Clinical and economic outcomes of individuals with severe peptic ulcer hemorrhage and nonbleeding visible vessel: An analysis of two prospective clinical trials

Ian M. Gralnek, Dennis M. Jensen, Jeffrey Gornbein, Thomas O.G. Kovacs, Rome Jutabha, Martin L. Freeman, Joy King, Mary Ellen Jensen, Susie Cheng, Gustavo A. MacHicado, James A. Smith, Gayle M. Randall, Michael Sue

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

78 Scopus citations


Objective: We report the clinical outcomes and direct medical costs of 155 patients with severe peptic ulcer hemorrhage and a nonbleeding visible vessel at emergency endoscopy treated with endoscopic hemostasis or medical- surgical therapy. Methods: In two consecutive, prospective, randomized, controlled trials, patients were randomly assigned to endoscopic hemostasis (heater probe, bipolar electrocoagulation, or injection sclerosis) or medical-surgical treatment. Study endpoints included the incidence of severe ulcer rebleeding and emergency surgery, length of hospital stay, blood transfusion requirements, mortality rate, and direct costs of utilized health care. Direct medical costs were estimated using combined fixed and variable institutional costs for consumed resources and Medicare reimbursement rates. Results: Compared with medical-surgical treatment, endoscopically treated patients had significantly lower rates of severe ulcer rebleeding (p = 0.004), emergency surgery (p = 0.002 and p = 0.019, 0.024), and blood transfusions (p = 0.025). Observed inter-trial differences in ulcer rebleeding rates may be partially explained in a multivariate model by covariates of comorbid disease and inpatient ulcer bleeding. In both trials, length of hospital stay, mortality rates, and treatment-related complications were similar. Estimated median direct costs per patient differed: The first trial had lower costs with endoscopic hemostasis ($4254, vs $4620 for electrocoagulation and $5909 for medical-surgical treatment), yet the second trial yielded lower costs with medical-surgical treatment ($3169, vs $3477 for injection sclerosis and $4098 for heater probe). Conclusions: Compared with medical-surgical therapy, endoscopic hemostasis for severe ulcer hemorrhage and a nonbleeding visible vessel yielded significantly better patient outcomes and was safe. This procedure may or may not yield lower direct medical costs and cost savings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2047-2056
Number of pages10
JournalAmerican Journal of Gastroenterology
Issue number11
StatePublished - Nov 1998

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
NIH-NIDDK ROI-AM33273 (Dr. Jensen) supported the randomized controlled trials. These analyses were also supported in part by NIH-NIDDK 41301, CURE Core Grant—Human Studies Core. An American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) 1995 Endoscopic Outcomes and Effectiveness Developmental Research Award (Dr. Gralnek) partially funded the economic analysis. Dr. Gralnek is also supported by a 1997 American Digestive Health Foundation Wilson-Cook Endoscopic Research Scholar Award.


Dive into the research topics of 'Clinical and economic outcomes of individuals with severe peptic ulcer hemorrhage and nonbleeding visible vessel: An analysis of two prospective clinical trials'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this