Cochrane · systematic review · CD005584
Epinephrine injection versus epinephrine injection and a second endoscopic method in high‐risk bleeding ulcers
Vergara, M, Bennett, C, Calvet, X, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014 · Cochrane Library
GutAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 4 · 100%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Epinephrine versus epinephrine and any second endoscopic method in high‐risk bleeding ulcers
Population: patients with high‐risk bleeding ulcers
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Recurrent and persistent bleeding overall rates with or without second‐look endoscopy Rebleeding (persistent or recurrent bleeding) Epinephrine vs epinephrine and any second endoscopic method | RR 0.57 | 19 studies · 1926 participants | Moderate Downgraded: inconsistency |
Surgery rate Number requiring emergency surgery Epinephrine vs epinephrine and any second endoscopic method | RR 0.68 | 18 studies · 1841 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Mortality rate Number of deaths (30‐day mortality or in‐hospital mortality) Epinephrine vs epinephrine and any second endoscopic method | RR 0.64 | 18 studies · 1841 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Adverse effects of endoscopy therapy Adverse effects Epinephrine vs epinephrine and any second endoscopic method | RR 1.25 | 12 studies · 1281 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |