A randomized trial of terlipressin plus nitroglycerin vs. balloon tamponade in the control of acute variceal hemorrhage

Management of Acute Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Critical Care Transport

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a relatively common and life-threatening condition encountered by critical care transport crews. It is of paramount importance that transport crews understand the underlying pathophysiology of variceal and nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding as well as the nuanced management of this patient population. This article reviews the current clinical evidence on initial resuscitation, medical management, and advanced invasive therapies (such as balloon tamponade devices) that transport crews should be familiar with to manage these patients. In addition, we present a novel method of continuous balloon pressure monitoring of balloon tamponade devices that is applicable to the transport environment.

Clinical algorithms for the prevention of variceal bleeding and rebleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis

Portal hypertension (PH), a common complication of liver cirrhosis, results in development of esophageal varices. When esophageal varices rupture, they cause significant upper gastrointestinal bleeding with mortality rates up to 20% despite state-of-the-art treatment. Thus, prophylactic measures are of utmost importance to improve outcomes of patients with PH. Several high-quality studies have demonstrated that non-selective beta blockers (NSBBs) or endoscopic band ligation (EBL) are effective for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. In secondary prophylaxis, a combination of NSBB + EBL should be routinely used. Once esophageal varices develop and variceal bleeding occurs, standardized treatment algorithms should be followed to minimize bleeding-associated mortality. Special attention should be paid to avoidance of overtransfusion, early initiation of vasoconstrictive therapy, prophylactic antibiotics and early endoscopic therapy. Pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt should be used in all Child C10-C13 patients experiencing variceal bleeding, and potentially in Child B patients with active bleeding at endoscopy. The use of carvedilol, safety of NSBBs in advanced cirrhosis (i.e. with refractory ascites) and assessment of hepatic venous pressure gradient response to NSBB is discussed. In the present review, we give an overview on the rationale behind the latest guidelines and summarize key papers that have led to significant advances in the field.

Treatment for bleeding oesophageal varices in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% to 95% of people with liver cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed within about one to three years after diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, including, among others, endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, and balloon tamponade. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the individual and relative benefits and harms of these treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with decompensated liver cirrhosis, through a network meta-analysis; and to generate rankings of the different treatments for acute bleeding oesophageal varices, according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until 17 December 2019, to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in people with cirrhosis and acute bleeding from oesophageal varices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only RCTs (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and acutely bleeding oesophageal varices. We excluded RCTs in which participants had bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those in whom initial haemostasis was achieved before inclusion into the trial, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS software, using Bayesian methods, and calculated the differences in treatments using 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. We performed also the direct comparisons from RCTs using the same codes and the same technical details.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 RCTs (4580 participants) in the review. Forty-eight trials (4042 participants) were included in one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those with and without a previous history of bleeding. We included outcomes assessed up to six weeks. All trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 19 interventions were compared in the trials (sclerotherapy, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues, variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade, somatostatin analogues plus variceal band ligation, nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, no active intervention, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy, balloon tamponade plus somatostatin analogues, balloon tamponade plus vasopressin analogues, variceal band ligation plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus variceal band ligation, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and sclerotherapy plus vasopressin analogues). We have reported the effect estimates for the primary and secondary outcomes when there was evidence of differences between the interventions against the reference treatment of sclerotherapy, but reported the other results of the primary and secondary outcomes versus the reference treatment of sclerotherapy without the effect estimates when there was no evidence of differences in order to provide a concise summary of the results. Overall, 15.8% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment of sclerotherapy (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) died during the follow-up periods, which ranged from three days to six weeks. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.57, 95% CrI 1.04 to 2.41; network estimate; direct comparison: 4 trials; 353 participants) and vasopressin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.70, 95% CrI 1.13 to 2.62; network estimate; direct comparison: 2 trials; 438 participants). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, a higher proportion of people receiving balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy had more serious adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 4.23, 95% CrI 1.22 to 17.80; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 60 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, people receiving vasopressin analogues alone and those receiving variceal band ligation had fewer adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (rate ratio 0.59, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.96; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 219 participants; and rate ratio 0.40, 95% CrI 0.21 to 0.74; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 77 participants; respectively). Based on low-certainty evidence, the proportion of people who developed symptomatic rebleed was smaller in people who received sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.94; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 105 participants). The evidence suggests considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons where sclerotherapy was the control intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone and vasopressin analogues alone (with supportive therapy) probably result in increased mortality, compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, vasopressin analogues alone and band ligation alone probably result in fewer adverse events compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy may result in large increases in serious adverse events compared to sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues may result in large decreases in symptomatic rebleed compared to sclerotherapy. In the remaining comparisons, the evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the interventions, compared to sclerotherapy.

