Banding ligation versus nadolol and isosorbide mononitrate for the prevention of esophageal variceal rebleeding

Prevention of recurrent esophageal variceal hemorrhage: review and current recommendations

Variceal rebleeding is a very frequent and severe complication in cirrhotic patients; therefore, its prevention should be mandatory. Lately several studies demonstrated that the rate of rebleeding was decreased by 40% and overall survival is improved by 20% with beta-blockers. However, this treatment presents some problems, such as the number of nonresponders and contraindications for its use. Recent trials found that the combination of beta-blockers with mononitrate of isosorbide to be superior to beta-blockade alone. Furthermore, endoscopic band ligation also shown to decrease the frequency of rebleeding, complications, and death compared with sclerotherapy and should be the preferred endoscopic treatment. In addition, the comparison between combined pharmacologic treatment with endoscopic treatment present similar rebleeding and mortality rates. More recently, the addition of nadolol to endoscopic band ligation increased the efficacy of endoscopy alone in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. These studies suggest that banding plus drugs could be the treatment of choice for the prophylaxis of rebleeding. When these treatments fail, the recommendation is to use transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) or surgical shunts. Both treatments are effective in preventing rebleeding; however, they are associated with a greater risk of encephalopathy. The comparison of portacaval shunts with TIPS demonstrated that TIPS patients presented higher rebleeding, treatment failure, and transplantation. Another randomized controlled trial comparing distal splenorenal shunt with TIPS shows that variceal rebleeding was similar in both groups without differences in encephalopathy and mortality. The only difference observed was the higher rate of reintervention observed in the TIPS group to maintain his patency.

Value of the hepatic venous pressure gradient to monitor drug therapy for portal hypertension: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The use of the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) to assess the efficacy of the pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension in cirrhosis is controversial. Our aim was to establish whether target HVPG reduction predicts variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients receiving variceal bleeding prophylaxis.

METHODS

Data sources were MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, citation lists, and abstracts (most recent search March 2006). Cohorts of patients on drug therapy from randomized and nonrandomized studies correlating variceal bleeding and HVPG change were used. Heterogeneity was explored by metaregression analysis.

RESULTS

Ten studies totaling 595 patients undergoing two HVPG measurements were identified. The RR of bleeding was lower in patients achieving an overall (HVPG <or=12 mmHg or decrease >or=20%) (0.27, 95% CI 0.14-0.52), complete (HVPG <or=12 mmHg) (0.48, CI 0.28-0.81), or partial (HVPG decrease >or=20%) (0.41, CI 0.20-0.81) response, with significant heterogeneity. Regression analysis identified the interval between the HVPG measurements significantly associated with the RR of bleeding. Heterogeneity was no longer significant after exclusion of an outlier trial, which showed the longest interval to HVPG remeasurement and the lowest quality score. Even considering nonvaluable patients because of bleeding as HVPG responders, the RR of bleeding was lower in overall responders than in nonresponders (0.66, CI 0.51-0.86). Overall response was associated with lower liver-related mortality (RR 0.58, CI 0.37-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the validity of HVPG end points to monitor drug therapy efficacy for variceal bleeding prophylaxis. HVPG monitoring also provides valuable prognostic information.

Prevention of recurrent haemorrhage

Patients who survive a first bleeding episode of oesophageal varices have a high risk of rebleeding, which is associated with a high mortality rate. Prevention of a recurrent haemorrhage is therefore recommended. Patients who were not on a primary prophylaxis should be treated with non-selective beta-adrenoceptor antagonists, endoscopic band ligation or both. If beta-blockers are not tolerated or are contraindicated, patients should be treated with endoscopic band ligation. If these preventive strategies fail, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (covered) or a small-diameter surgical shunt is indicated.

Prevention of esophageal variceal rebleeding

The rate of rebleeding of esophageal varices remains high after cessation of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage. Many measures have been developed to prevent the occurrence of rebleeding. When considering their effectiveness in reduction of rebleeding, the associated complications cannot be neglected. Due to unavoidable high incidence of complications, shunt surgery and endoscopic injection sclerotherapy are now rarely used. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt was developed to replace shunt operation but is now reserved for rescue therapy. Nonselective beta-blockers alone or in combination with isosorbide mononitrate and endoscopic variceal ligation are currently the first choices in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. The combination of nonselective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation appear to enhance the efficacy. With the advent of newly developed measures, esophageal variceal rebleeding could be greatly reduced and the survival of cirrhotics with bleeding esophageal varices could thereby be prolonged.

Hemodynamic response-guided therapy for prevention of variceal rebleeding: an uncontrolled pilot study

The clinical usefulness of assessing hemodynamic response to drug therapy in the prophylaxis of variceal rebleeding is unknown. An open-labeled, uncontrolled pilot trial was performed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of using the hemodynamic response to pharmacological treatment to guide therapy in this setting. Fifty patients with acute variceal bleeding underwent a hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement 5 days after the episode. Nadolol and nitrates were initiated, and a second HVPG was measured 15 days later. Responder patients (> or =20% decrease in HVPG from baseline) were maintained on drugs, partial responders (> or =10% and <20%) had banding ligation added to the drugs, and nonresponders (<10%) received a transjugular intrahepatic portal-systemic shunt (TIPS). Mean follow-up was 22 months. Eight patients (16%) did not receive the second HVPG, 6 of them because of early variceal rebleeding. Of the other 42 patients, 24 were classified as responders (57%); 10 as partial responders (24%), who had banding added; and 8 as nonresponders (19%), who received a TIPS. Patients with cirrhosis of viral etiology compared to alcoholic cirrhosis tended to present more early rebleedings, less response to drugs and needed more TIPS. Variceal rebleeding occurred in 22% of all patients but only in 12% of patients whose hemodynamic response was assessed. The 3 therapeutic groups were not different. In conclusion, using hemodynamic response to pharmacological treatment to guide therapy in secondary prophylaxis to prevent variceal bleeding is feasible and effectively protects patients from rebleeding. In this context, viral cirrhosis seems to present a worse outcome than alcoholic cirrhosis.

Comparative study between nadolol and 5-isosorbide mononitrate vs. endoscopic band ligation plus sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

After variceal bleeding, cirrhotic patients should receive secondary prophylaxis.

AIM

To compare nadolol plus 5-isosorbide mononitrate (5-ISMN) with endoscopic band ligation. The end points were rebleeding, treatment failure and death.

METHODS

One hundred and nine cirrhotic patients with a recent variceal bleeding were randomized: nadolol plus 5-ISMN in 57 patients and endoscopic band ligation in 52 patients.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 17 and 19 months in nadolol plus 5-ISMN and endoscopic band ligation groups, respectively. No differences were observed between groups in upper rebleeding (47% vs. 46%), variceal rebleeding (40% vs. 36%), failure (32% vs. 22%), major complications (7% vs. 13.5%) and death (19% vs. 20%), respectively. The actuarial probability of remaining free of rebleeding, failure and deaths were similar in both groups. Time to rebleeding shows that endoscopic band ligation patients had an early rebleed, with a median of 0.5 month (95% CI: 0.0-4.2) compared with patients from nadolol plus 5-ISMN, 7.6 months (95% CI: 2.9-12.3, P < 0.013). Multivariate analysis indicated that outcome-specific predictive factor(s) for rebleeding was Child A vs. B + C (P < 0.01); for failure was Child A vs. B + C (P < 0.02); and for death ascites (P < 0.01) and rebleeding (P < 0.02).

CONCLUSION

This trial suggests no superiority of endoscopic band ligation over nadolol plus 5-ISMN mononitrate for the prevention of rebleeding in cirrhotic patients.

Beta blockers in portal hypertension. Are they really a good option?

Non-selective beta blockers are very useful drugs in preventing first variceal bleeding and re-bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. These drugs work in two ways: 1) by blocking beta1 receptors and reducing cardiac output, and 2) by blocking beta2 receptors, producing splanchnic vasoconstriction and reducing portal flow. Consequently, they reduce portal pressure. In primary prophylaxis, beta blockers reduced the bleeding risk from 30 to 15%; in secondary prophylaxis, this risk decreased from 60 to 42% in the first year. Heart rate decrease does not necessary correlate with reduction in hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG). When this gradient is reduced to less than 12 mmHg, the patient will not bleed; when this is reduced > 20% from basal values bleeding risk is extremely low, estimated at 9% at 2 years. The only way to know whether the patient has become a responder is to measure the HVPG. Additionally, by means of this method we also can identify the non-responders, who have a higher rate of re-bleeding, between 54 and 64%, and can attempt to utilize a more aggressive therapy, such as adding isosorbide mononitrate to the beta blocker or combining the beta blocker with endoscopic ligation. These options are discussed in the present review.

Evolution of endoscopic therapy for esophageal varices

Endoscopic treatment for bleeding esophageal varices was first described 65 years ago, but the technique was not widely adopted until the 1970s. Rapid progress since then has resulted in new, more effective forms of endoscopic treatment. Currently, endoscopic therapy is the primary treatment for patients with bleeding esophageal varices at most centers. This review traces the evolution of endoscopic treatment, summarizes current outcomes data, and speculates on future development.

Factors predicting success of endoscopic variceal ligation for secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic obliteration of esophageal varices by endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is an effective form of secondary prophylaxis. However, there is no consensus regarding the technical aspects of EVL for secondary prophylaxis. The present study compares the technical aspects of EVL (frequency of sessions, number of sessions and number of bands used) in patients who rebled following secondary prophylaxis of esophageal varices by EVL compared to those who did not rebleed.

METHODS

All patients who underwent EVL for treatment of acute variceal bleeding followed by EVL for secondary prophylaxis and who subsequently developed recurrent variceal bleeding at Mayo Clinic, Rochester between January 1995 and May 2003 were identified. A control group of patients undergoing EVL for secondary prophylaxis who did not rebleed was identified.

RESULTS

During the study period, 216 patients with acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage underwent emergent EVL treatment with follow-up EVL for secondary prophylaxis, of whom 20 (9.3%) subsequently rebled. Both rebleeding and non-rebleeding patient groups were well-matched with respect to liver function (Child-Pugh class), number and size of variceal trunks, endoscopic stigmata of hemorrhage and beta-blocker usage. The median interval between EVL sessions in the rebleeding group (2 weeks, interquartile range 0-2 weeks) was significantly shorter compared to the non-rebleeding group (5 weeks, interquartile range 3-7 weeks; P = 0.004). Adjusting for age, gender, and Child-Pugh class, interbanding interval >/= 3 weeks was associated with increased likelihood of not rebleeding, hazard ratio 3.84 (95% confidence interval: 1.69-11.79; P = 0.0007).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate the importance of technical aspects of EVL on patient outcome, suggesting the benefit of longer interbanding intervals. Future prospective studies are required to define the optimal intersession interval. Standardizing procedural aspects of EVL will aid in objectively evaluating the benefit of this procedure when compared to other modalities such as medical treatment.

Bleeding caused by portal hypertension

Variceal bleeding is one of the dreaded complications of portal hypertension. Patients who have suspected or proven cirrhosis should undergo diagnostic upper endoscopy to detect medium and large gastro-esophageal varices. Patients with medium and large gastro-esophageal varices should be treated with non-selective beta-blockers (propranolol or nadolol), and these agents should be titrated to a heart rate of 55 beats per minute or adverse effects. If there are contraindications to or if patients are intolerant to beta-blockers, it is appropriate to consider prophylactic banding therapy for individuals with medium-to-large esophageal varices. When patients who have cirrhosis present with GI bleeding, they should be resuscitated and receive octreotide or other vasoactive agents. Endoscopy should be performed promptly to diagnose the source of bleeding and to provide endoscopic therapy (preferably banding). The currently available treatment for acute variceal bleeding provides hemostasis in most patients. These patients, however, are at significant risk for rebleeding unless secondary prophylaxis is provided. Although various pharmacological, endoscopic, radiological, and surgical options are available, combined pharmacological and endoscopic therapy is the most common form of secondary prophylaxis. TIPS is a radiologically placed portasystemic shunt, and if placed in suitable patients, it can provide effective treatment for patients with variceal bleeding that is refractory to medical and endoscopic therapy.

Endoscopic band ligation in the treatment of portal hypertension

The evidence that endoscopic band ligation (EBL) has greater efficacy and fewer side effects than endoscopic injection sclerotherapy has renewed interest in endoscopic treatments for portal hypertension. The introduction of multishot band devices, which allow the placement of 5-10 bands at a time, has made the technique much easier to perform, avoiding the use of overtubes and their related complications. EBL sessions are usually repeated at 2 week intervals until varices are obliterated, which is achieved in about 90% of patients after 2-4 sessions. Variceal recurrence is frequent, with 20-75% of patients requiring repeated EBL sessions. According to current evidence, nonselective beta-blockers are the preferred treatment option for prevention of a first variceal bleed, whereas EBL should be reserved for patients with contraindications or intolerance to beta-blockers. Nonselective beta-blockers, probably in association with the vasodilator isosorbide mononitrate, and EBL are good treatment options to prevent recurrent variceal rebleeding. The efficacy of EBL might be increased by combining it with beta-blocker therapy. Patients who are intolerant, have contraindications or bled while receiving primary prophylaxis with beta-blockers must be treated with EBL. In the latter situation, EBL should be added to rather than replace beta-blocker therapy. EBL, in combination with vasoactive drugs, is the recommended form of therapy for acute esophageal variceal bleeding; however, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy can be used in the acute setting if EBL is technically difficult.

The management of portal hypertension

Portal hypertension is an almost unavoidable complication of cirrhosis, and it is responsible for the more lethal complications of this syndrome. Appearance of these complications represents the major cause of death and liver transplantation in patients who have cirrhosis. This article highlights treatment modalities in use for managing portal hypertension and those that may be available in the future.

