Use of propranolol to reduce the rebleeding rate during injection sclerotherapy prior to variceal obliteration

Carvedilol and traditional nonselective beta blockers for the secondary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage and portal hypertension related complications among patients with decompensated cirrhosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Carvedilol has limited research on decompensated cirrhosis. This study compared the effects of carvedilol, traditional nonselective beta blockers (NSBBs), including propranolol and nadolol, and other interventions in patients using carvedilol or traditional NSBBs for secondary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage (VH) and portal hypertension (PH)-related complications.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, was conducted through October 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating carvedilol or traditional NSBBs for secondary prophylaxis of VH were included. The outcomes were the occurrence of VH and portal PH-related complications, including new or worsening ascites, hepatic encephalopathy, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and hepatorenal syndrome. A network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 60 RCTs involving 5,600 patients with a median Child Pugh score of 8.0 (range 6.8-10) were included. The risk of carvedilol plus variceal band ligation (VBL) on VH was lower than placebo (relative risk (RR) 0.24; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.10-0.57), and the risk of carvedilol on new or worsening ascites was lower than placebo (RR = 0.10, 95%CI; 0.01-0.93). Traditional NSBBs plus VBL also had preventive effects on VH compared to placebo (RR = 0.31, 95%CI; 0.18-0.54). However, there were no differences between carvedilol and traditional NSBBs in other outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Carvedilol can prevent PH-related complications, including VH and new or worsening ascites, in cirrhosis patients with a history of VH. No significant differences were observed between the effects of carvedilol and traditional NSBBs, both combined with VBL.

Secondary prevention of variceal bleeding in adults with previous oesophageal variceal bleeding due to decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% to 95% of people with cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed in about one to three years of diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, which include endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and surgical portocaval shunts, among others. However, there is uncertainty surrounding their individual and relative benefits and harms.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for secondary prevention of variceal bleeding in adults with previous oesophageal variceal bleeding due to decompensated liver cirrhosis through a network meta-analysis and to generate rankings of the different treatments for secondary prevention according to their safety and efficacy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until December 2019 to identify randomised clinical trials in people with cirrhosis and a previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices. We excluded randomised clinical trials in which participants had no previous history of bleeding from oesophageal varices, previous history of bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those who had acute bleeding at the time of treatment, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS using Bayesian methods and calculated the differences in treatments using hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 48 randomised clinical trials (3526 participants) in the review. Forty-six trials (3442 participants) were included in one or more comparisons. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies. The follow-up ranged from two months to 61 months. All the trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 12 interventions were compared in these trials (sclerotherapy, beta-blockers, variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy, no active intervention, TIPS (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt), beta-blockers plus nitrates, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus nitrates plus variceal band ligation, beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation, sclerotherapy plus nitrates). Overall, 22.5% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) of sclerotherapy died during the follow-up period ranging from two months to 61 months. There was considerable uncertainty in the effects of interventions on mortality. Accordingly, none of the interventions showed superiority over another. None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, variceal band ligation may result in fewer serious adverse events (number of people) than sclerotherapy (OR 0.19; 95% CrI 0.06 to 0.54; 1 trial; 100 participants). Based on low or very low-certainty evidence, the adverse events (number of participants) and adverse events (number of events) may be different across many comparisons; however, these differences are due to very small trials at high risk of bias showing large differences in some comparisons leading to many differences despite absence of direct evidence. Based on low-certainty evidence, TIPS may result in large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation (HR 0.12; 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.41; 1 trial; 58 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, any variceal rebleed was probably lower in sclerotherapy than in no active intervention (HR 0.62; 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.99, direct comparison HR 0.66; 95% CrI 0.11 to 3.13; 3 trials; 296 participants), beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy than sclerotherapy alone (HR 0.60; 95% CrI 0.37 to 0.95; direct comparison HR 0.50; 95% CrI 0.07 to 2.96; 4 trials; 231 participants); TIPS than sclerotherapy (HR 0.18; 95% CrI 0.08 to 0.38; direct comparison HR 0.22; 95% CrI 0.01 to 7.51; 2 trials; 109 participants), and in portocaval shunt than sclerotherapy (HR 0.21; 95% CrI 0.05 to 0.77; no direct comparison) groups. Based on low-certainty evidence, beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more, other compensation, events than sclerotherapy (rate ratio 2.37; 95% CrI 1.35 to 4.67; 1 trial; 65 participants and rate ratio 2.30; 95% CrI 1.20 to 4.65; 2 trials; 109 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions including those related to beta-blockers plus variceal band ligation in the remaining comparisons.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions on mortality. Variceal band ligation might result in fewer serious adverse events than sclerotherapy. TIPS might result in a large decrease in symptomatic rebleed than variceal band ligation. Sclerotherapy probably results in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than no active intervention. Beta-blockers plus sclerotherapy and TIPS probably result in fewer 'any' variceal rebleeding than sclerotherapy. Beta-blockers alone and TIPS might result in more other compensation events than sclerotherapy. The evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons. Accordingly, high-quality randomised comparative clinical trials are needed.

Benefit of combination β-blocker and endoscopic treatment to prevent variceal rebleeding: A meta-analysis

AIM: To determine whether the association of β-blockers with endoscopic treatment is superior to endoscopic treatment alone for the secondary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding.

METHODS: Randomised controlled trials comparing sclerotherapy (SCL) with SCL plus β-blockers (BB) or banding ligation (BL) with BL plus BB were identified. Main outcomes were overall and 6, 12 and 24 mo rebleeding rates, as well as overall and 6, 12 and 24 mo mortality. Two statistical methods were used: Yusuf-Peto, and Der Simonian and Laird. Inter-trial heterogeneity was systematically taken into account.

RESULTS: Seventeen randomised controlled trials were included, 14 with SCL and 3 with BL. Combination β-blocker and endoscopic treatment significantly reduced rebleeding rates at 6, 12 and 24 mo and overall [odds ratio (OR): 2.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.69-2.85, P < 0.0001] compared to endoscopic treatment alone. Mortality at 24 mo was significantly lower for the combined treatment group (OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.16-2.90, P = 0.009), as well as overall mortality (OR: 1.43, 95% CI: 1.03-1.98, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION: Combination therapy should thus be recommended as the first line treatment for secondary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding.

