Erythromycin Versus Gastric Lavage to Improve Quality of Endoscopy in Patients With Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge122 enrolled

Overview

The researchers will investigate whether erythromycin infusion is better than gastric lavage prior to emergency endoscopy to improve the quality of examination in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. One hundred and twenty-two patients admitted within 12 hours after hematemesis will be randomly assigned to receive erythromycin infusion or gastric lavage by nasogastric tube prior to emergency endoscopy. The endoscopic procedures will be recorded on Digital Video Disc (DVD). Two endoscopists blinded to the cleansing strategy will assess the quality of examination of the upper gastrointestinal tract by using scales designed by Frossard and Avgerinos . Secondary endpoints will be the need for a second-look endoscopy, the mean number of blood units transfused, the need of surgery or arteriography, and the mean duration of hospitalization

Study Type

INTERVENTIONAL

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

SINGLE

Enrollment

122

Conditions

Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage Hematemesis

Interventions

ErythromycinDRUG

Intravenous 250 mg of erythromycin, single-dose, 30 minutes before the endoscopy

gastric lavagePROCEDURE

gastric lavage by nasogastric tube with 1 liter of saline before the endoscopy

Eligibility

Sex: ALLMin age: 18 Years

Medical Language ↔ Plain English

Inclusion Criteria: * recent hematemesis (\<12 hours) Exclusion Criteria: * macrolides allergy * pregnancy or lactation * treatment with terfenadine, astemizole or cyclosporine * prior gastrectomy

Locations (1)

Hospital Universitari de Bellvitge

L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Visual quality of endoscopy

To assess the visual quality of endoscopy the investigators will use the Avgerinos' score modified by Frossard (Gastroenterology 2002;123:17-23). An score from 0 to 2(0 worst vision, where \< 25% of the surface was visible. 1, 25-75% visible and 2 \>75% visible) was derived from analysis of each area (fundus, body, antrum and bulbus). A score of 6 or greater is considered as a clear stomach, and a score of 5 or lower was considered as a full stomach.

Time frame: The endoscopy will be recorded and subsequently it will be evaluated by two endoscopists unaware of the cleaning strategy. The recording's evaluation will be made within the first 30 days after endoscopy

Secondary Outcomes

need for a second-look endoscopy

To assess the need of a second-look endoscopy due to a full stomach during the first endoscopy or due to rebleeding