The effects of eradication of Helicobacter pylori on the recurrence of duodenal ulcers in patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

The role of Helicobacter pylori in patients with cirrhosis and increased prevalence of peptic ulcers is still poorly defined. The objective is to evaluate the effect of H pylori eradication on ulcer recurrence in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

The study was conducted at a single, tertiary, referral hospital with 1200 beds. Patients with cirrhosis and duodenal ulcers were tested for H pylori and were enrolled in the study. Patients with positive H pylori received eradication therapy. Patients with duodenal ulcers received antisecretory therapy and regular endoscopic examinations. Main outcome measurements were the recurrence of duodenal ulcers within 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 104 patients with cirrhosis and duodenal ulcers were enrolled. Fifty-four patients (52%) were H pylori positive, and 50 patients (48%) were H pylori negative. Forty-four patients received antimicrobial treatment and 36 patients achieved eradication of H pylori. Recurrent duodenal ulcers within 1 year were noted in 21 of 36 patients (58%) who achieved H pylori eradication. Recurrent duodenal ulcers also were noted in 8 of the 18 patients (44%) who remained H pylori positive and in 24 of the patients (48%) who were H pylori negative since their enrollment in the study (p = 0.53). The limitation was a relatively small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study showed that the prevalence of H pylori in patients with cirrhosis and duodenal ulcers was only 52%. Eradication of H pylori in patients with cirrhosis and duodenal ulcers did not effectively reduce the recurrence of ulcers.

Evaluation of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) versus propanolol plus isosorbide mononitrate/nadolol (ISMN) in the prevention of variceal rebleeding: comparison of cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients

Both EVL and drug therapy are effective in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. Comparisons between the two modalities are few, and only in cirrhotics. This prospective randomized controlled trial compared EVL with drug therapy (propranolol + ISMN) in the prevention of rebleeds from esophageal varices in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) patients. One hundred thirty-seven variceal bleeders were randomized to EVL (Group I; n = 71) or drug therapy (Group II; n = 66). In Group I, EVL was done every 2 weeks till obliteration of varices. In Group II, propranolol (dose sufficient to reduce heart rate to 55 bpm/maximum tolerated dose) and ISMN (incremental dose up to 20 mg BD) were administered. Group I and II patients had comparable baseline characteristics, follow-up (12.4 vs. 11.1 months), cirrhotics and noncirrhotics [50(70.4%) and 21(29.6%) vs. 51(77.3%) and 15(22.7%)] and frequency of Child's A (35 vs. 27), B (26 vs. 28), and C (9 vs. 11). The mean daily dose was 109 +/- 46 mg propranolol and 34 +/- 11 mg ISMN and was comparable in cirrhotic and NCPH patients. Upper GI bleeds occurred in 10 patients in Group I (5 from esophageal varices) and in 18 patients in Group II (15 from esophageal varices) (P = 0.06). The actuarial probability of rebleeding from esophageal varices at 24 months was 22% in Group I and 37% in Group II (P = 0.02). The probability of bleed was significantly higher in Child's C compared to Child's A/B cirrhotics (P = 0.02). On subgroup analysis, in NCPH patients, the actuarial probability of bleed at 24 months was significantly lower in Group I compared to Group II (25% vs 37%; P = 0.01). In cirrhotics, there was no difference in the probability of rebleeding between patients in Group I and those in Group II (P = 0.74). In Group II, 25.7% patients had adverse effects of drug therapy and 9% patients had to stop propranolol due to serious adverse effects, none required stopping ISMN. There were 10 deaths, 6 in Group I (bleed related, 1) and 4 in Group II (bleed related, 1); the actuarial probability of survival was comparable (P = 0.39). EVL and combination therapy are equally effective in the prevention of variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients. EVL is more effective than drug therapy in the prevention of rebleeds in patients with NCPH and, hence, recommended. However, in view of the small number of NCPH patients, further studies are needed before this can be stated conclusively.

Management of portal hypertension

Treatment of portal hypertension is evolving based on randomised controlled trials. In acute variceal bleeding, prophylactic antibiotics are mandatory, reducing mortality as well as preventing infections. Terlipressin or somatostatin combined with endoscopic ligation or sclerotherapy is the best strategy for control of bleeding but there is no added effect of vasoactive drugs on mortality. Non-selective beta-blockers are the first choice therapy for both secondary and primary prevention; if contraindications or intolerance to beta-blockers are present then band ligation should be used. Novel therapies target the increased intrahepatic resistance caused by microcirculatory intrahepatic deficiency of nitric oxide and contraction of activated intrahepatic stellate cells.

Variceal ligation plus nadolol compared with ligation for prophylaxis of variceal rebleeding: a multicenter trial

beta-Blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) have proven to be valuable methods in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of EVL combined with nadolol versus EVL alone as secondary prophylaxis for variceal bleeding. Patients admitted for acute variceal bleeding were treated during emergency endoscopy with EVL or sclerotherapy and received somatostatin for 5 days. At that point, patients were randomized to receive EVL plus nadolol or EVL alone. EVL sessions were repeated every 10 to 12 days until the varices were eradicated. Eighty patients with cirrhosis (alcoholic origin in 66%) were included (Child-Turcotte-Pugh A, 15%; B, 56%; C, 29%). The median follow-up period was 16 months (range, 1-24 months). The variceal bleeding recurrence rate was 14% in the EVL plus nadolol group and 38% in the EVL group (P = .006). Mortality was similar in both groups: five patients (11.6%) died in the combined therapy group and four patients (10.8%) died in the EVL group. There were no significant differences in the number of EVL sessions to eradicate varices: 3.2 +/- 1.3 in the combined therapy group versus 3.5 +/- 1.3 in the EVL alone group. The actuarial probability of variceal recurrence at 1 year was lower in the EVL plus nadolol group (54%) than in the EVL group (77%; P = .06). Adverse effects resulting from nadolol were observed in 11% of the patients. In conclusion, nadolol plus EVL reduces the incidence of variceal rebleeding compared with EVL alone. A combined treatment could lower the probability of variceal recurrence after eradication.

