I think I have not been as clear as I expected to be or you are not in a mood of understanding the real problem.
Let's see :
1.- The general condition of the patient was so poor that we even did not think of performing any kind of surgery at the beginning.
2.- That's why sclerotherapy was performed...We knew that the pt would not tolerate major agressive attitudes, not even exploration and suture of the bleeding ulcer plus vagotomy and drainage at that moment.
3.- But the complication of sclerotherapy was established and we had to operate this very severely ill patient in order to try to save his life.
4.- And what did we found?...A necrotic duodenum with a perforation due to the repeated sclerotherapy...The chances were from one part to resect the duodenum and disconnect the area through a gastrostomy, a proximal yeyunostomy and try to divert the pancreatic secretions outside the abdo cannulating the Wirsung duct...Sounds queer,doesn't it?...From the other, the chance was to performed the Whipple's operation, what we did, with the disasterous result already mentioned.
5.- No way thinking in opening that necrotic, greenish, aperistaltic duodenum to perform any type of local hemosthasis...Had to be resected.
6.- Finally, facing same problem in another kind of patient, we might have act as you proposed, "in the standard fashion widely established throughout the world" but it happened to be, and that's what I wanted to point out and the reason for my question that this case was not a standard one.