Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 13, 2025
Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
TC-325 Superiority in Malignant Gastrointestinal Bleeding: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized
Ali A Alali1,2, Rapat Pittayanon3, Myriam Martel4
1Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Kuwait University, Jabriya, Kuwait.
Introduction:
The efficacy of topical hemostatic agents, recommended for peptic ulcer bleeding, remains poorly characterized in malignant gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB).
Methods:
We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis assessing the efficacy of topical hemostatic agents in malignant GIB. The literature was searched using OVID MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases (database inception to November 2023). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing topical hemostatic agents with conventional endoscopic modalities in malignant GIB were included. Original RCT patient-level data were obtained. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Quality of the evidence was evaluated using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and certainty of evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The primary outcome was immediate hemostasis; secondary outcomes were 30-day rebleeding and the composite measure of further bleeding (persistent bleeding or 30-day rebleeding). Other outcomes were all-cause mortality, adverse events, and need for additional nonendoscopic treatment. Odds ratios (ORs) from endpoint comparisons were pooled using logistic regression models.
Results:
Overall, 985 citations were identified; 3 RCTs (n = 160 patients) were included with all assessing TC-325 (Hemospray). TC-325 achieved immediate hemostasis more often than conventional endoscopic modalities (OR 46.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.89-369.1) (low-level certainty). Thirty-day rebleeding (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.70) and further bleeding (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.05-0.26) were both significantly lower with TC-325 (very-low-level certainty). All-cause mortality and need for additional nonendoscopic treatment did not differ between groups. No adverse events were reported. Subgroup analysis confirmed TC-325 superiority in patients with upper GIB.
Discussion:
TC-325 seems superior to conventional endoscopic therapy in managing patients with malignant GIB. TC-325 results in improvements in immediate hemostasis, 30-day rebleeding, and further bleeding, based on very low-to-low certainties of evidence.