Review article: portal vein thrombosis -- new insights into aetiology and management

Portal vein thrombosis may occur in the presence or absence of underlying liver disease, and a combination of local and systemic factors are increasingly recognized to be important in its development. Acute and chronic portal vein thrombosis have traditionally been considered separately, although a clear clinical distinction may be difficult. Gastrooesophageal varices are an important complication of portal vein thrombosis, but they follow a different natural history to those with portal hypertension related to cirrhosis. Consensus on optimal treatment continues to be hampered by a lack of randomized trials, but recent studies demonstrate the efficacy of thrombolytic therapy in acute thrombosis, and the apparent safety and benefit of anticoagulation in patients with chronic portal vein thrombosis.

Variceal bleeding: pharmacological therapy

The complications of portal hypertension are totally prevented if hepatic venous pressure gradient is decreased below 12 mm Hg. Besides, if this target is not achieved, a 20% decrease in portal pressure from baseline levels offers an almost total protection from variceal bleeding. This sets the rationale for drug therapy to reduce portal pressure in portal hypertension. Pharmacological therapy to decrease portal pressure includes vasoconstrictors to decrease portal blood inflow, vasodilators to decrease hepatic resistance, and combination therapy. Oral agents, such as beta-adrenergic blockers and organic nitrates, are used for long-term prevention of variceal bleeding, while parenteral agents, such as somatostatin (and analogues) and terlipressin, are used for the treatment of acute variceal bleeding.

Diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension

Prevention of the first variceal haemorrhage should start when the patients have developed medium-sized to large varices. Non-selective beta-blockers and band ligation are equally effective in preventing the first bleeding episode. Rubber band ligation is the first choice for patients with contraindications or intolerance to beta-blockers. Treatment of acute bleeding should aim at controlling bleeding and preventing early rebleeding and complications, especially infections. Combined endoscopic (band ligation or sclerotherapy) and pharmacological treatment with vasoactive drugs can control bleeding in up to 90% of patients. Antibiotic prophylaxis is an integral part of the treatment of acute variceal haemorrhage, and must be started as soon as possible. Emergency transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt (TIPS) is the standard rescue therapy for patients failing combined endoscopic and pharmacological treatment. All patients who survive a variceal bleed should be treated with beta-blockers or band ligation to prevent rebleeding. All patients in whom bleeding cannot be controlled or who continue to rebleed can be treated with salvage TIPS or, in selected cases, with surgical shunts. Liver transplantation should be considered for patients with severe liver insufficiency in which first-line treatments fail.

The characteristics and the prognosis for patients presenting with actively bleeding esophageal varices at endoscopy

BACKGROUND

It remains unresolved whether the prognosis is worse for patients who present with actively bleeding varices at endoscopy compared with those in whom variceal bleeding has stopped.

METHODS

Patients with acute esophageal variceal bleeding were enrolled in this study and were divided into two groups: an active bleeding group and an inactive bleeding group. All patients had band ligation shortly after endoscopic examination and underwent elective ligation procedures until the varices were obliterated. Patients were followed for 1 year or until death. Short- and long-term prognoses were compared.

RESULTS

The active bleeding group included 54 patients and the inactive bleeding included 251 patients. Initial hemostasis was achieved in 93% in the active group and 99% in the inactive group ( p = not significant). The rate of recurrent variceal bleeding within 30 days was 24% in the active bleeding group vs. 12% in the inactive bleeding group ( p = 0.01); the mortality rates were 18% and 8%, respectively ( p = 0.03 in a single statistical test; however, Bonferroni correction for the multiple testing of data removed this significance). The rate of recurrent variceal bleeding within 1 year was 37% in the active bleeding group and 27% in the inactive bleeding group ( p = 0.06); the mortality rates were 22% and 21%, respectively ( p = not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

Whether variceal bleeding is active or inactive at endoscopy, variceal ligation is equally effective for control of bleeding. The rates of recurrent bleeding and mortality at 1 month were significantly higher among patients with active bleeding. However, the mortality rate was similar for both groups at 1 year.

