Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 1998
Prospective comparison of argon plasma coagulator and heater probe in the endoscopic treatment of major peptic ulcer bleeding.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Cipolletta L, Bianco M A, Rotondano G, Piscopo R, Prisco A, Garofano M L
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Argon plasma coagulator was prospectively compared with heater probe in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers.
METHODS: Forty-one patients with major stigmata of ulcer hemorrhage were randomly assigned to receive either heater probe (n = 20) or argon plasma coagulation (n = 21) treatment; 40% had active bleeding and 60% had a nonbleeding visible vessel in the ulcer crater. The two groups were similar with respect to all background variables. Episodes of recurrent bleeding were retreated with the same modality as used previously. Patients in whom treatment or retreatment failed underwent emergency surgery.
RESULTS: Initial hemostasis (95% vs. 95.2%), recurrent bleeding (21% vs. 15%), 30-day mortality (5% vs. 4.7%), and emergency surgery (15% vs. 9.5%) were comparable in the heater probe and argon plasma coagulation groups, respectively. Argon plasma coagulation provided faster hemostasis (mean 60 +/- 19 vs. 115 +/- 28 seconds, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Argon plasma coagulation is safe and effective. Larger studies in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers are needed to confirm these promising results.
METHODS: Forty-one patients with major stigmata of ulcer hemorrhage were randomly assigned to receive either heater probe (n = 20) or argon plasma coagulation (n = 21) treatment; 40% had active bleeding and 60% had a nonbleeding visible vessel in the ulcer crater. The two groups were similar with respect to all background variables. Episodes of recurrent bleeding were retreated with the same modality as used previously. Patients in whom treatment or retreatment failed underwent emergency surgery.
RESULTS: Initial hemostasis (95% vs. 95.2%), recurrent bleeding (21% vs. 15%), 30-day mortality (5% vs. 4.7%), and emergency surgery (15% vs. 9.5%) were comparable in the heater probe and argon plasma coagulation groups, respectively. Argon plasma coagulation provided faster hemostasis (mean 60 +/- 19 vs. 115 +/- 28 seconds, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Argon plasma coagulation is safe and effective. Larger studies in patients with bleeding peptic ulcers are needed to confirm these promising results.