Outcomes after placement of a SX-ELLA oesophageal stent for refractory variceal bleeding-A national multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines favour the use of bleeding stents over balloon tamponade (BT) for refractory variceal bleeding (VB) from oesophageal varices. However, data on the efficacy and safety of self-expandable metal SX-ELLA Danis stents (SEMS) are limited.

METHODS

Cirrhotic patients receiving SEMS for VB at four tertiary care centres were included in this retrospective multicentre study. Rates of failure-to-control bleeding (within 5 days) and bleeding-related mortality (6 weeks) were assessed.

RESULTS

SEMS controlled VB in 79.4% (27/34) of patients. In the rest of patients, other rescue treatments including endoscopic band ligation (EBL, n = 3), SEMS renewed (n = 2) or Linton (n = 2) were applied; however, VB was only controlled in one patient. Early rebleeding within six weeks occurred in 17.6% (6/34) patients. Median SEMS dwell time was three (IQR:6) days. Overall n = 13/34 (38.2%) patients died with SEMS in situ. After SEMS removal, rebleeding and bleeding-related death occurred in n = 7 (35%) and n = 5 (14.7%) patients respectively. Only 32.4% (10/34) patients did not experience any rebleeding within six weeks after SEMS removal. Bleeding-related mortality was 47.1% (n = 16/34) and the median survival after SEMS placement was 2.1 months. Notably, no patient received an early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). The most common adverse events were stent dislocations (n = 13; 38.2%), while ulcers/necrosis of the oesophageal mucosa was seen in only four (11.8%) patients.

CONCLUSION

SEMS controlled refractory VB in most patients. However, bleeding-related mortality remained high. While SEMS dislocations were frequent, ulcers/necrosis of the oesophagus was rare. Further studies should investigate whether the wider use of early TIPS reduces bleeding-related mortality after SEMS placement.

Terlipressin for the treatment of acute variceal bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is life-threatening. We aimed to systematically review the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of terlipressin for AVB in liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. The reference list was also hand-searched. Using a random-effect model, we combined the data obtained according to the different time points when the events developed. Odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were calculated. Quality of evidence was evaluated by the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Thirty randomized controlled trials with 3344 patients were included. Compared with no vasoactive drug, terlipressin significantly improved the control of bleeding within 48 hours (OR = 2.94, P = .0008) and decreased the in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.31, P = .008). Compared with somatostatin, terlipressin had a significantly higher risk of complications (OR = 2.44, P = .04). Compared with octreotide, terlipressin had a significantly inferior control of bleeding within 24 hours (OR = 0.37, P = .007). Compared with vasopressin, terlipressin had a significantly lower risk of complications (OR = 0.15, P = .02). Compared with terlipressin combined with endoscopic variceal ligation, terlipressin alone had significantly higher 5-day treatment failure (OR = 14.46, P = .01) and transfusion requirements within 49 to 120 hours (WMD = 1.20, P = .002). No outcome was significantly different between terlipressin and sclerotherapy. Compared with balloon tamponade, terlipressin significantly decreased the 30-day rebleeding (OR = 0.05, P = .001) and transfusion requirements (WMD = -2.70, P = .02). Quality of evidence was very low to moderate.

CONCLUSION

Our findings were in accordance with the current recommendations regarding terlipressin for the treatment of AVB in cirrhosis. However, due to low quality of evidence, further studies are recommended.

Esophageal balloon tamponade versus esophageal stent in controlling acute refractory variceal bleeding: A multicenter randomized, controlled trial

Balloon tamponade is recommended only as a "bridge" to definitive therapy in patients with cirrhosis and massive or refractory esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB), but is frequently associated with rebleeding and severe complications. Preliminary, noncontrolled data suggest that a self-expandable, esophageal covered metal stent (SX-ELLA Danis; Ella-CS, Hradec Kralove, Czech Republic) may be an effective and safer alternative to balloon tamponade. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial aimed at comparing esophageal stent versus balloon tamponade in patients with cirrhosis and EVB refractory to medical and endoscopic treatment. Primary endpoint was success of therapy, defined as survival at day 15 with control of bleeding and without serious adverse events (SAEs). Twenty-eight patients were randomized to Sengstaken-Blakemore tube (n = 15) or SX-ELLA Danis stent (n = 13). Patients were comparable in severity of liver failure, active bleeding at endoscopy, and initial therapy. Success of therapy was more frequent in the esophageal stent than in balloon tamponade group (66% vs. 20%; P = 0.025). Moreover, control of bleeding was higher (85% vs. 47%; P = 0.037) and transfusional requirements (2 vs 6 PRBC; P = 0.08) and SAEs lower (15% vs. 47%; P = 0.077) in the esophageal stent group. TIPS was used more frequently in the tamponade group (4 vs. 10; P = 0.12). There were no significant differences in 6-week survival (54% vs. 40%; P = 0.46).

