SNFGE SNFGE
 
Thématique :
- Endoscopie/Imagerie
Originalité :
Intermédiaire
Solidité :
Intermédiaire
Doit faire évoluer notre pratique :
Dans certains cas
 
 
Nom du veilleur :
Docteur Edouard Chabrun
Coup de coeur :
 
 
Endoscopy
  2016/06  
 
  2016 Jun 8  
  -  
 
  High-dose omeprazole infusion compared with scheduled second-look endoscopy for prevention of peptic ulcer rebleeding: a randomized controlled trial.  
 
  Chiu PW, Joeng HK, Choi CL, Tsoi KK, Kwong KH, Lam SH, Sung JJ  
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27275859  
 
 

Background and study aim: Previous studies have shown that both scheduled second-look endoscopy and high-dose continuous omeprazole infusion are effective in preventing peptic ulcer rebleeding. The aim of this noninferiority trial was to compare the efficacy of these two strategies for the prevention of rebleeding following primary endoscopic hemostasis.

Patients and methods: Consecutive patients who received endoscopic treatment for bleeding peptic ulcers (actively bleeding, with nonbleeding visible vessels) were randomized to two treatment groups following hemostasis. One group (second-look endoscopy group) received the proton pump inhibitor (PPI) omeprazole as an intravenous bolus every 12 hours for 72 hours and a second endoscopy within 16 - 24 hours with retreatment for persistent stigmata of bleeding. The other group (PPI infusion group) received continuous high-dose omeprazole infusion for 72 hours. Patients who developed rebleeding underwent surgery if repeat endoscopic therapy failed. The primary outcome was the rebleeding rate within 30 days after initial hemostasis. The margin for noninferiority was set at 5 %.

Results: A total of 153 patients were randomized to the PPI infusion group and 152 to the second-look endoscopy group. Rebleeding occurred within 30 days in 10 patients (6.5 %) in the PPI infusion group and in 12 patients (7.9 %) in the second-look endoscopy group (P  = 0.646). Surgery was required for rebleeding in six patients from the PPI infusion group and three patients in the second-look endoscopy group (P  = 0.32). Intensive care unit stay, transfusion requirements, and mortality were not different between the groups. Patients in the second-look endoscopy group were discharged 1 day earlier than those in the PPI infusion group (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: After endoscopic hemostasis, high-dose PPI infusion was not inferior to second-look endoscopy with bolus PPI in preventing peptic ulcer rebleeding.

 
Question posée
 
IPP à haute dose versus contrôle endoscopique précoce dans le cadre d’hémorragie digestive haute traitée efficacement par endoscopie première.
 
Question posée
 
Etude randomisée de non infériorité. 2 groupes. Dans le 1, les patients étaient sous haute dose d’IPP IVSE ; dans le 2, ils recevaient des IPP en intra-veineux à double dose et avaient une endoscopie de surveillance 16 à 24 heures après la première. Résultats : il n’y avait pas de différence significative entre les deux groupes en termes de récidive du saignement (6,5% versus 7,9%).
 
Commentaires

Les IPP IVSE en prévention de la récidive du saignement ne font pas moins bien que la double dose associée au contrôle endoscopique précoce.

Une étude complémentaire ne comparant que les deux types d’administration des IPP (sans contrôle endoscopique) serait utile, du fait du coût important des IPP intra-veineux.

 
www.snfge.org