Endoscopic injection therapy of bleeding ulcer: a prospective and randomized comparison of adrenaline alone or with polidocanol

J Clin Gastroenterol. 1993 Oct;17(3):195-200. doi: 10.1097/00004836-199310000-00005.


In a prospective randomized trial involving 63 patients with bleeding peptic ulcer, we assessed whether the addition of 1% polidocanol improved the results achieved by 1/10(4) adrenaline alone for injection therapy. The inclusion criterion was the presence of active arterial bleeding or a nonbleeding visible vessel at emergency endoscopy. Thirty patients were treated with 1/10(4) adrenaline (group A) and 33 with adrenaline plus 1% polidocanol (group B). Initial hemostasis was achieved in 97% of cases in both groups and permanent hemostasis in 87% patients in group A and in 76% in group B (p = NS). Mortality was 6% in group A and 3% in group B. There were no differences between the two groups regarding requirements for emergency surgery, the number of transfusions, or the length of hospital stay. One patient in group B had a perforation. No other relevant complications were noted. In conclusion, combined therapy does not improve the results achieved with adrenaline alone.

Publication types

  • Clinical Trial
  • Comparative Study
  • Randomized Controlled Trial

MeSH terms

  • Epinephrine / administration & dosage
  • Epinephrine / therapeutic use*
  • Female
  • Hemostasis, Endoscopic*
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage / epidemiology
  • Peptic Ulcer Hemorrhage / therapy*
  • Polidocanol
  • Polyethylene Glycols / administration & dosage
  • Polyethylene Glycols / therapeutic use*
  • Prospective Studies
  • Sclerosing Solutions / therapeutic use*
  • Treatment Outcome


  • Sclerosing Solutions
  • Polidocanol
  • Polyethylene Glycols
  • Epinephrine