endoscopic hemostasis: literature search. GI, gastrointestinal.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Rebleeding after transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) versus surgery for peptic ulcer bleeding after failed endoscopic hemostasis: forest plot. CI, confidence interval.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Mortality after transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) versus surgery for peptic ulcer bleeding after failed endoscopic hemostasis: forest plot. CI, confidence interval.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Need for additional intervention after transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) versus surgery for peptic ulcer bleeding after failed endoscopic hemostasis: forest plot. CI, confidence interval.

References

    1. Cook D J, Guyatt G H, Salena B J. et al.Endoscopic therapy for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 1992;102:139–148.
    1. Rockall T A, Logan R F, Devlin H B. Steering Committee and members of the National Audit of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Haemorrhage et al.Incidence of and mortality from acute upper gastrointestinal haemorrhage in the United Kingdom. BMJ. 1995;311:222–226.
    1. de Manzoni G Catalano F Festini M et al.Emorragia acuta da ulcera duodenale. Risultati del trattamento endoscopico del primo sanguinamento e delle recidive. (In Italian.) [Acute hemorrhage caused by duodenal ulcer. Results of endoscopic treatment of the first bleeding episode and of recurrences] Ann Ital Chir 200273387–394., discussion 394-396
    1. Cheynel N, Peschaud F, Hagry O. et al.Ulcère gastroduodénal hémorragique: résultats du traitement chirurgical. (in French). [Bleeding gastroduodenal ulcer: results of surgical management] Ann Chir. 2001;126:232–235.
    1. Lau J Y, Sung J J, Lam Y H. et al.Endoscopic retreatment compared with surgery in patients with recurrent bleeding after initial endoscopic control of bleeding ulcers. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:751–756.
    1. Barkun A N, Bardou M, Kuipers E J. et al.International consensus recommendations on the management of patients with nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152:101–113.
    1. Rösch J, Dotter C T, Brown M J. Selective arterial embolization. A new method for control of acute gastrointestinal bleeding. Radiology. 1972;102:303–306.
    1. Wells G A Shea B O’Connell D et al.The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analysis 2011. Accessed September 2, 2013.
    1. DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7:177–188.
    1. Higgins J P, Thompson S G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539–1558.
    1. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M. et al.Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–634.
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre . The Cochrane Collaboration Review Manager (RevMan) computer program, Version 5.0. 2012.
    1. Ang D, Teo E K, Tan A. et al.A comparison of surgery versus transcatheter angiographic embolization in the treatment of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding uncontrolled by endoscopy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012;24:929–938.
    1. Wong T C, Wong K T, Chiu P W. et al.A comparison of angiographic embolization with surgery after failed endoscopic hemostasis to bleeding peptic ulcers. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011;73:900–908.
    1. Venclauskas L, Bratlie S O, Zachrisson K. et transcatheter arterial embolization a safer alternative than surgery when endoscopic therapy fails in bleeding duodenal ulcer? Scand J Gastroenterol. 2010;45:299–304.
    1. Ripoll C, Bañares R, Beceiro I. et al.Comparison of transcatheter arterial embolization and surgery for treatment of bleeding peptic ulcer after endoscopic treatment failure. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2004;15:447–450.
    1. Larssen L, Moger T, Bjørnbeth B A. et al.Transcatheter arterial embolization in the management of bleeding duodenal ulcers: a 5.5-year retrospective study of treatment and outcome. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2008;43:217–222.
    1. Eriksson L G, Ljungdahl M, Sundbom M. et al.Transcatheter arterial embolization versus surgery in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding after therapeutic endoscopy failure. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19:1413–1418.
    1. Okazaki M, Higashihara H, Ono H. et al.Embolotherapy of massive duodenal hemorrhage. Gastrointest Radiol. 1992;17:319–323.
    1. Lang E K. Transcatheter embolization in management of hemorrhage from duodenal ulcer: long-term results and complications. Radiology. 1992;182:703–707.
    1. Toyoda H, Nakano S, Takeda I. et al.Transcatheter arterial embolization for massive bleeding from duodenal ulcers not controlled by endoscopic hemostasis. Endoscopy. 1995;27:304–307.
    1. Walsh R M Anain P Geisinger M et al.Role of angiography and embolization for massive gastroduodenal hemorrhage J Gastrointest Surg 1999361–65,.discussion 66
    1. De Wispelaere J F, De Ronde T, Trigaux J P. et al.Duodenal ulcer hemorrhage treated by embolization: results in 28 patients. Acta Gastroenterol Belg. 2002;65:6–11.
    1. Ljungdahl M, Eriksson L G, Nyman R. et al.Arterial embolisation in management of massive bleeding from gastric and duodenal ulcers. Eur J Surg. 2002;168:384–390.
    1. Holme J B, Nielsen D T, Funch-Jensen P. et al.Transcatheter arterial embolization in patients with bleeding duodenal ulcer: an alternative to surgery. Acta Radiol. 2006;47:244–247.
    1. Branicki F J Coleman S Y Fok P J et al.Bleeding peptic ulcer: a prospective evaluation of risk factors for rebleeding and mortality World J Surg 19901402262–269,.discussion 269-270
    1. Loffroy R, Guiu B, D’Athis P. et al.Arterial embolotherapy for endoscopically unmanageable acute gastroduodenal hemorrhage: predictors of early rebleeding. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;7:515–523.
    1. Shin J H. Recent update of embolization of upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding. Korean J Radiol. 2012;13:31–S39 .
    1. Loffroy R, Rao P, Ota S. et al.Embolization of acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage resistant to endoscopic treatment: results and predictors of recurrent bleeding. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2010;33:1088–1100.
    1. Mine T, Murata S, Nakazawa K. et al.Glue embolization for gastroduodenal ulcer bleeding: contribution to hemodynamics and healing process. Acta Radiol. 2013;54:934–938.
    1. Murata S, Onozawa S, Nakazawa K. et al.Glue embolization for endoscopically unmanageable gastrointestinal haemorrhage. Hepatogastroenterology. 2012;59:1126–1130.
    1. Loffroy R, Estivalet L, Cherblanc V. et al.Transcatheter embolization as the new reference standard for endoscopically unmanageable upper gastrointestinal bleeding. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;4:223–227.
    1. Aina R, Oliva V L, Therasse E. et al.Arterial embolotherapy for upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: outcome assessment. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2001;12:195–200.
    1. Poultsides G A, Kim C J, Orlando R III. et al.Angiographic embolization for gastroduodenal hemorrhage: safety, efficacy, and predictors of outcome. Arch Surg. 2008;143:457–461.
    1. Padia S A, Geisinger M A, Newman J S. et al.Effectiveness of coil embolization in angiographically detectable versus non-detectable sources of upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;20:461–466.
    1. Berlin J A. Invited commentary: benefits of heterogeneity in meta-analysis of data from epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;142:383–387.
    1. Stroup D F, Berlin J A, Morton S C. et al.Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283:2008–2012.
    1. Egger M, Schneider M, Davey Smith G. Spurious precision? Meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ. 1998;316:140–144.
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J. et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe