Efficacy of hemostatic powder in preventing bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection in high-risk patients

Post-polypectomy colorectal bleeding: current strategies and the way forward

Post-endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) bleeding, or clinically significant post-EMR bleeding, is influenced by factors such as polyp size, right-sided colonic lesions, laterally spreading tumors, anticoagulant use, and comorbidities like cardiovascular or chronic renal disease. The optimal prophylactic therapy for post-EMR bleeding remains unknown, with no consensus on specific criteria for its application. Moreover, prophylactic measures, including clipping, suturing, and coagulation, have produced mixed results. Selective clipping in high-risk patients is cost-effective, whereas universal clipping is not. Studies and meta-analyses indicate that routine prophylactic clipping does not generally reduce post-polypectomy bleeding but may be beneficial in cases of large proximal lesions. Some studies have revealed that the post-polypectomy bleeding risk after EMR of transverse colonic lesions is lower than that of the ascending colon and caecum, suggesting limited efficacy of clipping in the transverse colon. Cost-effectiveness studies support selective clipping in high-risk groups, and newer static agents such as PuraStat are alternatives; however, their cost-effectiveness is undetermined. Further research is required to establish clear guidelines and refine prophylactic strategies to prevent post-EMR bleeding.

Comparison of a Polysaccharide Hemostatic Powder and Conventional Therapy for Peptic Ulcer Bleeding

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Hemostatic powders have been clinically used in the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding. We investigated the non-inferiority of a polysaccharide hemostatic powder (PHP), compared with conventional endoscopic treatments, for peptic ulcer bleeding (PUB).

METHODS

This study was a prospective multi-center, randomized, open-label, controlled trial at 4 referral institutions. We consecutively enrolled patients who had undergone emergency endoscopy for PUB. The patients were randomly assigned to either a PHP or conventional treatment group. In the PHP group, diluted epinephrine was injected, and the powder was applied as a spray. Conventional endoscopic treatment included the use of electrical coagulation or hemoclipping after injection of diluted epinephrine.

RESULTS

Between July 2017 and May 2021, 216 patients were enrolled in this study (PHP group, 105; control group, 111). Initial hemostasis was achieved in 92 of 105 patients (87.6%) in the PHP group and 96 of 111 patients (86.5%) in the conventional treatment group. Re-bleeding did not differ between the 2 groups. In subgroup analysis, the initial hemostasis failure rate in the conventional treatment group was 13.6% for Forrest IIa cases; however, there was no initial hemostasis failure in the PHP group (P = .023). Large ulcer size (≥15 mm) and chronic kidney disease with dialysis were independent risk factors for re-bleeding at 30 days. No adverse events were associated with PHP use.

CONCLUSIONS

PHP is not inferior to conventional treatments and could be useful in initial endoscopic treatment for PUB. Further studies are needed to confirm the re-bleeding rate of PHP.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, Number: NCT02717416).

Hemostatic Effect and Mechanism of Epidermal Growth Factor-Hemostatic Powder after Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in a Porcine Model

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Among several methods used to prevent endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) bleeding, the recently developed hemostatic powder (HP) has few technical limitations and is relatively easy-to-use. This study aimed to analyze the hemostatic effects and mechanisms of two HPs using a porcine upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage model.

METHODS

We evaluated HPs (Endospray and epidermal growth factor [EGF]-endospray) for adhesion, waterproofing ability, permeability, and absorption in vitro. ESD was performed to induce bleeding ulcers in the porcine stomachs. In a total of three pigs, three bleeding ulcers per animal were generated. Hemostasis and rebleeding were evaluated endoscopically. After 72 hours, the animals were sacrificed, and histologically analyzed.

RESULTS

The water absorption of HPs was over 20 times the initial value within 30 minutes. The gelated HPs completely blocked water penetration into the applied site within 5 minutes and strongly adhered to the Petri-dish surface for up to 6 hours. The initial hemostasis rates within 5 minutes were 33.3%, 100.0%, and 66.7%, and the rebleeding rates at 6 to 72 hours after HP application were 33.3%, 16.7%, and 33.3% (control, Endospray, and EGF-endospray groups, respectively). Histological analysis revealed the thickness of the regenerated mucosa (522.1, 514.5, and 680.3 μm) and the submucosal layer (1,510.3, 2,848.2, and 3,062.3 μm) and the number of newly formed blood vessels (15.3, 17.9, and 20.5) in the control, Endospray, and EGF-endospray groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The endoscopic HPs demonstrated the ability to elicit effective initial hemostasis and the histological ulcer-healing effect of EGF in an animal model of hemorrhagic gastric ulcers.

Endoscopic submucosal dissection techniques and technology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Review

ESGE suggests conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD; marking and mucosal incision followed by circumferential incision and stepwise submucosal dissection) for most esophageal and gastric lesions. ESGE suggests tunneling ESD for esophageal lesions involving more than two-thirds of the esophageal circumference. ESGE recommends the pocket-creation method for colorectal ESD, at least if traction devices are not used. The use of dedicated ESD knives with size adequate to the location/thickness of the gastrointestinal wall is recommended. It is suggested that isotonic saline or viscous solutions can be used for submucosal injection. ESGE recommends traction methods in esophageal and colorectal ESD and in selected gastric lesions. After gastric ESD, coagulation of visible vessels is recommended, and post-procedural high dose proton pump inhibitor (PPI) (or vonoprazan). ESGE recommends against routine closure of the ESD defect, except in duodenal ESD. ESGE recommends corticosteroids after resection of  > 50 % of the esophageal circumference. The use of carbon dioxide when performing ESD is recommended. ESGE recommends against the performance of second-look endoscopy after ESD. ESGE recommends endoscopy/colonoscopy in the case of significant bleeding (hemodynamic instability, drop in hemoglobin > 2 g/dL, severe ongoing bleeding) to perform endoscopic hemostasis with thermal methods or clipping; hemostatic powders represent rescue therapies. ESGE recommends closure of immediate perforations with clips (through-the-scope or cap-mounted, depending on the size and shape of the perforation), as soon as possible but ideally after securing a good plane for further dissection.

Hemostatic powders for gastrointestinal bleeding: a review of old, new, and emerging agents in a rapidly advancing field

Background and study aims  Hemostatic powders are increasingly used to address limitations in conventional endoscopic techniques for gastrointestinal bleeding. Various agents exist with different compositions, characteristics, efficacy, and adverse events (AEs). We sought to review existing hemostatic powders, from preclinical to established agents. Methods  A literature review on hemostatic powders for gastrointestinal bleeding was undertaken through a MEDLINE search from 2000-2021 and hand searching of articles. Relevant literature was critically appraised and reviewed for mechanism of action, hemostasis and rebleeding rate, factors associated with hemostatic failure, and AEs. Results  The most established agents are TC-325 (Hemospray), EndoClot, and Ankaferd Blood Stopper (ABS). These agents have been successfully applied to a variety of upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding etiologies, in the form of primary, combination, salvage, and bridging therapy. Few AEs have been reported, including visceral perforation, venous embolism, and self-limited abdominal pain. Newer agents include CEGP-003 and UI-EWD, which have shown results similar to those for the older agents in initial clinical studies. All aforementioned powders have high immediate hemostasis rates, particularly in scenarios not amenable to conventional endoscopic methods, but are limited by significant rates of rebleeding. Other treatments include TDM-621 (PuraStat) consisting of a liquid hemostatic agent newly applied to endoscopy and self-propelling thrombin powder (CounterFlow Powder), a preclinical but promising agent. Conclusions  Rapid development of hemostatic powders and growing clinical expertise has established these agents as a valuable strategy in gastrointestinal bleeding. Further research will continue to refine the efficacy and applicability of these agents.

Complete omission of second-look endoscopy after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection in real-world practice

Gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is increasingly performed in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy. Second-look endoscopy (SLE) has been performed empirically in several clinical settings. We investigated whether SLE omission was associated with an increased risk of postESD bleeding in all patients, including those administered antithrombotic agents. Between July 2016 and June 2018, 229 patients were treated with a clinical pathway for gastric ESD that involved SLE on the day after ESD (SLE group). Between September 2018 and May 2020, 215 patients were treated using a clinical pathway that did not include SLE (nonSLE group). We retrospectively compared the incidence of postESD bleeding among the propensity score-matched cohorts and determined the risk factors for postESD bleeding using multivariate analysis. The propensity score-matched cohorts showed no significant differences in the incidence of postESD bleeding between the SLE (3.2%) and nonSLE (5.1%) groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of lesions in the lower gastric body (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.17, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-4.35, P.03) was a significant risk factor for postESD bleeding during admission, whereas resected specimen size ≥ 40 mm (adjusted OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.19-8.19, P.02) and antiplatelet therapy (adjusted OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.47-11.80, P.007) were significant risk factors after discharge. Complete omission of SLE after gastric ESD does not increase postESD bleeding in clinical practice.

Endoscopic Delivery of Polymers Reduces Delayed Bleeding after Gastric Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

New endoscopic approaches for the prevention of delayed bleeding (DB) after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) have been reported in recent years, and endoscopic delivery of biodegradable polymers for iatrogenic ulcer hemostasis and coverage has emerged as one of the most promising techniques for post-ESD management. However, the comparative efficacy of these techniques remains uncertain. We performed a systematic search of multiple databases up to May 2022 to identify studies reporting DB rates as outcomes in patients undergoing gastric ESD who were treated with subsequent endoscopic management, including endoscopic closure (clip-based methods and suturing), PGA sheet tissue shielding, and hemostatic powder/gel spray (including polymeric sealants and other adhesives). The risk ratios (RRs) of delayed bleeding in treatment groups and control groups were pooled, and the Bayesian framework was used to perform a network meta-analysis (NMA). Among these studies, 16 head-to-head comparisons that covered 2742 lesions were included in the NMA. Tissue shielding using PGA sheets significantly reduced the risk of DB by nearly two thirds in high-risk patients, while hemostatic spray systems, primarily polymer-based, reduced DB in low-risk patients nine-fold. Researchers should recognize the essential role of polymers in the management of ESD-induced ulcers, and develop and validate clinical application strategies for promising materials.

The future of endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer

Endoscopic resection for early gastric cancer is recommended when the risk of lymph node metastasis is negligible and should be performed through submucosal dissection due to well-established short- and long-term results. To overcome technical difficulties and decrease adverse events some techniques have been studied. This review outlines current strategies for improving patient selection and highlights innovative techniques that help minimize adverse events. Moreover, we discuss how to improve management after curative and noncurative resections.

Propensity score matching analysis to evaluate efficacy of polyethylene oxide adhesive on preventing delayed bleeding after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection

Regardless of technical advancements, delayed bleeding is still a common adverse event after gastric endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), often occurring in the early postoperative phase. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of a newly designed polyethylene oxide (PEO) adhesive for preventing delayed gastric bleeding. Patients who underwent gastric ESD between December 2017 and December 2020 at three Chinese institutions were retrospectively reviewed. Patients receiving PEO application on gastric post-ESD ulcers were included in the PEO group, and patients without this procedure were included in the control group. To minimize potential bias, propensity score matching was performed, and sex, age, lesion size, lesion morphology, ulceration, localization, procedure time, frequency of major intraoperative bleeding, resected specimen size, lesion histopathology, submucosal invasion and the taking of antithrombotic drugs were included as matching factors. The incidence of delayed bleeding and time to bleeding were compared between both groups. After propensity score matching, 270 patients (135 per group) were included in the analysis. The delayed bleeding rate in the PEO group was significantly lower than that in the control group (1.5%, 2/135 vs. 8.9%, 12/135, P = 0.006). The median time (range) to bleeding was 4.5 (4–5) days in the PEO group and 2 (1–15) days in the control group, with no significant difference (P = 0. 198). PEO demonstrated a significant effect in reducing the rate of delayed bleeding. Further study is warranted to confirm the efficacy of PEO for bleeding that occurs in the early phase after gastric ESD.

Polysaccharide hemostatic powder to prevent bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection in high risk patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND : Bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a severe adverse event. Several methods to prevent post-ESD bleeding (PEB) have been introduced; however, they have not been widely used because of technical difficulties. We aimed to investigate whether polysaccharide hemostatic powder (PHP), which is very easy to apply, can prevent early post-ESD bleeding, especially in patients with a high risk of post-ESD bleeding. METHODS : This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open-label, controlled trial. Patients with a high risk for post-ESD bleeding were enrolled. Patients with gastric neoplasms in whom the resected specimen size was expected to be > 40 mm and those who were regularly taking antithrombotic agents were defined as high risk patients. Patients were randomly assigned to the PHP or control groups. RESULTS:  Between May 2017 and September 2018, 143 patients were enrolled (PHP group, 73; control group, 70). The total post-ESD bleeding rate was 6.3 % (PHP group, 5.5 % vs. control group, 7.1 %; P = 0.74). There was no bleeding within 7 days after ESD in the PHP group. Continued antithrombotic use was an independent risk factor for post-ESD bleeding. In subgroup analysis excluding the patients who continued to take antithrombotic agents (n = 129) during ESD, the rate of post-ESD bleeding tended to be lower in the PHP group than in the control group (0 % vs. 6.3 %; P = 0.06). CONCLUSION : PHP did not demonstrate a significant effect on the prevention of post-ESD bleeding in this study. Further larger scale, randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this.

Strategies that Reduce Post-endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Bleeding

Bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), one of the most common postprocedural adverse events, is the main cause of increased readmission rates and hospital costs. Generally, the incidence of post-ESD bleeding is estimated to be about 5%. However, the incidence of bleeding is particularly increased in high-risk patients. In particular, it has an incidence of over 50% in patients that use antithrombotic agents. The well-known risk factors for post-ESD bleeding include antithrombotic therapy, lesions in the proximal stomach, specimen size >4 cm, and concomitant renal disease. Currently, the number of patients at a high risk of post-ESD bleeding has been increasing. This may be due to the aging society and the increase in the usage of antithrombotic agents. Therefore, several strategies have been employed to prevent post-ESD bleeding. These strategies include acid inhibition therapy, preventive hemostasis using Doppler endoscopic ultrasound and artery-selective clipping, second look endoscopy, the closings method, and the shield methods. However, these methods are technically demanding, which hinders their wide usage in clinical practice. Recently, several hemostatic powders have been developed and clinically used in the treatment of gastrointestinal bleeding. In this article, we review the risk factors for post-ESD bleeding and the recently introduced prevention methods. Moreover, we aimed to explore realistic and appropriate strategies for the prevention of post-ESD bleeding.

Bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection of gastric lesions

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is generally used to treat gastric mucosal and submucosal lesions. Nevertheless, ESD is more difficult and complicated to perform than a traditional endoscopic mucosal resection, which can increase the incidence of various complications including hemorrhage, perforation and infection. Hemorrhage is a major post-ESD complication. Prevention and early diagnosis of post-ESD bleeding for gastric lesions are closely associated with the efficacy and safety of the operation. Many studies have reported the risks of and the preventative measures for hemorrhage after gastric ESD, but there remain some issues to be solved. We thus reviewed the risk factors, precautions and treatments for hemorrhage after ESD of gastric lesions.

Efficacy of hemostatic powders in upper gastrointestinal bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the efficacy of hemostatic powders in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding.

AIMS

Provide a pooled estimate of the efficacy and safety profile of hemostatic powders in digestive endoscopy.

METHODS

A computerized bibliographic search on the main databases was performed through December 2018. Pooled effects were calculated using a random-effects model. The primary outcome was immediate hemostasis rate. Secondary outcomes were rebleeding rate (either at 7 and 30 days), bleeding-related mortality, and all-cause mortality rate.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies, of which three were randomized-controlled trials, with 1063 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Immediate hemostasis was achieved in 95.3% (93.3%-97.3%) of patients, with no difference based on treatment strategy, hemostatic agent used, bleeding etiology. Success rate was slightly lower in spurting bleeding (91.9%). Hemostatic powders showed similar efficacy as compared to conventional endoscopic therapy (odds ratio: 0.84, 0.06-11.47; p = 0.9). Thirty-day rebleeding rate was 16.9% (9.8%-24%) with no difference in comparison to other endoscopic treatments (odds ratio 1.59, 0.35-7.21; p = 0.55). All-cause and bleeding-related mortality rates were 7.6% (4%-10.8%) and 1.4% (0.5%-2.4%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Novel hemostatic powders represent a user-friendly and effective tool in the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding.