Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 507

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Endoscopic Retreatment Compared with Surgery in Patients with Recurrent Bleeding after Initial Endoscopic Control of Bleeding Ulcers

Open access
Lau, James Y.W., Sung, Joseph J.Y., Lam, Yuk-hoi, Chan, Angus C.W., Ng, Enders K.W., Lee, Danny W.H., Chan, Francis K.L., Suen, Roamy C.Y., Chung, S.C. Sydney·1999·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND METHODS: After endoscopic treatment to control bleeding of peptic ulcers, bleeding recurs in 15 to 20 percent of patients. In a prospective, randomized study, we compared endoscopic retreatment with surgery after initial endoscopy. Over a 40-month period, 1169 of 3473 adults who were admitted to our hospital with bleeding peptic ulcers underwent endoscopy to reestablish hemostasis. Of 100 patients with recurrent bleeding, 7 patients with cancer and 1 patient with cardiac arrest were excluded from the study; 48 patients were randomly assigned to undergo immediate endoscopic retreatment and 44 were assigned to undergo surgery. The type of operation used was left to the surgeon. Bleeding was considered to have recurred in the event of any one of the following: vomiting of fresh blood, hypotension and melena, or a requirement for more than four units of blood in the 72-hour period after endoscopic treatment. RESULTS: Of the 48 patients who were assigned to endoscopic retreatment, 35 had long-term control of bleeding. Thirteen underwent salvage surgery, 11 because retreatment failed and 2 because of perforations resulting from thermocoagulation. Five patients in the endoscopy group died within 30 days, as compared with eight patients in the surgery group (P=0.37). Seven patients in the endoscopy group (including 6 who underwent salvage surgery) had complications, as compared with 16 in the surgery group (P=0.03). The duration of hospitalization, the need for hospitalization in the intensive care unit and the resultant duration of that stay, and the number of blood transfusions were similar in the two groups. In multivariate analysis, hypotension at randomization (P=0.01) and an ulcer size of at least 2 cm (P=0.03) were independent factors predictive of the failure of endoscopic retreatment. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with peptic ulcers and recurrent bleeding after initial endoscopic control of bleeding, endoscopic retreatment reduces the need for surgery without increasing the risk of death and is associated with fewer complications than is surgery.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199903113401002

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Cited by

See all 507

Metadata

Authors
Lau, J. Y. W., Sung, J. J. Y., Lam, Y.-H., Chan, A. C. W., Ng, E. K. W., Lee, D. W. H., Chan, F. K. L., Suen, R. C. Y., & Chung, S. C. S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1999-03-11
Volume
340
Issue
10
Pages
751-756
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2315941418
Cited by
507
References
16
FWCI
20.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Endoscopic Retreatment Compared with Surgery in Patients with Recurrent Bleeding after Initial Endoscopic Control of Bleeding Ulcers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199903113401002
The paper
Lau, J. Y. W., Sung, J. J. Y., Lam, Y.-H., Chan, A. C. W., Ng, E. K. W., Lee, D. W. H., Chan, F. K. L., Suen, R. C. Y., & Chung, S. C. S. (1999). Endoscopic Retreatment Compared with Surgery in Patients with Recurrent Bleeding after Initial Endoscopic Control of Bleeding Ulcers. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199903113401002

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.