Randomized controlled studies of injection Gold Probes compared with monotherapies for hemostasis of bleeding canine gastric ulcers.

BACKGROUND

There is a significant interest in combination therapy using endoscopic epinephrine injection and thermal coagulation for nonvariceal hemostasis. The purpose of the study was to compare the relative effectiveness, ease of use, and safety of new Injection Gold Probes to other hemostasis techniques in three randomized, controlled laboratory studies of bleeding canine gastric ulcers.

METHODS

Fifteen dogs with prehepatic portal hypertension were heparinized and bleeding gastric ulcers were induced with jumbo biopsy forceps. Three different prototypes of Injection Gold Probes were compared with monotherapy (thermal, electrocoagulation, or epinephrine injection alone), control, or combination therapy with separate injector and thermal probes. The treatment times, total number of pulses or injections, volume of epinephrine injected, and ease of applications were recorded. Gastric ulcer size, ulcer healing, and complications were evaluated at 1 and 4 weeks.

RESULTS

All endoscopic treatments were effective for acute hemostasis compared with control. Thermal coagulation alone was the fastest treatment to perform. The performance of the first Injection Gold Probe prototype was restricted by its small-gauge needle. The second and third Injection Gold Probe prototypes had a larger-gauge needle and irrigation channel which made them faster and easier to use than separate injection catheters and thermal probes.

CONCLUSIONS

The advantages of Injection Gold Probes were the ability to irrigate, inject, and coagulate without probe removal. Combination therapy did not increase treatment-related complications compared with monotherapies.