RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) is usually carried out at weekly intervals in patients with esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB). However, some patients receive sclerotherapy at irregular intervals. In this study we aimed to elucidate the reasons and risk factors for irregular-interval sclerotherapy in patients with EVB, and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of interrupted irregular intervals in these patients. METHODS: Medical records of patients who were admitted to the Chinese PLA General Hospital from December 2013 to June 2015 for EVS were retrospectively analyzed. EVS sessions were scheduled to be repeated at regular weekly intervals. However, some of these patients received at least one treatment session at irregular intervals (mainly <7 days). This irregular-interval group was further divided into those whose treatment was rescheduled for emergency and elective reasons. RESULTS: Irregular treatment intervals were mainly caused by early rebleeding, initial emergency treatment, and holidays. However, there were no differences in the rates of complication and variceal eradication between patients treated at weekly and irregular intervals. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified ascites (P = 0.0009), variceal erosion (P = 0.0003), and maximum injected volume of sclerosing agent per session (P = 0.0008) to be associated with emergency irregular-interval treatment. Only age differed between the elective irregular-treatment and weekly treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Early rebleeding, initial emergency treatment, and treatment over holidays may necessitate irregular sclerotherapy intervals in patients with EVB. Moreover, ascites, variceal erosion, and maximum injected volume of sclerosing agent per session are risk factors for emergency sclerotherapy, whereas elective adjustments to treatment schedules as a result of holidays do not affect the outcomes of patients undergoing EVS for EVB.
Assuntos
Varizes Esofágicas e Gástricas/terapia , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/terapia , Escleroterapia/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Endoscopia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
AIM: To evaluate the clinical effects of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) vs endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) in the management of gastric variceal (GV) bleeding in terms of variceal rebleeding, hepatic encephalopathy (HE), and survival by meta-analysis. METHODS: Medline, Embase, and CNKI were searched. Studies compared TIPS with EVS in treating GV bleeding were identified and included according to our predefined inclusion criteria. Data were extracted independently by two of our authors. Studies with prospective randomized design were considered to be of high quality. Hazard ratios (HRs) or odd ratios (ORs) were calculated using a fixed-effects model when there was no inter-trial heterogeneity. Oppositely, a random-effects model was employed. RESULTS: Three studies with 220 patients who had at least one episode of GV bleeding were included in the present meta-analysis. The proportions of patients with viral cirrhosis and alcoholic cirrhosis were 39% (range 0%-78%) and 36% (range 12% to 41%), respectively. The pooled incidence of variceal rebleeding in the TIPS group was significantly lower than that in the EVS group (HR = 0.3, 0.35, 95%CI: 0.17-0.71, P = 0.004). However, the risk of the development of any degree of HE was significantly increased in the TIPS group (OR = 15.97, 95%CI: 3.61-70.68). The pooled HR of survival was 1.26 (95%CI: 0.76-2.09, P = 0.36). No inter-trial heterogeneity was observed among these analyses. CONCLUSION: The improved effect of TIPS in the prevention of GV rebleeding is associated with an increased risk of HE. There is no survival difference between the TIPS and EVS groups. Further studies are needed to evaluate the survival benefit of TIPS in cirrhotic patients with GV bleeding.
RESUMO
Objective To evaluate the prophylactic effects of propranolol, propranolol plus endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) and propranolol plus endoscopic sclerotherapy (EVS), and to determine the most effective combination for secondary prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding.Methods After hemostasis, a total of 78 patients with esophageal variceal bleeding were randomly assigned to receive propranolol (propranolol group), propranolol plus EVL (ligation group) or propranolol plus sclerotherapy (EVS group), with 26 in each group.All patients were followed up for 12 months, and the rates of variceal re-bleeding, mortality, portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG), re-occurrence of esophageal varices and formation of gastric fundus varices were compared among different groups.Results During the 12-month follow-up, the rate of re-bleeding in EVL group (30.77%) was significantly lower than those of the EVS group (42.31%) or propranolol group (53.85%) (P<0.05).The occurrence of PHG and fundal varices in patients of EVL group was similar to that of propranolol group, which were both lower than that of EVS group (P<0.05), but the re-occurrence of esophageal varices in EVL group was significantly higher than that of EVS group (P<0.05).Conclusion EVL plus propranolol might be the most effective therapy for secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding.
RESUMO
Objective To study the effects of three kinds of endoscopic therapy on gastric varices. Methods In this study, the efficacies of endoscopic band ligation ( EVL) , endoscopic injection of tissue adhesives (histoacryl) and sclerotic agent (EIS) for gastric varices were assessed. Forty consecutive, non-randomized patients with gastric varices were prospectively studied. EVL was done for 11 cases, Histoacryl 15 cases, and EIS 14 cases, to control and prevent relapse of bleeding. Results In the following-up ( six months) period, the effective rate of EVL, histoacryl and EIS were 100. 0% , 100. 0% and 72. 7% ; the e-radicative rate 25. 0% , 30. 8% ,0 (P
