ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2025
Efficacy and safety of endoscopic glue injection in acute peptic ulcer bleeding.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preliminary research on the effectiveness and safety of metal clip-assisted endoscopic variceal ligation in the treatment of gastric varices.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Optimal management of peptic ulcer bleeding remains a clinical challenge. Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic glue injection (EGI) for acute peptic ulcer bleeding. Design: Single-center retrospective study. Methods: This study (October 2015-December 2024) included adults (⩾18 years) with high-risk peptic ulcer bleeding (Forrest Ia-IIa) treated with EGI using n-butyl α-cyanoacrylate ester or standard endoscopic treatment (SET) involving contact thermal therapy and hemoclips. The primary endpoint was the rebleeding within 7 days, and the secondary endpoints included rebleeding within 30 days, 30-day all-cause mortality rate, occurrence of adverse events (AEs), and length of hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Risk factors for rebleeding within 7 days were also analyzed. Results: A total of 148 patients were included (EGI: 57; SET: 91). The rates of rebleeding within 7 days were 8.77% (EGI) versus 20.88% (SET; Conclusion: EGI may be an effective and safe treatment for acute peptic ulcer bleeding, significantly reducing 30-day rebleeding and shortening hospital stay compared with SET. Clinicians should exercise heightened vigilance and consider more intensive monitoring or preventive strategies for patients with Forrest classification Ia ulcers or underlying kidney disease, who are at increased risk of early rebleeding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.