Management of esophageal varices: an update from Digestive Disease Week and American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases 2003

Esophageal varices are a commonly encountered complication of cirrhosis. beta-blockers are a well-established cornerstone of the treatment of portal hypertension and primary and secondary prophylaxis for prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding. However, not all patients tolerate this type of therapy. Moreover, the exact role of esophageal variceal band ligation alone or in combination with beta-blocker therapy in the management of patients with esophageal varices remains to be defined. This summary report presents a number of recent studies addressing these important issues.

Modeling our way toward the optimal management of variceal hemorrhage

The optimal management approach for secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal hemorrhage is an area of active investigation. Clearly, some form of intervention is mandated owing to the high risk of rebleeding, up to 80% at two years. This editorial highlights the role for decision analytic modeling as a tool to guide management strategies for the clinical problem.

A cost-utility analysis of secondary prophylaxis for variceal hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Secondary prophylaxis for esophageal variceal hemorrhage (VH) is recommended, but there has never been a cost-utility analysis of its implementation.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to compare the cost utility of various strategies for the secondary prophylaxis of VH including (a) observation alone, (b) medical therapy (MED), (c) endoscopic band ligation (EBL), (d) endoscopic band ligation plus medical therapy (EBL + M), and (e) transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and to examine the effect of adherence on these strategies.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed for all five strategies, and included surveillance, risk of hepatic encephalopathy, complications, and nonadherence.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature and the Health Care Financing Administration.

TARGET POPULATION

People with cirrhosis and a history of controlled VH.

TIME HORIZON

Three years.

PERSPECTIVE

Third-party payer.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained.

RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS

Combination EBL + M was the optimal strategy, dominating all other strategies including observation, meaning that it was more effective and less expensive than the others. In addition, EBL alone dominated observation and TIPS in terms of QALYs, and MED alone dominated the strategy of observation in terms of QALYs.

RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Important variables affecting the optimal strategy were the odds ratio (OR) of VH with EBL compared to MED, the OR of VH with EBL + M compared to EBL, and patients' preferences regarding taking the medication as reflected in the associated toll exacted on the health state utility. Variations in these parameters within the range of clinical plausibility allowed EBL or MED to become the optimal strategy. TIPS was the optimal strategy only if adherence rates for all strategies were less than 12%. RESULTS OF MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS: Neither observation nor TIPS was ever the optimal strategy, and EBL + M was optimal in 62% of cases. If the variables identified in the sensitivity analysis were controlled, then EBL + M was optimal in 95% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS should be reserved only for patients with very poor adherence. Otherwise, patients are best served by medications, EBL, or a combination of both, depending on the comparative rates of rebleeding with each and patients' preferences regarding medical therapy. The redundancy of combination band ligation plus medical therapy can improve outcomes, particularly in the setting of poor patient adherence.

The cost-effectiveness of hepatic venous pressure gradient monitoring in the prevention of recurrent variceal hemorrhage

OBJECTIVE

Recurrent variceal hemorrhage is common following an initial bleed in patients with cirrhosis. The current standard of care for secondary prophylaxis is endoscopic band ligation (EBL). Combination of beta-blocker and nitrate therapy, guided by hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) monitoring, is a novel alternative strategy. We sought to determine the cost-effectiveness of these competing strategies.

METHODS

Decision analysis with Markov modeling was used to calculate the cost-effectiveness of three competing strategies: (1) EBL; (2) beta-blocker and nitrate therapy without HVPG monitoring (HVPG-); and (3) beta-blocker and nitrate therapy with HVPG monitoring (HVPG+). Patients in the HVPG+ strategy who failed to achieve an HVPG decline from medical therapy were offered EBL. Cost estimates were from a third-party payer perspective. The main outcome measure was the cost per recurrent variceal hemorrhage prevented.

RESULTS

Under base-case conditions, the HVPG+ strategy was the most effective yet most expensive approach, followed by EBL and HVPG-. Compared to the EBL strategy, the HVPG+ strategy cost an incremental 5,974 dollars per recurrent bleed prevented. In a population with 100% compliance with all therapies, the incremental cost of HVPG-versus EBL fell to 5,270 dollars per recurrent bleed prevented. The model results were sensitive to the cost of EBL, the cost of HVPG monitoring, and the probability of medical therapy producing an adequate HVPG decline.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to EBL for the secondary prophylaxis of variceal rebleeding, combination medical therapy guided by HVPG monitoring is more effective and only marginally more expensive.

Portal hypertension

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review discusses the advances in the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of the complications of portal hypertension that have occurred in the past year.

RECENT FINDINGS

The specific topics reviewed are the pathophysiology of portal hypertension (including recent findings regarding intrahepatic vascular resistance and splanchnic vasodilatation) and experimental methods used to act on the mechanisms that lead to portal hypertension, as well as recent advances in the diagnosis and management of the complications of portal hypertension.

