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

Abstract

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.