Abstract
Objective. To investigate treatment practice in non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (NVUGIB) caused by gastroduodenal ulcer and how it adheres to the best evidence as documented in randomized studies and meta-analyses. Material and methods. The literature was surveyed to identify appropriate practices, and a structured multiple choice questionnaire developed and mailed to all departments in Denmark treating UGIB. Results. All 42 departments responded. All had therapeutic gastroscopes and equipment necessary for endoscopic haemostasis; 90% of departments had written guidelines. Adjuvant pharmacologic treatment included tranexamic acid in 38%. Proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) were used by all departments, with 29% starting prior to endoscopic treatment. Eight departments (19%) used continuous PPI infusion, three of them starting with a bolus dose. In 50% of departments an anaesthesiologist was always present regardless of whether endotracheal intubation (routinely used by 10%) was used or not. Ten percent did not treat Forrest IIa and IIb ulcers, while IIc ulcers were treated by 36%. In 10% of departments clots were never removed, while in 2/3 attempts were made to remove resistant clots by mechanic means. Seven departments (17%) used monotherapy with epinephrine, while 59% always used dual therapy; 19% injected less than 10 ml. In rebleeding, 92% attempted endoscopic treatment before surgery, and used epinephrine in 79% of cases, while the remainder used epinephrine or polidocanol at the discretion of the endoscopist. Two out of three departments used high-dependency or intensive-care units for surveillance. Seventeen percent applied scheduled second-look gastroscopy. Conclusions. Practice is variable, even in areas with established evidence based on randomized controlled studies, such as dosage and way of administration and duration of PPI treatment, injection treatment used as monotherapy and the volume used, including ulcers with clots for treatment, and the use of scheduled second-look endoscopy. Since the rebleeding rate has remained unchanged for decades, and rebleeding implies increased surgery and mortality rates, appropriate practices must be promoted in order to improve results. Development and implementation of national guidelines may facilitate the process.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.