1.
Hemostatic effect of topical hemocoagulase spray in digestive endoscopy
Wang T, Wang DN, Liu WT, Zheng ZQ, Chen X, Fang WL, Li S, Liang L, Wang BM
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2016;22((25)):5831-6.
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the hemostatic effect of topical hemocoagulase spray in digestive endoscopy. METHODS Eighty-nine patients who developed oozing bleeding during endoscopic treatment from September 2014 to October 2014 at Center for Digestive Endoscopy, Tianjin Medical University General Hospital were randomly divided into either a study group (n = 39) or a control group (n = 50). The study group was given topical hemocoagulase spray intraoperatively, while the control group was given traditional 8% norepinephrine spray. Hemostatic efficacy was compared between the two groups. Bleeding site, wound cleanliness and perforation were recorded, and the rates of perforation and late bleeding were compared. RESULTS Successful hemostasis was achieved in 39 (100%) patients of the study group and in 47 (94.0%) patients of the control group, and there was no significant difference in the rate of successful hemostasis between the two groups. Compared with the control group, after topical hemocoagulase spray in the study group, the surgical field was clearer, the bleeding site was more easily identified, and the wound was cleaner. There was no significant difference in the rate of perforation between the study and control groups (16.7% vs 35.0%, P = 0.477), but the rates of late bleeding (0% vs 15.8%, P = 0.048) and overall complications (P = 0.032) were significantly lower in the study group. CONCLUSION Topical hemocoagulase spray has a definite hemostatic effect for oozing bleeding in digestive endoscopy, and this method is convenient, safe, and reliable. It is expected to become a new method for endoscopic hemostasis.
2.
A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study of granulocyte/monocyte apheresis for active ulcerative colitis
Sands BE, Sandborn WJ, Feagan B, Löfberg R, Hibi T, Wang T, Gustofson LM, Wong CJ, Vandervoort MK, Hanauer S, et al
Gastroenterology. 2008;135((2):):400-9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS Activated granulocytes and monocytes/macrophages are implicated in the pathogenesis of ulcerative colitis. Open-label studies and clinical experience in Japan and Europe have suggested that granulocyte/monocyte apheresis is safe and effective in treating ulcerative colitis. METHODS We evaluated the efficacy of granulocyte/monocyte apheresis in a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled trial in patients with active moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis (Mayo score 6-11) in community-based and tertiary care centers. As intervention, we used granulocyte/monocyte apheresis with the Adacolumn Apheresis System (JIMRO, Ltd, Takasaki, Japan) or sham apheresis in a 2:1 ratio for 9 weeks of treatment in a North American pivotal study (N = 168) and in a smaller, companion study of identical design conducted in Europe and Japan (N = 47). RESULTS In the pivotal study, clinical remission rates (Mayo score 0-2, with scores of 0 on rectal bleeding and 0 or 1 on endoscopic examination) were 17% and 11% for the granulocyte/monocyte apheresis (n = 112)- and sham-treatment groups, respectively (n = 56; P = . 361). Clinical response (Mayo score reduction of ≥3 points from baseline) was observed in 44% and 39% of patients, respectively (P = . 620). Similar changes were observed for the apheresis- and sham-treatment groups for endoscopic remission and response, and changes in Mayo and quality-of-life scores. The companion study and pooled data from both studies also yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS In this study, granulocyte/monocyte apheresis was well tolerated but did not demonstrate efficacy for induction of clinical remission or response in patients with moderate-to-severe ulcerative colitis.