Pharmacotherapy plus endoscopic intervention is more effective than pharmacotherapy or endoscopy alone in the secondary prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding: a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Previous clinical trials on the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding yielded mixed results regarding the efficacy of endoscopic procedures compared with pharmacotherapy only.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of endoscopic procedures with that of pharmacotherapy in the prevention of mortality and rebleeding.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A systematic literature review was performed to identify randomized, controlled trials of the efficacy of pharmacotherapy and endoscopic therapy. A meta-analysis was performed by using the Comprehensive MetaAnalysis software package. A 2-sided alpha error <.05 was considered statistically significant (P < .05).

PATIENTS

Twenty-five clinical trials with a total of 2159 patients were eligible for meta-analysis.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was computed for all-cause mortality, mortality from rebleeding, all-cause rebleeding, and rebleeding caused by varices.

RESULTS

Pharmacotherapy was as effective as endoscopic procedures in preventing rebleeding (RR 1.067; 95% CI, 0.865-1.316; P = .546), variceal rebleeding (RR 1.143; 95% CI, 0.791-1.651; P = .476), all-cause mortality (RR 0.997; 95% CI, 0.827-1.202, P = .978), and mortality from rebleeding (RR 1.171; 95% CI, 0.816-1.679; P = .39). Pharmacotherapy combined with endoscopic procedures did not reduce all-cause mortality (RR 0.787; 95% CI, 0.587-1.054; P = .108) or mortality caused by rebleeding (RR 0.786; 95% CI, 0.445-1.387; P = .405) compared with endoscopic procedures. However, combination therapy (endoscopic procedure plus pharmacotherapy) significantly reduced the incidence of all rebleeding (RR 0.623; 95% CI, 0.523-0.741; P < .001) and variceal rebleeding (RR 0.601; 95% CI, 0.440-0.820; P < .001).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity of patient population and different treatment protocols may have affected our meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacotherapy may be as effective as endoscopic therapy in reducing rebleeding rates and all-cause mortality. Pharmacotherapy plus endoscopic intervention is more effective than endoscopic intervention alone.

Avoiding pitfalls: what an endoscopist should know in liver transplantation--part 1

Cirrhosis is associated with global homodynamic changes, but the majority of the complications are usually manifested through the gastrointestinal tract. Therefore, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy has become an important tool in the multidisciplinary approach in the management of these patients. With the ever growing number of cirrhotic patients requiring pre-transplant endoscopic management, it is imperative that the community endoscopists are well aware of the pathologies that can be potentially noted on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Their timely management is also considered to have the utmost importance in being able to stabilize the patient until their transfer to a Liver Transplant Center. The aim of this manuscript is to give a comprehensive update and review of various endoscopic findings that a non-transplant endoscopist will encounter in the pre-transplant setting.

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.

Management of portal hypertension after variceal hemorrhage

Each variceal bleed is associated with 20% to 30% risk of dying. Management of portal hypertension after a bleed consists of (1) control of bleeding and (2) prevention of rebleeding. Effective control of bleeding can be achieved either pharmacologically by administering somatostatin or octreotide or endoscopically via sclerotherapy or variceal band ligation. In practice, both pharmacologic and endoscopic therapy are used concomitantly. Rebleeding can be prevented by endoscopic obliteration of varices. In this setting, variceal ligation is the preferred endoscopic modality. B-blockade is as effective as endoscopic therapy and, in combination, the two modalities may be additive.

Review article: current endoscopic therapeutic options in the management of variceal bleeding

Variceal bleeding is a frequent and life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. The first episode of variceal bleeding is not only associated with a high mortality, but also with a high recurrence rate in those who survive. Therefore, many studies and randomized clinical trials have focused on different therapeutic strategies aiming to prevent the first episode of variceal bleeding (primary prophylaxis), to control haemorrhage during the acute bleeding episode (emergency treatment), and to prevent re-bleeding (secondary prophylaxis). These strategies involve pharmacological, endoscopic, surgical, and interventional radiological modalities. This review concentrates on the clinical aspects of the endoscopic modalities used to treat oesophageal variceal haemorrhage, including variceal injection sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, and the use of tissue adhesives (glue) and their substitutes. We also draw conclusions from the available literature regarding the use of endoscopic modalities in primary prophylaxis, emergency treatment, and secondary prophylaxis of variceal re-bleeding. The management of gastric varices and variceal bleeding during pregnancy is also addressed.

The effects of endoscopic variceal ligation and propranolol on portal hypertensive gastropathy: a prospective, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment of esophageal varices may accentuate portal hypertensive gastropathy. The impact of the combination of band ligation and propranolol on this condition remains unknown.

METHODS

Patients with history of variceal bleeding were randomized to receive band ligation alone (control group, 40 patients) or a combination of band ligation and propranolol (propranolol group, 37 patients). Serial endoscopic evaluation of gastropathy was performed. Gastropathy was classified into 3 grades and scored as 0, 1, or 2.

RESULTS

Before endoscopic treatment, 17% of the control group and 22% of the propranolol group had gastropathy (p = 0.78). The occurrence of gastropathy after endoscopic treatment was significantly higher in the control group than in the propranolol group (p = 0.002). Serial endoscopic follow-up revealed that the mean gastropathy score was significantly higher in the control group than in the propranolol group (p < 0.05). In patients with gastropathy the gastropathy score reached a peak at 6 months after endoscopic treatment in both the control and propranolol groups (85% vs. 48%, respectively). After variceal obliteration, accentuation of gastropathy was significant in the control group (p < 0.01) but not in the propranolol group. Gastropathy was less likely to develop in patients who developed gastric varices. Esophageal variceal recurrence was not related to the development of gastropathy after variceal obliteration with banding. Only one patient in the control group bled from gastropathy.

CONCLUSION

Band ligation of esophageal varices may accentuate gastropathy, which in this study was partly relieved by propranolol.