SUMMARY

The specific complications discussed in this review are varices and variceal bleeding (primary prophylaxis, treatment of the acute episode, and secondary prophylaxis), portal hypertensive gastropathy, ascites, hepatorenal syndrome, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, the cardiopulmonary complications of portal hypertension (hepatopulmonary syndrome, portopulmonary hypertension, cardiac dysfunction), and hepatic encephalopathy.

Cost-effectiveness of hepatic venous pressure gradient measurements for prophylaxis of variceal re-bleeding

BACKGROUND

Measurement of the hepatic venous pressure gradient may identify a sub-optimal response to drug prophylaxis in patients with a history of variceal bleeding. However, the cost-effectiveness of routine hepatic venous pressure gradient measurements to guide secondary prophylaxis has not been examined.

METHODS

A Markov model was constructed using specialized software (DATA 3.5, Williamstown, MA, USA). Three strategies involved secondary prophylaxis without haemodynamic monitoring using beta-blockers alone, beta-blockers plus isosorbide mononitrate or endoscopic variceal ligation alone. Four strategies involved secondary prophylaxis with beta-blockers plus isosorbide mononitrate or beta-blockers alone, accompanied by one or two hepatic venous pressure gradient measurements to identify haemodynamic non-responders, who underwent endoscopic variceal ligation as an alternative. The total expected costs, variceal bleeding episodes and total deaths were calculated for each strategy over 3 years.

RESULTS

The two most effective strategies were combination therapy alone and combination therapy with two hepatic venous pressure gradient measurements. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the latter strategy was 136,700 dollars per year of life saved compared with combination therapy alone. The ratio improved as the time horizon was extended or the rates of variceal re-bleeding were increased.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-effectiveness of haemodynamic monitoring to guide secondary prophylaxis of recurrent variceal bleeding is highly dependent on local hepatic venous pressure gradient measurement costs, life expectancy and re-bleeding rates.

Endoscopic ligation vs. nadolol in the prevention of first variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

The value of band ligation for prevention of the first episode of variceal bleeding has not been fully evaluated. This study compared the efficacy and safety of band ligation vs. treatment with a beta-blocker for the prophylactic prevention of first bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and high-risk esophageal varices.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients with cirrhosis and endoscopically determined high-risk esophageal varices but no history of bleeding were randomized to band ligation (50 patients) or treatment with nadolol (50 patients). In the ligation group, two to 4 elastic bands were deployed during each session. Ligation was repeated at intervals of 3 to 4 weeks until variceal obliteration was achieved. In the nadolol group, the dose of the drug, administered once daily, was sufficient to reduce the pulse rate by 25%.

RESULTS

In the ligation group, variceal obliteration was achieved in 41 patients (82%), at a mean of 2.7 (1.1) ligation sessions. In the nadolol group, the mean daily dose of nadolol administered was 60 (20) mg. During follow-up (median approximately 22 months), 10 patients (20%) in the ligation group and 16 (32%) in the nadolol group had upper-GI bleeding (p=0.23). Esophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 5 patients (10%) in the ligation group and 9 (18%) in the nadolol group (p=0.31). By multivariate Cox analysis, Child-Pugh class was the only factor predictive of variceal bleeding. Minor complications were noted in 9 patients (18%) in the ligation group and 4 (8%) in the nadolol group (p=0.35). No serious complication was encountered. Twelve patients in the ligation group and 11 in the nadolol group died (p=0.62). One patient in the ligation group and 3 in the nadolol group died from uncontrollable variceal hemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

Variceal ligation is as effective and as safe as treatment with nadolol for prevention of first variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis.

TIPS: an update

During the last 15 years the transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) procedure has become a safe and effective treatment of portal hypertension. Its major obstacle, the high rate of shunt insufficiency, is going to be solved by the availability of covered stents showing a patency rate of up to 90%. The treatment of acute oesophageal and gastric variceal bleeding is an unsolved problem because variceal bleeding remains the major cause of death in patients with cirrhosis. TIPS has become the rescue treatment of choice because it combines high efficacy with low invasiveness. In this context, the timing of the rescue TIPS is of major importance for achieving definitive haemostasis before multi-organ failure develops. In the prevention of re-bleeding, TIPS is accepted as a second-line treatment, required in about 10-20% of patients. TIPS may be indicated when more than two significant re-bleedings occurred within a time frame of 12 months in spite of adequate first-line measures i.e. drugs or ligation. Refractory ascites is the third main indication for TIPS. Five randomized studies comparing TIPS with paracentesis show good response and comparable survival. Interpretations of authors and comments of reviewers are, however, controversial and do not permit a definitive recommendation.

Endoscopic therapy for upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is one of the most common medical emergencies and remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among patients. Although initially employed diagnostically, endoscopy has steadily replaced surgery as a first-line treatment in all but the haemodynamically unstable patient. A vast selection of techniques and devices are now available to the dedicated therapeutic endoscopist, including injection therapy, electrical or thermal coagulation and mechanical banding or clipping. The use of endoscopic ultrasound for targeting treatment is increasing and the development of new technologies, such as capsule endoscopy, is likely to play an important role in future protocols. However, despite numerous randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses comparing the efficacy of different endoscopic interventions, the implementation of obtained results into treatment regimes has so far failed to impact significantly on overall UGIB mortality, which remains stubbornly at 10-14%. Reducing this continues to be one of the main challenges facing the therapeutic endoscopist.

