Abstract:BACKGROUND: Current endoscopic methods in the control of acute nonvariceal bleeding have a small but clinically significant failure rate. The role of over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) as the first treatment has not been defined.OBJECTIVE: To compare OTSCs with standard endoscopic hemostatic treatments in the control of bleeding from nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal causes.DESIGN: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03216395).SETTING: University teaching hospitals in Hong Kong, China, and Australia.PATIENTS: 190 adult patients with active bleeding or a nonbleeding visible vessel from a nonvariceal cause on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.INTERVENTION: Standard hemostatic treatment (n = 97) or OTSC (n = 93).MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was 30-day probability of further bleeds. Other outcomes included failure to control bleeding after assigned endoscopic treatment, recurrent bleeding after initial hemostasis, further intervention, blood transfusion, and hospitalization.RESULTS: The 30-day probability of further bleeding in the standard treatment and OTSC groups was 14.6% (14 of 97) and 3.2% (3 of 93), respectively (risk difference, 11.4 percentage points [95% CI, 3.3 to 20.0 percentage points]; P = 0.006). Failure to control bleeding after assigned endoscopic treatment in the standard treatment and OTSC groups was 6 versus 1 (risk difference, 5.1 percentage points [CI, 0.7 to 11.8 percentage points]), respectively, and 30-day recurrent bleeding was 8 versus 2 (risk difference, 6.6 percentage points [CI, -0.3 to 14.4 percentage points]), respectively. The need for further interventions was 8 versus 2, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was 4 versus 2, respectively. In a post hoc analysis with a composite end point of failure to successfully apply assigned treatment and further bleeds, the event rate was 15 of 97 (15.6%) and 6 of 93 (6.5%) in the standard and OTSC groups, respectively (risk difference, 9.1 percentage points [CI, 0.004 to 18.3 percentage points]).LIMITATION: Clinicians were not blinded to treatment and the option of crossover treatment.CONCLUSION: Over-the-scope clips, as an initial treatment, may be better than standard treatment in reducing the risk for further bleeding from nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal causes that are amenable to OTSC placement.PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: General Research Fund to the University Grant Committee, Hong Kong SAR Government.

Randomized Comparison of a Novel Hemostatic Clip (resolution Clip™) to Combined Epinephrine Injection and Heater Probe (HP) Thermocoagulation in Endoscopic Control of Peptic Ulcer Bleeding (PUB)

Systematic Review with Network Meta-Analysis: Dual Therapy for High-Risk Bleeding Peptic Ulcers

Comparison of Over-the-Scope Clips to Standard Endoscopic Treatment As the Initial Treatment in Patients with Bleeding from a Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Cause A Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparison of Over-the-Scope Clips to Standard Endoscopic Treatment as the Initial Treatment in Patients With Bleeding From a Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Cause

Randomized controlled trial of hemostatic powder versus endoscopic clipping for non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Endoscopic hemostasis for peptic ulcer bleeding: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

Comparison of the efficacy of two combined therapies for peptic ulcer bleeding: adrenaline injection plus haemoclipping versus adrenaline injection followed by bipolar electrocoagulation

Randomised comparison between adrenaline injection alone and adrenaline injection plus heat probe treatment for actively bleeding ulcers.

Reduced mortality for over-the-scope clips (OTSC) versus surgery for refractory peptic ulcer bleeding: a retrospective study

Over-the-scope clip as first-line treatment of peptic ulcer bleeding: a multicenter randomized controlled trial (TOP Study)

Prophylactic Angiographic Embolisation after Endoscopic Control of Bleeding to High-Risk Peptic Ulcers: a Randomised Controlled Trial.

962 an non-inferiority randomized controlled trial to compare hemostatic powder tc325 and standard therapy in bleeding from non-variceal upper gastrointestinal causes

98 AN NON-INFERIORITY RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL TO COMPARE HEMOSTATIC POWDER TC325 AND STANDARD THERAPY IN BLEEDING FROM NON-VARICEAL UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL CAUSES

Bipolar haemostatic forceps versus standard therapy by haemoclip + / - epinephrine injection as initial endoscopic treatment in active non-variceal upper GI bleeding: study protocol for a prospective, randomized multicentre trial (BeBop-Trial)

Effectiveness and safety of a new clip for delivery using a duodenoscope for bleeding after endoscopic sphincterotomy

Hemostatic spray powder TC-325 in the primary endoscopic treatment of peptic ulcer-related bleeding: multicenter international registry

Over-the-Scope Clips Versus Standard Endoscopic Treatment for First Line Therapy of Non-variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Evaluating the Efficacy of a Novel Hemostatic Powder Compared to Traditional Treatments in Non-Variceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Multicenter, Randomized Non-inferiority Study

Efficacy of prophylactic clip closure in reducing the risk of delayed bleeding after colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in patients on anticoagulant therapy: Multicenter prospective study

Evaluating the safety and efficacy of a novel polysaccharide hemostatic system during surgery: A multicenter multispecialty prospective randomized controlled trial

S1575: Nanopowders Are Highly Effective in Achieving Hemostasis in Severe Peptic Ulcer Bleeding: an Interim Report of a Prospective Human Trial