ReviewAmerican journal of translational research2026
Clinical efficacy and safety of endoscopic metal titanium clip and local injection hemostasis for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal tract bleeding: a meta-analysis.
Review in American journal of translational research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This meta-analysis systematically evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of endoscopic metal titanium clips versus local injection hemostasis for acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding (ANVUGIB). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang data was conducted from inception to June 2025, identifying nine randomized controlled trials involving 871 patients. No significant differences were observed between the titanium clip and injection groups regarding initial hemostasis rate (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.05, P = 0.08), hospitalization time (MD = -0.59 days, 95% CI: -1.75-0.57, P = 0.32), mortality (RR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.62-2.43, P = 0.56), or blood transfusion volume (MD = -0.35 mL, 95% CI: -0.85-0.14, P = 0.16). However, the titanium clip group demonstrated significantly lower rebleeding rates (RR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.92, P = 0.02) and reduced surgical requirements (RR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.12-0.85, P = 0.02). Subgroup analysis showed that titanium clips were particularly advantageous in reducing rebleeding among peptic ulcer patients (RR = 0.25, P = 0.0008). Sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of these findings, and no significant publication bias was detected. In conclusion, while endoscopic metal titanium clips and local injection offer comparable initial hemostatic efficacy and safety for ANVUGIB, titanium clips are superior for reducing rebleeding and the need for surgical intervention, especially in patients with peptic ulcers or a high risk of rebleeding, and should therefore be prioritized as a hemostatic strategy.
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.