Brief Article
Copyright ©2012 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. May 14, 2012; 18(18): 2219-2224
Published online May 14, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i18.2219
Table 1 Clinical and endoscopic characteristics of the patients at study entry n (%)
Group 1(n = 50)Group 2 (n = 50)Group 3 (n = 50)
Age (yr)68 (40-96)61 (30-92)67 (40-94)
Gender (M/F)31/1933/1734/16
Location of ulcer
Stomach26 (52)23 (46)28 (56)
Duodenum24 (48)27 (54)22 (44)
Ulcer size (cm)
< 236 (72)44 (88 )37 (74)
≥ 214 (28)6 (12)13 (26)
Gastric content
Blood19 (38)22 (44)21 (42)
Coffee ground31 (62)28 (56)29 (58)
Shock4 (8)2 (4)1 (2)
Hb level (g/dL)9.3 (3.9-14.7)9.0 (3.6-14.2)9.4 (5.6-14.3)
Comorbid disease36 (72)35 (70)33 (60)
NSAIDs15 (30)23 (46)29 (58)
Alcohol consumption20 (40)23 (46)30 (60)
Smoker’s12 (24)16 (32)10 (20)
Previous ulcer disease14 (28)10 (20)11 (22)
Previous ulcer bleeding12 (24)10 (20)8 (16)
Table 2 Clinical outcomes of endoscopic therapy n (%)
Group 1Group 2Group 3
Primary outcome
Early recurrent bleeding15 (30)8 (16)2 (4)cb
Stigmata
Spurting4 (26.7)1 (12.5)1 (50)
Oozing5 (33.3)2 (25)1 (50)
Visible vessel6 (40)5 (62.5)0
Secondary outcomes
Initial hemostasis50 (100)50 (100)50 (100)
Permanent hemostasis44 (88)46 (92)48 (96)
Emergency surgery6 (12)4 (8)2 (4)
30-d mortality3 (6)0 (0)4 (8)
Blood transfusion (mL)1041 (120-1997)912 (0-2039)840 (0-1893)
Hospital stays (d)7.5 (1-14)7.6 (1-15)5.7(1-15)bd
Table 3 Therapeutic efficacy of small-volume and large-volume epinephrine, and hemoclips in reducing recurrent bleeding (95% CI)
Recurrent bleeding rate (%)RRR (%)ARR (%)NNT
Small-volume vs large-volume epinephrine46.6 (-11.2-75.0)14.0 (-2.6-30.3)8.0 (37.7-3.3)
Small-volume epinephrine vs hemoclips86.7 (51.7-96.5)26.0 (12.3-40.4)4.0 (2.5-8.1)
Large-volume epinephrine vs hemoclips75.0 (9.0-23.0)12.0 (0.2-25.0)9.0 (4.0-476.0)