Endoscopic variceal ligation plus nadolol and sucralfate compared with ligation alone for the prevention of variceal rebleeding: a prospective, randomized trial

Both beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) have proven to be valuable alternatives to sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. Sucralfate is a mucosal protector. The effects of combinations of beta-blocker, band ligation, and sucralfate (triple therapy) remain unknown. A total of 122 patients with a history of esophageal variceal bleeding were randomized to receive EVL only (group A, 62 patients) or triple therapy (group B, 60 patients). The procedure for the triple therapy included ligation with the addition of sucralfate granules until variceal obliteration. In addition, nadolol was administered during the course of the study or until death. After a median follow-up of 21 months, recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding developed in 29 patients (47%) in group A and 14 patients (23%) in group B (P =.005). Recurrent bleeding from esophagogastric varices occurred in 18 patients in group A and 7 patients in group B (P =.001). Twenty-one patients in group A (50%) and 12 patients (26%) in group B experienced variceal recurrence after variceal obliteration (P <.05). Treatment failure occurred in 11 patients (18%) in group A and in 4 patients (7%) in group B (P =.05). Twenty patients from group A and 10 patients from group B died (P =.08); 9 and 4 of these deaths, respectively, were attributed to variceal hemorrhage (P =.26). The combination of ligation, nadolol, and sucralfate (triple therapy) proved more effective than banding ligation alone in terms of prevention of variceal recurrence and upper gastrointestinal rebleeding as well as variceal rebleeding.

Drug treatment for bleeding oesophageal varices

At the time of diagnosis of cirrhosis, varices are present in about 60% of decompensated and 30% of compensated patients. The risk factors for the first episode of variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients are the severity of liver dysfunction, a large size of the varices and the presence of endoscopic red colour signs, but only a third of patients who suffer variceal haemorrhage demonstrate the above risk factors. The only treatment that does not require sophisticated equipment or the skills of a specialist, and is immediately available, is vasoactive drug therapy. Hence, drug therapy should be considered to be the initial treatment of choice and can be administered while the patient is transferred to hospital, as has been done in one recent study. Moreover, drug therapy is no longer considered to be only a 'stop-gap' therapy until definitive endoscopic therapy is performed. Several recent trials have reported an efficacy similar to that of emergency sclerotherapy in the control of variceal bleeding. Furthermore, recent evidence suggests that those patients with high variceal or portal pressure are likely to continue to bleed or re-bleed early, implying that prolonged therapy lowering the portal pressure over several days may be the optimal treatment. Pharmacological treatment with beta-blockers is safe, effective and the standard long-term treatment for the prevention of recurrence of variceal bleeding. The combination of beta-blockers with isosorbide-5-mononitrate needs further testing in randomized controlled trials. The use of haemodynamic targets for the reduction of the HVPG response needs further study, and surrogate markers of the pressure response need evaluation. Ligation has recently been compared with beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis, but there is as yet no good evidence to recommend banding for primary prophylaxis if beta-blockers can be given.

Esophageal varices. I. Clinical presentation, medical therapy, and endoscopic therapy

The last half century has witnessed great advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis and natural history of portal hypertension in cirrhotics. Several pharmacologic and endoscopic techniques have been developed for the treatment of portal hypertension. The use of these agents in a given patient must be based on an understanding of the stage in the natural history of the disease and the relative efficacy and safety of the available treatment options.

The rebleeding course and long-term outcome of esophageal variceal hemorrhage after ligation: comparison with sclerotherapy

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic variceal ligation is widely accepted as the optimum endoscopic treatment for esophageal variceal hemorrhage. However, the rebleeding course and long-term outcome of patients with esophageal variceal hemorrhage after ligation have been poorly defined. Therefore, we conducted a long-term follow-up study to delineate the outcome of ligation and compare it with that after sclerotherapy.

METHODS

One hundred and eighty-five liver cirrhotic patients with endoscopically proven esophageal variceal hemorrhage were randomized to undergo endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy or ligation. These patients received regular follow-up and detailed clinical assessment.

RESULTS

Two patients developed hepatoma within 6 months of entry in each group and were excluded. Another six patients in the sclerotherapy group and seven patients in the ligation group were excluded because of poor compliance or lost to follow-up. Therefore, 84 patients in each group were analyzed. In this long-term follow-up (55.3 +/- 12.5 months) the rebleeding rate for ligation was lower than that for sclerotherapy, regardless of whether the rebleeding was analyzed by patient number or Kaplan-Meier analysis. With regard to the rebleeding risk of various periods, the sclerotherapy risk was higher than that of ligation within 4 weeks of the initial endoscopic treatment or before variceal eradication. Multifactorial analysis showed hematemesis, poor hepatic function, and sclerotherapy were the risk factors determining rebleeding. The annual hepatocellular carcinoma incidence was 4.9%. There was no difference in survival between sclerotherapy and ligation. Multifactorial analysis showed that poor hepatic function was the only factor determining survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The rebleeding risk was higher in sclerotherapy than in ligation before variceal eradication, especially within 4 weeks of the initial endoscopic treatment. Long-term survival was dependent on hepatic reserve regardless of the treatment method.

Prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

After control of variceal bleeding, the risk of recurrent bleeding approaches 70%. In secondary prophylaxis, both endoscopic therapy (sclerotherapy or banding ligation) and pharmacotherapy (beta-blockers with or without isosorbide-5-mononitrate) are effective in reducing the rate of rebleeding. The effect on mortality is less striking and in some studies not significant. Although many randomized trials are published, we lack criteria for selection of the optimal therapy in the individual patient in routine daily practice. The designs of published studies are multiple, with differences in timing of randomization, severity and causes of liver disease, definitions of end-points such as rebleeding, duration of follow-up, etc. These variations in addition to variation in the natural history and treatment given in the control groups make comparisons between studies difficult. This review summarizes the endoscopic and pharmacological treatment for the secondary prevention of variceal bleeding.

Sequential variceal pressure measurement by endoscopic needle puncture during maintenance sclerotherapy: the correlation between variceal pressure and variceal rebleeding

BACKGROUND/AIMS

The risk factors for esophageal variceal rebleeding are little known. Variceal pressure is one of the major determinants of variceal rupture, but the relationship between variceal pressure and variceal rebleeding during maintenance sclerotherapy has not been determined. This study was undertaken to evaluate the relationship between variceal pressure/gradient change and variceal rebleeding during maintenance sclerotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with liver cirrhosis and recent esophageal variceal hemorrhage underwent consecutive variceal pressure measurements by direct puncture of the varices before each elective sclerotherapy.

RESULTS

In 46 patients, the initial variceal pressure was no different regardless of age, sex, underlying etiology or hepatic reserve. Variceal pressure was higher in large varices, varices with more severe red wale markings, and varices with slower reduction in size during maintenance sclerotherapy. A larger volume of sclerosant was required to eradicate large varices, varices with more severe red wale markings, and varices with slower reduction in size during maintenance sclerotherapy. There was a positive correlation between initial variceal pressure and total amount of sclerosant (r=0.485, p=0.001). Initial variceal pressure was not related to rebleeding. Variceal pressure increased more in patients with rebleeding from varices per se (n=7) than in those without rebleeding (n= 24). There was no difference in pressure change between patients without rebleeding (n=24) and those with rebleeding from variceal ulcers (n=7).

CONCLUSIONS

Large varices, severe red color signs and slow reduction in variceal size were associated with higher initial variceal pressure, and more sclerosant was required to eradicate the varices. An increase in variceal pressure during maintenance sclerotherapy indicates a higher risk of variceal rebleeding, but not of variceal ulcer rebleeding.

Effect of sucralfate granules in suspension on endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy induced ulcer: analysis of the factors determining ulcer healing

Oesophageal ulcers commonly occur after endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy and usually cause complications and a delay in further sclerotherapy. The aims of this study are to investigate the effect of sucralfate granules in suspension on the treatment of endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy induced ulcer and analyse the factors determining the ulcer healing. Fifty-two patients with oesophageal variceal bleeding received elective endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy. After endoscopically proved oesophageal ulcers, they were randomized to receive either sucralfate granules in suspension (n = 22) or antacid (n = 23). Follow-up endoscopy was performed weekly. Ulcer healing rates were compared between the groups using the log-rank test. Forty-one ulcers receiving sucralfate and 48 ulcers receiving antacid treatment were evaluated. The clinical characteristics of the ulcers were similar in both groups. The ulcers in patients receiving sucralfate healed faster than those receiving antacid (P<0.02). On analysis of factors affecting ulcer healing, ulcers smaller than 1 cm2 (n = 59) appeared to heal faster than those larger than 1 cm2 (n = 30; P= 0.059) and shallow ulcers (n = 46) healed faster than deep ulcers (n = 43; P<0.001). On multifactorial analysis, ulcer depth was the only factor determining ulcer healing. The ulcer healing effects of sucralfate became more prominent when the ulcer was larger than 1.0cm2 (1.7+/-0.6 weeks vs 2.3+/-0.6 weeks, P= 0.011) and deep (1.7+/-0.7 weeks vs 2.5+/-1.0 weeks, P= 0.013) when compared with those receiving antacid. Sucralfate granules in suspension speed the healing of endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy induced ulcer, especially deep and large ulcers.

Advances in drug therapy for acute variceal haemorrhage

Recent advances in the pharmacology of portal hypertension are reviewed, against the background of existing knowledge and current clinical research. The most recent trials are analysed, and conclusions made about the use of drugs in acute variceal haemorrhage, as well as directions for further clinical trials and research.

Endoscopic treatments for portal hypertension

Endoscopic treatments for bleeding gastro-oesophageal varices include injection sclerotherapy, variceal obturation with tissue adhesives and variceal rubber band ligation. Today, endoscopic treatments are not recommended for the primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. Acute injection sclerotherapy remains a quick and simple technique for the control of active bleeding from oesophageal varices. Its efficacy may be improved by the early administration of vasoactive drugs. Banding ligation is the optimal endoscopic treatment for the prevention of rebleeding from oesophageal varices. The use of tissue adhesives and thrombin as injectates to treat bleeding fundal gastric varices and oesophageal varices not responding to vasoactive drugs or sclerotherapy is promising but needs further assessment by means of randomized controlled trials.

Endoscopic sclerotherapy versus variceal ligation in the long-term management of patients with cirrhosis after variceal bleeding. A prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Long-term endoscopic injection sclerotherapy of oesophageal varices prevents rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis surviving an acute variceal bleeding episode. However, this treatment is associated with a substantial complication rate. Endoscopic band ligation is a newly developed technique in an attempt to provide a safer alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of injection sclerotherapy versus variceal ligation in the management of patients with cirrhosis after variceal haemorrhage.

METHODS

Seventy-seven patients with cirrhosis who proved to have oesophageal variceal bleeding were studied. After initial control of haemorrhage by sclerotherapy, 40 of the patients were randomly assigned to sclerotherapy and 37 to ligation. Both procedures were performed under midazolam sedation at intervals of 7-14 days until all varices in the distal oesophagus were eradicated or were too small to receive further treatment.

RESULTS

The eradication of varices required a lower mean number of sessions with ligation (3.7 +/- 1.9) than with sclerotherapy (5.8 +/- 2.7, p = 0.002). The mean duration of follow-up was similar in both groups (15.6 months +/- 7.3 and 15 +/- 7.4, respectively). The proportion of patients remaining free from recurrent bleeding against time was significantly higher in the ligation group as compared to the sclerotherapy group (chi 2 = 3.86, p = 0.05). Only 13 patients (35%) developed complications in the ligation group as compared to 24 (60%, p = 0.05) in the sclerotherapy group. The mortality rate was similar in both groups (20% and 21%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Variceal ligation is better than sclerotherapy in the long-term management of patients with cirrhosis after variceal haemorrhage which was initially controlled with sclerotherapy.

Review: pharmacotherapeutic agents in the treatment of portal hypertension

Certain vasoactive substances reduce portal pressure in patients or animals with portal hypertension by either inducing splanchnic vasoconstriction or reducing hepatic vascular resistance. Studies have shown that propranolol or nadolol significantly reduce the risk of a first episode of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding and increase the survival rate in patients with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices. Isosorbide-5-mononitrate is also effective in the prevention of bleeding. The combination of beta-blockers and nitrates may be more effective than one drug alone. These results show that beta-adrenoceptor antagonists must be used to prevent the first episode of GI bleeding. Beta-blocker administration also significantly reduces the risk of recurrent GI bleeding and increases the survival rate in patients with cirrhosis. Studies have shown that propranolol is as effective as endoscopic sclerotherapy. The combination of a beta-blocker with endoscopic sclerotherapy may be more effective than pharmacological or endoscopic treatment alone for the prevention of rebleeding. Finally, new experimental and clinical studies are needed to improve the pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension.

Propranolol and sclerotherapy in the prevention of gastrointestinal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/AIMS

A meta-analysis of nine selected randomized trials was performed to compare the effects of propranolol and sclerotherapy in the prevention of rebleeding and on survival in patients with cirrhosis.

METHODS

Five end points were assessed: rebleeding, esophageal rebleeding, death, death due to bleeding, and adverse events. Analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat method. For each end point, heterogeneity and treatment efficacy were assessed by the Der Simonian and Peto methods. When a significant difference was observed, sensitivity analyses were performed by successive stratification according to treatment duration, type of publication, severity of cirrhosis, and methodological quality.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of patients free of rebleeding, the mean survival rate and the mean percentage of patients free of death from bleeding were not significantly different between patients treated with propranolol and those treated by sclerotherapy. The mean percentage of patients free of variceal rebleeding was 39% in propranolol group and 55% in sclerotherapy group (mean difference: 17%, 95% confidence interval: 9-25%, p < 0.001). The mean percentage of patients free of adverse events was significantly higher in the propranolol group than in the sclerotherapy group (mean difference: 22%, 95% confidence interval: 6-38%, p < 0.007).

CONCLUSION

In patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices, endoscopic sclerotherapy is more effective than propranolol in preventing variceal rebleeding, but the incidence of adverse events is significantly higher with sclerotherapy. There was no difference in survival between the treatments. Propranolol should be considered as a first choice treatment for preventing rebleeding.

Sclerotherapy versus sclerotherapy and propranolol in the prevention of rebleeding from oesophageal varices: a randomised study

BACKGROUND

This trial was carried out to assess the value of propranolol in the prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding when combined with longterm endoscopic sclerotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred patients (161 male, 39 female, age range 20-68 years) with portal hypertension resulting mainly from schistosomal periportal fibrosis or posthepatitic cirrhosis presenting with their first episode of haematemesis or melena, or both were included. This was confirmed endoscopically to result from ruptured oesophageal varices. After initial control of bleeding, patients were randomised into two groups: group 1 treated with endoscopic sclerotherapy alone and group 2 treated with sclerotherapy plus propranolol. They were followed up for two years.

RESULTS

Group (2) had a lower rebleeding rate (14.3% v 38.6% in group 1), lower variceal recurrence after obliteration (17% v 34% in group 1), longer period between variceal obliteration and recurrence (36 weeks v 21 weeks in group 1); but no change in mortality (12% in both groups).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with sclerotherapy should be given propranolol for longterm management.

Bleeding oesophageal varices

BACKGROUND

The Danish contribution to evaluation and treatment of bleeding oesophageal varices.

METHODS

Danish papers dealing with portal hypertension and oesophageal varices have been reviewed and set in relation to international publications.

RESULTS

The Danish papers have mainly contributed with controlled clinical trials concerning both primary and secondary prophylaxis. Furthermore, they have dealt with pathophysiologic, clinical and experimental studies concerning portal haemodynamics and the evolution and treatment of variceal bleeding.

CONCLUSION

The Danish studies have been well designed and are frequently cited. Further prospective randomized studies in the new treatment modalities are encouraged.

Comparison of endoscopic variceal injection sclerotherapy and ligation for the treatment of esophageal variceal hemorrhage: a prospective randomized trial

To determine the efficacy of endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) and ligation (EVL) in the management of esophageal variceal bleeding, 134 cirrhotic patients were randomized to receive either treatment. The clinical and endoscopic characteristics were similar in both groups. Active bleeding was controlled with ligation (20 of 20) as efficiently as with sclerotherapy (14 of 16). Elective sclerotherapy consumed less time than ligation (7.9 +/- 1.8 minutes vs. 11.5 +/- 2.7 minutes, P < .001), but there was no difference between emergent sclerotherapy (14.5 +/- 5.8 minutes) and ligation (14.9 +/- 4.1 minutes). Ligation reduced one grade of variceal size more quickly than sclerotherapy (1.1 +/- 0.4 vs. 2.0 +/- 1.7 session, P < .001). The rebleeding rate was lower with ligation (13 of 67 vs. 28 of 67, P < .01). Esophageal ulcer was the most common source of rebleeding. Recurrence of varices appears more probable with ligation (P = .079). The complication rate was higher with sclerotherapy (15 of 67 vs. 3 of 67, P < .01), with esophageal stricture being the most common cause. Survival rate was the same in both groups even after stratifying patients into good and poor hepatic reserve groups. Hepatic failure was the major cause of death, followed by exsanguination. In summary, EVL was superior to EVS regarding rebleeding and complications but not in other aspects such as time consumption in elective treatment and recurrence of varices. Substantial results for long-term follow-up are required before conclusion of the treatment of choice.

Prevention of rebleeding from oesophageal varices: two-year follow up of a prospective controlled trial of propranolol in addition to sclerotherapy

A prospective randomised trial comparing propranolol and sclerotherapy to sclerotherapy alone was conducted over a 2-year follow up in a district hospital setting of unselected patients. Rebleeding and survival were analysed. Thirty-nine patients were randomised to propranolol plus sclerotherapy and 34 to sclerotherapy alone. The two groups were clinically comparable. There was no significant difference in the cumulative percent of patients free of rebleeding; 54% of the sclerotherapy group rebled compared to 52% of the group treated with propranolol plus sclerotherapy (Hazard ratio 1.09 (0.54-2.22) and p = 0.81, NS). Two-year actuarial survival was also not significantly different, with 77% of the propanolol plus sclerotherapy group surviving, compared to 74% of sclerotherapy alone (Hazard ratio 1.08 (0.35-2.22) and p = 0.79, NS). The mean time to eradication of varices was not significantly different between the two groups (propranolol plus sclerotherapy 222 days, sclerotherapy alone 243 days), nor did the rate of variceal recurrence differ (72.7 vs 72 days). This study did not show long-term improvement in rebleeding or survival using propranolol in addition to a regular sclerotherapy programme.

Oral isosorbide-5-mononitrate reduces the rebleeding rate during the course of injection sclerotherapy for esophageal varices

A double-blind, multicenter trial was carried out to assess the effectiveness of isosorbide-5-mononitrate in preventing recurrent variceal hemorrhage during the course of endoscopic sclerotherapy. Seventy-six patients with their first bleeding episode from esophageal varices were randomly allocated, after initial control of hemorrhage, to groups receiving either 50 mg/day oral isosorbide-5-mononitrate retard (37 patients) or an identical placebo (39 patients) until variceal eradication. Sclerotherapy was performed at weekly intervals, and varices were intra- and para-variceally injected with 1% polidocanol until eradication. If rebleeding occurred, additional sclerotherapy was performed. Four (10.8%) patients rebled in the isosorbide group, compared with 15 (38.4%) in the placebo group (p = 0.01). The total number of rebleeding episodes was also significantly lower in the isosorbide group (5 versus 19, p = 0.043), whereas comparison between major versus minor rebleedings was not significant. The median transfusion requirement per bleeding episode was not significantly different in the two groups, although the cumulative number of blood units transfused was over threefold greater (22 versus 70) in the placebo group. Two (5.4%) deaths occurred among isosorbide-treated patients and nine (17.9%) among placebo patients (NS). The number of sclerotherapy sessions and the time required to obtain variceal eradication were also comparable in the two groups. Finally, the nitrovasodilator was well tolerated, requiring withdrawal for severe headache in only one patient. In conclusion, isosorbide-5-mononitrate reduces the rebleeding rate and the number of rebleeding episodes before variceal eradication in patients treated with sclerotherapy.