Endoscopic banding ligation can effectively resect hyperplastic polyps of stomach

AIM

Bleeding and perforation are the major and serious complications associated with endoscopic polypectomy. To develop a safe and effective method to resect hyperplastic polyps of the stomach, we employed rubber bands to strangulate hyperplastic polyps and to determine the possibility of inducing avascular necrosis in these lesions.

METHODS

Forty-seven patients with 72 hyperplastic polyps were treated with endoscopic banding ligation (EBL). On 14 days after endoscopic ligation, follow-up endoscopies were performed to assess the outcomes of the strangulated polyps.

RESULTS

After being strangulated by the rubber bands, all of the polyps immediately became congested (100%), and then developed cyanotic changes (100%) approximately 4 minutes later. On follow-up endoscopy 2 weeks later, all the polyps except one had dropped off. The only one residual polyp shrank with a rubber band in its base, and it also dropped off spontaneously during subsequent follow-up. No complications occurred during or following the ligation procedures.

CONCLUSION

Gastric polyps develop avascular necrosis following ligation by rubber bands. Employing suction equipment, EBL can easily capture sessile polyps. It is an easy, safe and effective method to eradicate hyperplastic polyps of the stomach.

Current Management of Esophageal Varices

Acute variceal hemorrhage is the most lethal complication of cirrhosis. The reported mortality rate from a first episode of variceal hemorrhage is 17% to 57%. Management of varices can be categorized into three phases: 1) prevention of initial bleeding, 2) management of acute bleeding, and 3) prevention of rebleeding. Modalities for treatment include pharmacologic, endoscopic, and shunt therapy. For the prevention of first variceal hemorrhage, cirrhotic patients should undergo endoscopy to identify patients with large varices. Priority for screening for varices should be given to patients with low platelet count, splenomegaly, and advanced cirrhosis. Once large varices are identified, patients should be started on beta-blocker therapy, which reduces the risk of bleeding by 50%. If pharmacologic therapy is not tolerated or contraindicated, endoscopic band ligation should be performed, and surveillance of varices should be performed every 6 months thereafter. Shunt procedures are not indicated due to their higher rates of complications compared with medical therapy. For the management of acute variceal hemorrhage, patients should be started on prophylactic intravenous antibiotics and intravenous octreotide. Endoscopy should be performed to diagnose and treat variceal hemorrhage. Band ligation appears to be as effective as sclerotherapy, but with less complications. If hemostasis is not achieved, balloon tamponade can be used as a bridge to definitive therapy, which in this case would be a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). If TIPS is unavailable, a surgical shunt is indicated. Once an episode of acute bleeding has been controlled, variceal eradication is best accomplished with repeat band ligation every 10 to 14 days until varices are obliterated. Prevention of recurrent bleeding can be achieved with beta-blocker therapy. The addition of isosorbide mononitrate further reduces recurrent bleeding. This combination pharmacologic therapy has been shown to be superior to sclerotherapy and may be superior to band ligation. However, side effects of combination pharmacologic therapy may limit its effectiveness. Band ligation is preferred to sclerotherapy when considering endoscopic therapy due to less complications and lower cost. Surgical shunts should be used for prevention of rebleeding in patients who do not tolerate or are noncompliant with medical therapy and who have relatively preserved liver function. TIPS should be reserved for patients who have poor liver function and who have failed medical therapy.

Portal hypertension

Portal hypertension, the main complication of cirrhosis, is responsible for its most common complications: variceal hemorrhage, ascites, and portosystemic encephalopathy. Portal hypertension is the result of increased intrahepatic resistance and increased portal venous inflow. Vasodilatation (splanchnic and systemic) and the hyperdynamic circulation are hemodynamic abnormalities typical of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Gastroesophageal varices result almost solely from portal hypertension, although the hyperdynamic circulation contributes to variceal growth and hemorrhage. Ascites results from sinusoidal hypertension and sodium retention, which, in turn, is secondary to vasodilatation and activation of neurohumoral systems. The hepatorenal syndrome represents the result of extreme vasodilatation, with an extreme decrease in effective blood volume that leads to maximal activation of vasoconstrictive systems, renal vasoconstriction, and renal failure. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis is a potentially lethal infection of ascites that occurs in the absence of a local source of infection. Portosystemic encephalopathy is a consequence of both portal hypertension (shunting of blood through portosystemic collaterals) and hepatic insufficiency that result in the accumulation of neurotoxins in the brain. This review covers the recent advances in the pathophysiology and management of the complications of portal hypertension.