皮圈结扎与金属夹子治疗上消化道Dieulafoy病变出血的临床对比研究

目的:比较内镜下皮圈结扎（EBL)与金属夹子（EHP)治疗Dieulafoy病变出血的疗效及安全性。方法:2004年2月至2006年10月共有34例上消化道Dieulafoy病变出血患者入选本研究,其中22例病灶位于胃部,10例位于胃肠吻合口,2例位于十二指肠球部。将患者随机分成EBL组（n=16)和EHP组（n=18),分别采用EBL或EHP治疗,并对两组治疗结果进行比较。结果:EBL组与EHP组达到止血平均所需的皮圈戓金属夹子个数相似；两组早期止血率、再出血率、转外科手术率、并发症发生率、平均输血量及平均住院时间差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论:本组小样本的临床研究提示,EBL与EHP治疗上消化道Dieulafoy病变出血在临床疗效与安全性方面无明显差异。

Endoscopic band ligation versus endoscopic hemoclip placement for bleeding due to Dieulafoy lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract

ObjectiveTo compare the hemostatic efficacy and safety of endoscopic band ligation(EBL) and endoscopic hemoclip placement(EHP) for bleeding due to Dieulafoy lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract.MethodsBetween February 2004 and October 2006, 34 patients with Dieulafoy lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract were prospectively enrolled,including 22 cases of lesions in the stomach,10 in gastrointestinal stoma,and 2 in duodenal, who were randomly assigned to undergo EBL (n=16) or EHP (n=18). The therapeutic results of these 2 groups were compared.ResultsThe median number of O-ring or hemoclip required in the EBL group and the EHP group was similar. The rate of primary haemostasis,recurrent bleeding,transfer into surgery, complications, and average stay and blood transfusion requirements did not significantly differ in the 2 groups （P&;gt;0.05).ConclusionIn this study, no significant differences are detected in the efficacy and the safety of EBL vs. EHP for bleeding due to Dieulafoy lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract.