• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>World Journal of Gastroenterology >Epinephrine injection therapy versus a combination of epinephrine injection and endoscopic hemoclip in the treatment of bleeding ulcers.
【24h】

Epinephrine injection therapy versus a combination of epinephrine injection and endoscopic hemoclip in the treatment of bleeding ulcers.

机译：肾上腺素注射疗法与肾上腺素注射液和内窥镜止血钳相结合治疗出血性溃疡。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

AIM: To assess the efficacy of hemoclip application in combination with epinephrine injection in the treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers and to compare the clinical outcomes between patients treated with such a combination therapy and those treated with epinephrine injection alone. METHODS: A total of 293 patients (211 males, 82 females) underwent endoscopic therapy for bleeding peptic ulcers. Of these, 202 patients (152 males, 50 females) received epinephrine injection therapy while 91 patients (59 males, 32 females) received combination therapy. The choice of endoscopic therapy was made by the endoscopist. Hemostatic rates, rebleeding rates, need for emergency surgery and 30-d mortality were the outcome measures studied. RESULTS: Patients who received combination therapy were significantly older (mean age 66+/-16 years, range 24-90 years) and more suffered from chronic renal failure compared to those who received epinephrine injection therapy alone (mean age 61+/-17 years, range 21-89 years). Failureto achieve permanent hemostasis was 4% in the group who received epinephrine injection alone and 11% in the group who received combination therapy. When the differences in age and renal function between the two treatment groups were taken into account by multivariate analysis, the rates of initial hemostasis, rebleeding rates, need for surgery and 30-d mortality for both treatment options were not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy of epinephrine injection with endoscopic hemoclip application is an effective method of achieving hemostasis in bleeding peptic ulcer diseases. However, superiority of combination therapy over epinephrine injection alone, could not be demonstrated.
机译：目的：评估应用止血钳联合肾上腺素注射液治疗出血性消化性溃疡的疗效，并比较接受这种联合疗法的患者与单独接受肾上腺素注射的患者的临床结局。方法：共有293例患者（211例男性，82例女性）接受了内镜治疗消化性溃疡出血。其中202例患者（男性152例，女性50例）接受肾上腺素注射疗法，而91例患者（男性59例，女性32例）接受联合疗法。内镜医师选择内镜治疗。止血率，再出血率，急诊手术需求和30天死亡率是研究的结果指标。结果：与单独接受肾上腺素注射疗法的患者（平均年龄61 +/- 17）相比，接受联合疗法的患者年龄更大（平均年龄66 +/- 16岁，范围24-90岁），患有慢性肾功能衰竭的患者更多。年，范围为21-89年）。单独接受肾上腺素注射的组中未能实现永久止血的比例为4％，接受联合疗法的组中为11％。通过多变量分析考虑到两个治疗组之间年龄和肾功能的差异时，两种治疗方案的初始止血率，再出血率，手术需求和30天死亡率均无显着差异。结论：肾上腺素注射液与内镜止血夹联合治疗是实现消化性溃疡出血止血的有效方法。然而，无法证明联合疗法优于单独的肾上腺素注射剂。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号