AI Article Synopsis

  • This study compared the effectiveness of catheter angiography and contrast-enhanced multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) in detecting acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in patients who previously failed endoscopic treatment.
  • Data were collected from 63 patients over three years, focusing on their diagnostic outcomes after undergoing endoscopy, MDCT, and angiography within 24 hours.
  • Results showed that micro-angiography had a significantly higher GIB detection rate compared to MDCT and 5Fr-angiography, and arterial embolization was deemed both effective and safe in the majority of cases, despite some complications.

Article Abstract

Purpose: This study compared the detection sensitivity of catheter angiography to that of contrast-enhanced multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) for detecting acute non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) to elucidate the diagnostic efficacy of catheter angiography. We also determined GIB outcomes of transcatheter arterial embolization after failed endoscopic hemostasis.

Materials And Methods: Data were collected retrospectively from 63 patients managed at four institutions who met the following criteria during a 3-year period: (1) ongoing non-variceal GIB confirmed during endoscopy; (2) failed endoscopic hemostasis; and (3) endoscopy, MDCT, and catheter angiography performed within 24 h. The diagnostic efficacies of MDCT, selective angiography with a 5-Fr catheter (5Fr-angiography), and super-selective angiography with a microcatheter (micro-angiography) were compared using endoscopic diagnosis as the reference method. The rates of technical success, clinical success, and complications were analyzed when arterial embolization was performed.

Results: All transcatheter angiographies were performed after MDCT. Micro-angiography had a significantly higher GIB detection rate (73.0%) than MDCT (57.1%) and 5Fr-angiography (39.7%) (micro-angiography vs. MDCT, P = 0.021; MDCT vs. 5Fr-angiography, P = 0.043). Arterial embolization was attempted in 55 of 63 patients, with technical success achieved in 53 of 55 patients (96.4%) and clinical success in 38 of 42 patients (90.5%). Eleven patients were lost to follow-up. Three patients experienced complications, including bowel infarction (two patients) and common bile duct stricture (one patient).

Conclusion: In cases of endoscopic hemostasis failure, angiography can be performed even if MDCT yields negative results but should include micro-angiography; moreover, embolization can be performed safely and effectively.

Trial Registration: None.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11604-022-01246-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

arterial embolization
16
failed endoscopic
12
endoscopic hemostasis
12
catheter angiography
12
gastrointestinal bleeding
8
diagnostic efficacy
8
computed tomography
8
outcomes transcatheter
8
transcatheter arterial
8
mdct
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!