Long-term management of variceal bleeding: the place of pharmacotherapy

Portal hypertension is treated by reducing portal pressure in order to prevent esophageal variceal bleeding or recurrent bleeding. Because portal hypertension depends on both elevated portal tributary blood flow and intrahepatic vascular resistance, the pharmacologic therapy of this syndrome consists in reducing portal blood flow or vascular resistance, or both. The pharmacologic prevention of first bleeding or recurrent bleeding has been performed with nonselective beta-adrenergic antagonists (propranolol or nadolol). Certain controlled studies have shown that this type of drug significantly reduces the risk of first bleeding by approximately 40% in patients with esophageal varices. A meta-analysis showed that death due to bleeding was also significantly lower in the beta-blocker group than in the placebo group. Moreover, beta-blockers are effective in patients in both good and poor condition and with all types of cirrhosis. The efficacy of beta-blockers on the risk of recurrent bleeding is less clear, but these substances significantly decrease the risk of rebleeding, by approximately 30%. Recurrent bleeding in patients treated with beta-blockers is associated with the occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma or lack of compliance. In conclusion, it is clear that different substances have portal hypotensive effects and can be used to treat or prevent complications of portal hypertension. However, other drugs should be tested, and other clinical studies are needed to identify good responders.

Pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension: hemodynamic effects and prevention of bleeding

In the past 10 years, it has been clearly shown that vasoactive substances reduce portal pressure in patients or animals with portal hypertension. Some of these substances act by inducing splanchnic vasoconstriction, while others reduce hepatic and porto-systemic collateral vascular resistance and, thus, induce a portal hypotensive effect. Still others induce arterial hypotension, which causes a vasoconstrictive effect in the splanchnic territory. Since these drugs act on different vascular receptors, their combination should have a more marked effect on portal hypertension. Up to now, only nonselective beta-blockers have been used in the prevention of first gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with portal hypertension and esophageal varices and in the prevention of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. These trials have shown that propranolol or nadolol significantly reduce either a first episode of bleeding or recurrent bleeding. This pharmacological treatment also improves the survival rate in these patients. All of these studies have helped us to understand, in part, why gastrointestinal hemorrhage occurs in certain patients. Additional studies of beta-blockers or other substances are, nevertheless, necessary to select patients who will respond to this type of treatment. Finally, it is possible that the pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension may also be used before esophageal varices occur.

Propranolol in the prevention of recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis undergoing endoscopic sclerotherapy. A randomized controlled trial

The purpose of this study was to investigate the possible value of continuous administration of propranolol in the prevention of recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis undergoing chronic endoscopic sclerotherapy. Among 239 patients admitted for acute variceal bleeding, 85 with cirrhosis were randomized to receive sclerotherapy either alone (40) or in combination with propranolol (45). Sclerotherapy was carried out with an intravariceal injection of 5% ethanolamine oleate through a fiberoptic endoscope. The procedure was performed every week, until the esophageal varices at the gastroesophageal junction were too small for any further injections. Varices were reinjected if they recurred. Propranolol was given orally twice a day until heart rate was reduced by 25% in the resting position. The mean follow-up period was 23.2 and 24.2 months for sclerotherapy and the sclerotherapy plus propranolol groups, respectively. During this period a significant (P = 0.001) reduction in the recurrence of esophageal varices was observed in patients treated with the combination of sclerotherapy plus propranolol compared with those treated with sclerotherapy alone. However, the time of rebleeding from any source or from esophageal varices did not differ significantly between the two groups. In the sclerotherapy group 21 patients rebled (35 bleeding episodes) compared with 14 (22 episodes) in the combination therapy group. Patients in the sclerotherapy group were more prone to bleed from gastric varices and congestive gastropathy than patients treated with the combination of sclerotherapy plus propranolol (P = 0.012). Twenty-five patients in the endoscopic sclerotherapy group developed complications attributed to sclerotherapy compared with 23 patients in the sclerotherapy plus propranolol group. Complications directly attributable to propranolol were observed in 11 patients. Three of these patients stopped taking the drug due to heart failure (1) and flapping tremor (2). Eight patients (17.8%) died in the latter group while the corresponding figure in the sclerotherapy group was nine (22.5%). It is concluded that the continuous administration of propranolol may reduce incidences of recurrent upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage from gastric sources in patients with cirrhosis undergoing chronic sclerotherapy.

Does propranolol maintain post-sclerotherapy variceal obliteration? A prospective randomized study

Variceal recurrence and rebleeding are common after initial obliteration by injection sclerotherapy. To investigate whether propranolol can maintain variceal obliteration by sclerotherapy, 59 patients with oesophageal variceal bleeding after sclerotherapy were enrolled. Patients were allocated to propranolol treatment (30 patients) or served as controls (29 patients). After a mean follow up of 2 years and 4 months, 53 patients completed the study. Fifty-eight per cent of the propranolol group versus 77% of the control group experienced recurrent varices (P = 0.20). Fifteen per cent of the propranolol group versus 11% of the control group developed cardiac varices. Recurrent variceal bleeding was encountered in 27% of the propranolol group and 19% of the control group. Three patients in the propranolol group, compared with two patients in the control group, died of massive variceal bleeding. Eighty per cent of them bled from cardiac varices. Both groups had similar survival rates. We therefore concluded that the use of propranolol after variceal obliteration by sclerotherapy can neither prevent oesophagogastric variceal recurrence nor prevent further rebleeding.

