Papaefthymiou A, Aslam N, Hussein M, Alzoubaidi D, Gross SA, Serna A, Varbobitis I, Hengehold TA, López MF, Fernández-Sordo JO, Rey JW, Hayee B, Despott EJ, Murino A, Moreea S, Boger P, Dunn JM, Mainie I, Mullady D, Early D, Latorre M, Ragunath K, Anderson JT, Bhandari P, Goetz M, Kiesslich R, Coron E, Santiago ER, Gonda TA, O'Donnell M, Norton B, Telese A, Simons-Linares R, and Haidry R
Background: Hemostatic powders are used as second-line treatment in acute gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (AGIB). Increasing evidence supports the use of TC-325 as monotherapy in specific scenarios. This prospective, multicenter study evaluated the performance of TC-325 as monotherapy for AGIB., Methods: Eighteen centers across Europe and USA contributed to a registry between 2016 and 2022. Adults with AGIB were eligible, unless TC-325 was part of combined hemostasis. The primary endpoint was immediate hemostasis. Secondary outcomes were rebleeding and mortality. Associations with risk factors were investigated (statistical significance at P≤0.05)., Results: One hundred ninety patients were included (age 51-81 years, male: female 2:1), with peptic ulcer (n=48), upper GI malignancy (n=79), post-endoscopic treatment hemorrhage (n=37), and lower GI lesions (n=26). The primary outcome was recorded in 96.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 92.6-98.5) with rebleeding in 17.4% (95%CI 11.9-24.1); 9.9% (95%CI 5.8-15.6) died within 7 days, and 21.7% (95%CI 15.6-28.9) within 30 days. Regarding peptic ulcer, immediate hemostasis was achieved in 88% (95%CI 75-95), while 26% (95%CI 13-43) rebled. Higher ASA score was associated with mortality (OR 23.5, 95%CI 1.60-345; P=0.02). Immediate hemostasis was achieved in 100% of cases with malignancy and post-intervention bleeding, with rebleeding in 17% and 3.1%, respectively. Twenty-six patients received TC-325 for lower GI bleeding, and in all but one the primary outcome was achieved., Conclusions: TC-325 monotherapy is safe and effective, especially in malignancy or post-endoscopic intervention bleeding. In patients with peptic ulcer, it could be helpful when the primary treatment is unfeasible, as bridge to definite therapy., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest: Rehan J. Haidry declares: Pentax Medical, Apollo Endosurgery, Medtronic, Odin Vision, Cook Endoscopy, Fractyl Limited, Endogastric Solutions; Enrique Rodríguez de Santiago declares: Olympus, Norgine and Apollo Endosurgery (Educational activities) Adacyte therapeuthics (Advisory); Seth A. Gross declares: Cook, Medtronic, Olympus, Microtech. The other authors have nothing to declare, (Copyright: © 2024 Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology.)