Current status and clinical outcome of endoscopic hemostatic powder in gastrointestinal bleeding: a retrospective multicenter study
- Author:
Zie Hae LIM
1
;
Seung In SEO
;
Dae-Seong MYUNG
;
Seung Han KIM
;
Han Hee LEE
;
Selen KIM
;
Bo-In LEE
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- From:Clinical Endoscopy 2024;57(5):620-627
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Background/Aims:Few multicenter studies have investigated the efficacy of hemostatic powders in gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. We aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of hemostatic powder therapy and the independent factors affecting rebleeding rates.
Methods:We retrospectively recruited patients who underwent a new hemostatic adhesive powder (UI-EWD; Next-Biomedical) treatment for upper and lower GI bleeding between January 1, 2020 and March 1, 2023. We collected patients’ medical records and bleeding lesions. The primary outcomes were clinical and technical success rates, and the secondary outcomes were early, delayed, and refractory bleeding, mortality, and factors affecting early rebleeding rates.
Results:This study enrolled 135 patients (age: 67.7±13.6 years, male: 74.1%) from five hospitals. Indications for UI-EWD were peptic ulcers (51.1%), post-procedure-related bleeding (23.0%), and tumor bleeding (19.3%). The clinical and technical success rates were both 97%. The early, delayed, and refractory rebleeding rates were 19.3%, 11.1%, and 12.8%, respectively. Initially elevated blood urea nitrogen (BUN) levels (p=0.014) and Forrest classification IA or IB compared with IIA or IIB (p=0.036) were factors affecting early rebleeding.
Conclusions:UI-EWD showed high clinical and technical success rates; however, rebleeding after UI-EWD therapy in patients with initially high BUN levels and active bleeding, according to the Forrest classification, should be considered.