Pharmacologic prevention of variceal bleeding and rebleeding

A review of nine placebo-controlled studies for the prevention of first bleeding and 14 for the prevention of rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis and oesophageal varices indicates that beta-adrenergic antagonists significantly reduced the incidence of both initial and recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding over study durations ranging from 1 to 2 years, provided the patients complied with the regimen. Three meta-analyses concluded that beta-blockers also significantly reduced the risk of fatal bleeding, although this remains controversial. These agents were also effective in patients with portal hypertension from causes other than alcoholic cirrhosis, although not in hepatocellular carcinoma. Side effects occurred in 3-40% of patients and required discontinuation of beta-blocker administration in 5%. In two clinical trials in which beta-blocker therapy was compared with endoscopic sclerotherapy, the drug was at least as effective as sclerotherapy in preventing first episodes of variceal bleeding. In nine studies, the two modalities were comparably effective in preventing rebleeding. Used in combination, beta-blockers and sclerotherapy were more effective in preventing rebleeding than either used alone. However, neither treatment unequivocally prolonged survival relative to placebo.

Approaches to the endoscopic treatment of esophageal varices

Endoscopic therapy is commonly employed for both initial and subsequent definitive treatment of variceal bleeding. Sclerotherapy performed with a flexible endoscope is currently the most widespread technique. Available data suggests that such treatment does not improve outcome in the acute treatment of variceal bleeding (first 30 days) but appears superior to conventional medical management in the long term. Sclerotherapy does not appear better or worse than pharmacological therapy or surgical therapy when these treatments are compared in the elective setting. Although effective, endoscopic sclerotherapy is recognized to be associated with many major and minor treatment-related complications and a significant incidence of recurrent hemorrhage. In response to these shortcomings newer forms of endoscopic therapy such as polymer injection and endoscopic ligation have been developed. Polymer injection appears well suited for patients with active bleeding and for those with gastric varices but does not have advantages for chronic treatment aimed at variceal eradication. Endoscopic ligation appears at least as effective as conventional sclerotherapy for control of acute bleeding and prevention of rebleeding and is associated with few treatment induced complications. While endoscopic therapy will likely continue as the most commonly employed treatment for patients with hemorrhage from esophageal varices, newer methods with wider margins of safety and efficacy seem destined to supplement or replace conventional endoscopic sclerotherapy.

A prospective randomized trial comparing repeated endoscopic sclerotherapy and propranolol in decompensated (Child class B and C) cirrhotic patients

A prospective randomized study was conducted to compare the efficacy of long-term endoscopic sclerotherapy vs. propranolol in Child class B and C patients with variceal bleeds within the 30 days before the study. Forty-five and 46 patients were randomized to receive sclerotherapy and propranolol, respectively, after preentry stratification for Child scores. Sclerotherapy was administered with 1% polidocanol at 10-day intervals until obliteration of varices was achieved. Propranolol was administered to achieve a reduction in resting pulse rate of 25%. Rebleeding occurred in 19 patients undergoing sclerotherapy and in 31 receiving propranolol (p less than 0.05). The number of episodes of rebleeding was higher (p less than 0.05) in the propranolol group (n = 64) than in the sclerotherapy group (n = 35). The mean bleeding risk factor, number of hospitalizations for rebleeding and blood transfusion requirement were also significantly higher in the propranolol-treated patients. The median bleed-free period was more than 36 mo in the sclerotherapy group and 2.5 mo in the propranolol group (p less than 0.01). The median survival time was significantly longer in the sclerotherapy group (greater than 36 mo) than in the propranolol group (greater than 24 mo). We conclude that in decompensated cirrhotic patients, long-term endoscopic sclerotherapy is superior to propranolol in preventing rebleeding and improving survival.

Propranolol reduces the rebleeding rate during endoscopic sclerotherapy before variceal obliteration

In patients treated with sclerotherapy, most rebleeding episodes are observed before variceal obliteration. This prospective randomized study aimed to assess if propranolol together with sclerotherapy could reduce the rebleeding rate before variceal obliteration. Seventy-five patients (59 male, 16 female; mean age, 54 +/- 15 years) with cirrhosis (from alcohol abuse in 91%) admitted with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, which was endoscopically proven to originate from ruptured esophageal varices, were included. After initial control of bleeding, the patients were randomized into the following two groups: group 1 treated with sclerotherapy alone (36 patients) and group 2 treated with sclerotherapy plus propranolol (39 patients). They were followed up to variceal obliteration. In group 2, 7 patients rebled as compared with 14 patients treated with sclerotherapy alone (P less than 0.005). When considering only rebleedings from esophageal varices, 4 patients rebled in group 2 vs. 10 in group 1 (P less than 0.10). The total number of rebleeding episodes was lower in group 2 than in group 1 whether considering all causes (8 vs. 17; P less than 0.07) or variceal rebleedings alone (4 vs. 13; P less than 0.01). Mean total blood requirement per patient was lower in group 2 than in group 1 (1.4 +/- 3.4 vs. 2.79 +/- 6.4 units of blood, respectively; P less than 0.01). Mortality was similar in both groups of patients (14% vs. 13% in groups 1 and 2, respectively, NS). It is concluded that patients treated with sclerotherapy should be given propranolol before variceal obliteration.

Long term management of oesophageal varices

Effective control of variceal rebleeding (secondary prophylaxis) or prevention of the initial bleeding (primary prophylaxis) are the main objectives of the treatment of portal hypertension. Endoscopic sclerotherapy is the treatment of choice for secondary prophylaxis, since it significantly decreases rebleeding and, to some extent, mortality. A combination of propranolol and sclerotherapy may be of benefit by decreasing postsclerotherapy rebleeding. Endoscopic variceal band ligation and transjugular intrahepatic shunt are emerging as useful alternative techniques. Devascularisation and preferably selective shunts should be reserved for use as salvage of sclerotherapy failures. Liver transplantation, if feasible, could become the ultimate therapy by controlling variceal bleeding and improving hepatic function. Pharmacotherapy, while not very successful for secondary prophylaxis, has shown promise for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. Nonselective beta-blockers significantly decrease the rebleeding rates but are associated with only marginal survival benefits. beta-Blockers alone cannot decrease the hepatic venous pressure gradient adequately (to less than 12mm Hg). Combination with nitrates and other drugs may prove beneficial and requires clinical evaluation. Endoscopic sclerotherapy and surgery have little role in primary prevention of variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis but need evaluation in noncirrhotic patients.

