Direct clipping method with a repositioning endoscopic clip for colonic diverticular bleeding

Updated evidence on epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment for colonic diverticular bleeding

Since 2020, multiple large-scale studies (CODE BLUE-J) in Japan have accelerated the accumulation of evidence on colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). This review summarizes the latest findings regarding CDB epidemiology and endoscopic hemostasis. Recent data show that CDB has become the most common cause of lower gastrointestinal bleeding in Japan, driven by an aging population and the increased use of antithrombotic medications. Although 70%-90% of patients achieve spontaneous hemostasis, rebleeding occurs in up to 35% of cases within 1 year. Despite an overall mortality rate of < 1%, patients with CDB can present with hypovolemic shock and may require urgent intervention. There are no effective pharmacological treatments for controlling CDB. Therefore, endoscopic therapy plays a crucial role in its management. Based on available evidence, both clipping and endoscopic band ligation are considered effective initial treatments. Recent studies indicate that direct clipping reduces early rebleeding compared with indirect clipping, while endoscopic band ligation achieves lower rebleeding rates (13%-15%) than clipping. The choice between direct clipping and endoscopic band ligation depends on the diverticulum location and the presence of active bleeding. Newer techniques, such as over-the-scope clip and self-assembling peptide application, have shown potential, but require further study. The detection of the bleeding source remains challenging because accurate identification is essential for successful hemostasis. Additional research is needed to refine the endoscopic diagnostic and therapeutic techniques, prevent rebleeding, and improve patient outcomes.

Useful treatment selection strategy for endoscopic hemostasis in colonic diverticular bleeding according to endoscopic findings (with video)

Background and study aims

Direct or indirect clipping and endoscopic band ligation (EBL) are widely used for hemostasis in patients with colonic diverticular bleeding (CDB). However, no treatment selection strategy has been established. This report describes our approach and its outcomes.

Patients and methods

We select direct clipping if the bleeding point is visible and clips could be inserted into the diverticulum. When direct clipping is not feasible, we select EBL as the second choice and indirect clipping as the third. We reviewed data from 192 patients treated with clipping or EBL for definitive CDB with stigmata of recent hemorrhage (SRH) at our hospital between March 2016 and February 2023.

Results

The hemostatic method was clipping in 84 patients (direct, n=78; indirect, n=6) and EBL in 108. The rate of SRH with active bleeding was significantly higher in the EBL group (33.3% vs. 60.2%, p <0.001). Median hemostasis time was significantly shorter in the clipping group (9 min vs. 22 min, P <0.001). There was no significant difference in the 30-day rebleeding rate between clipping and EBL (15.5% vs. 13.0%; P =0.619). There was one case of delayed perforation post-EBL. There were no complications after clipping.

Conclusions

Direct clipping when placement of clips at the bleeding point is feasible and EBL when direct clipping is not feasible is a reasonable strategy in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, and safety. Selection of hemostatic method according to the visual field of SRH and maneuverability of the endoscope allows the advantages of both methods to be realized.

Direct clipping using a half-opened reopenable clip and long hood for colonic diverticular bleeding

Watch a video of this article.