Prophylaxis of first hemorrhage from esophageal varices by sclerotherapy, propranolol or both in cirrhotic patients: a randomized multicenter trial. The PROVA Study Group

The objective of this randomized multicenter trial was to assess the prophylactic effect on the incidence and severity of the first variceal hemorrhage of endoscopic sclerotherapy, propranolol and the combination of the two compared with none of these treatments in patients with cirrhosis and esophageal varices. Among 819 cirrhotic patients who never had experienced variceal bleeding, esophagoscopy revealed varices in 379, of whom 286 were enrolled in the trial; 73 were allocated to sclerotherapy (paravenous polidocanol [10 mg/ml] every 1 to 2 wk until eradication), 68 to propranolol (slow-release preparation in one daily dose adjusted to provide about 25% heart rate reduction), 73 to both treatments and 72 to neither of the two treatments. The patients were observed for up to 42 mo, with an average of 15 mo. After variceal bleeding, patients in all groups received sclerotherapy only. The incidences of variceal bleeding (n = 50) were almost identical in the four groups. The relative risk (with 95% confidence limits) with sclerotherapy was 1.06 (0.61 to 1.84), and the relative risk with propranolol was 0.92 (0.53 to 1.60). The mortality rate after variceal bleeding (n = 29) did not differ significantly either. The mortality rate without variceal bleeding (n = 46) was 2.75 (1.45 to 5.22) times higher in the sclerotherapy groups than in the nonsclerotherapy groups (p = 0.002), whereas propranolol showed no effect, the relative risk being 1.17 (0.66 to 2.10). The total mortality rate showed no significant difference between the sclerotherapy, propranolol and control groups, but the combined therapy group had a significantly increased mortality rate.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[Therapy of bleeding esophageal varices in West Germany--results of a survey]

An inquiry concerning bleeding of esophageal varices included 1076 surgical and medical departments in the Federal Republic of Germany (West). Prevailing forms of treatment are acute sclerotherapy or esophageal balloon tamponade followed by long-term sclerotherapy. In case of medically uncontrollable bleeding oesophagogastric devascularization procedures are preferred to portacaval shunt. Beta-blockers are applied in medical departments for the prophylaxis of recurrence. Only after several rebleedings, despite of sclerotherapy, approx. half of the departments consider an elective shunt. The distal splenorenal shunt described by Warren and portacaval anastomosis clearly prevail over all other shunts.

Prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding in alcoholic cirrhotic patients: prospective controlled trial of propranolol and sclerotherapy

We conducted a prospective randomized controlled study to evaluate the effectiveness of propranolol and sclerotherapy, compared to a control group, in the prevention of variceal rebleeding in alcoholic cirrhotic patients. Among the 79 patients included, the distribution of patients according to Child-Pugh classification was: A, 22%; B, 40%; and C, 38%. Propranolol was given twice daily with a mean final dose of 54 +/- 16 mg/day, this resulted in a mean reduction in resting heart rate of 26 +/- 7%. Sclerotherapy was performed weekly using 1% polidocanol. End points were rebleeding or death. During the mean follow up of 19 +/- 16 months, 43 patients bled and 22 patients died. The cumulative percentages of patients free of rebleeding at 1 year were: propranolol, 81% (95% confidence interval (CI): 63-92); sclerotherapy, 64% (95% CI: 45-82); control, 54% (95% CI: 36-71); these differences did not reach statistical significance. The cumulative percentages of patients alive at 1 year were: propranolol, 92% (95% CI: 76-98); sclerotherapy, 79% (95% CI: 58-91); control, 81% (95% CI: 60-93); these differences were not statistically significant. Alcohol withdrawal, which occurred in 66% of patients, was an independent predictive factor associated with a decreased risk of rebleeding or death. In conclusion, a life table analysis of patients free of rebleeding, as well as of patients surviving, revealed a tendency in favour of propranolol. The lack of a statistical support for these two favorable effects could be due to poor statistical power.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Variceal injection sclerotherapy

With the development and widespread use of flexible endoscopes, injection sclerotherapy of oesophageal varices has advanced beyond the early stages. Although slightly different techniques and different sclerosants are used, the results are not strikingly different. The cumulative rate of adverse effects is in the range of 20 to 40%, with a procedure-related mortality of around 1 to 2%. Sclerotherapy is the best available treatment for haemostasis of acute oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, as a long-term therapy it is less effective in the prevention of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding events, since obliteration of all varices often takes several months. Furthermore, extra-oesophageal bleeding is not amenable to sclerotherapy. Thus, if repeated injections fail to prevent recurrent bleeding, other options such as shunt surgery, transection, chronic medical portal decompression with beta-blockers or even liver transplantation should be considered according to the needs of the individual patient. Prophylaxis of first variceal haemorrhage was beneficial in selected patients with a high bleeding risk. It cannot, however, be generally recommended at present.

Meta-analysis of value of propranolol in prevention of variceal haemorrhage

A meta-analysis of all controlled clinical trials of beta-adrenoceptor blocking drugs, principally propranolol, in the prevention of primary or secondary variceal bleeding has shown that beta-blockade significantly reduced the occurrence of variceal bleeding, deaths from variceal bleeding, and overall mortality. There was some heterogeneity between trials in the effect of beta blockade on secondary prevention. When only fully reported, randomised, placebo-controlled studies were included the heterogeneity disappeared, and the reductions in bleeding episodes and mortality became more striking. Separate analyses of primary and secondary prevention studies also showed clear reductions in occurrence of variceal bleeding and deaths. These results seem to indicate the value of beta-adrenoreceptor blocking drugs for the primary prevention of haemorrhage from large oesophageal varices. However, there is still a need for large multicentre trials of beta-blockade for primary prevention of variceal bleeding in patients without large varices and of comparisons between beta-blocker therapy with other treatments in secondary prevention.

Status of sclerotherapy for variceal bleeding in 1990

The enthusiasm for injection sclerotherapy over the last decade has almost certainly surpassed what was justified on the basis of objective evidence. This was most clearly emphasized by the widespread adoption of prophylactic sclerotherapy after the report of the first two trials, even though enough was known of the natural history of variceal hemorrhage in patients with cirrhosis to warrant caution. The use of sclerotherapy for an episode of variceal hemorrhage represents the role most supported by the available data. Diagnostic endoscopy, as an integral part of management, provides the optimum time to intervene with sclerotherapy. Sclerotherapy can then provide hemostasis in patients who are actively bleeding and prevent early rebleeding in those in whom bleeding has stopped spontaneously. The progression to long-term injection sclerotherapy is of proven benefit; however, doubts exist concerning the need for the intensive regimens currently in use. The continued use of long-term injection sclerotherapy is dependent not only on additional investigations, but also on the accumulating evidence arising from comparative studies encompassing other available therapy.