CONCLUSION

Esophageal stents have greater efficacy with less SAEs than balloon tamponade in the control of EVB in treatment failures. Our findings favor the use of esophageal stents in patients with EVB uncontrolled with medical and endoscopic treatment. (Hepatology 2016;63:1957-1967).

Nonendoscopic management strategies for acute esophagogastric variceal bleeding

Acute variceal bleeding is a potentially life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. Management consists of emergent hemostasis, therapy directed at hemodynamic resuscitation, protection of the airway, and prevention and treatment of complications including prophylactic use of antibiotics. Endoscopic treatment remains the mainstay in the management of acute variceal bleeding in combination with pharmacotherapy aimed at reducing portal pressure. This article intends to highlight only the current nonendoscopic treatment approaches for control of acute variceal bleeding.

Management of acute variceal bleeding

Acute variceal bleeding could be a fatal complication in patients with liver cirrhosis. In patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis accompanied by ascites or hepatic encephalopathy, acute variceal bleeding is associated with a high mortality rate. Therefore, timely endoscopic hemostasis and prevention of relapse of bleeding are most important. The treatment goals for acute variceal bleeding are to correct hypovolemia; achieve rapid hemostasis; and prevent early rebleeding, complications related to bleeding, and deterioration of liver function. If variceal bleeding is suspected, treatment with vasopressors and antibiotics should be initiated immediately on arrival to the hospital. Furthermore, to obtain hemodynamic stability, the hemoglobin level should be maintained at >8 g/dL, systolic blood pressure >90 to 100 mm Hg, heart rate <100/min, and the central venous pressure from 1 to 5 mm Hg. When the patient becomes hemodynamically stable, hemostasis should be achieved by performing endoscopy as soon as possible. For esophageal variceal bleeding, endoscopic variceal ligation is usually performed, and for gastric variceal bleeding, endoscopic variceal obturation is performed primarily. If it is considered difficult to achieve hemostasis through endoscopy, salvage therapy may be carried out while keeping the patient hemodynamically stable.

[Upper gastrointestinal bleeding and haemorrhagic shock at the end of the holidays: pre-hospital and in-hospital management of a gastrointestinal emergency]

Upon returning from holidays, a 55-year-old patient presenting with melena and haemorrhagic shock was admitted to a University hospital after receiving first emergency medical care in a German InterCity train. In an interdisciplinary effort, haemodynamics were stabilised and the airway and respiratory function were secured. Under emergency care conditions the patient then underwent an emergency upper GI endoscopy where a spurting arterial upper gastrointestinal bleeding (Forrest 1a) was found. While the bleeding could not be controlled with endoscopic techniques, definitive haemostasis was achieved with a surgical laparotomy. While not commonly established for patients with severe GI bleeding, by spontaneous implementation of an interdisciplinary trauma room approach following established trauma algorithms the team was able to achieve stabilisation of vital functions and final control of bleeding in this highly unstable patient. Although the majority of upper gastrointestinal bleedings spontaneously cease, emergency care algorithms should be developed and implemented for patients with severe gastrointestinal bleedings in shock. Following the case vignette, we discuss a potential approach and develop an exemplary protocol for shock room management in this patient subgroup.

Refractory acute variceal bleeding: what to do next?

Current recommendations for the treatment of acute variceal bleeding (AVB) are to combine hemodynamic stabilization, antibiotic prophylaxis, pharmacologic agents, and endoscopic treatment. However, despite the application of the current gold-standard pharmacologic and endoscopic treatment, failure to control bleeding or early rebleed within 5 days still occurs in 15% to 20% of patients with AVB. In case of treatment failure of the acute bleeding episode, if bleeding is mild and the patient is hemodynamically stable, a second endoscopic therapy may be attempted. If this fails, or if bleeding is severe, it is usually controlled temporarily with balloon tamponade until a definitive derivative treatment is applied. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt is highly effective in this situation; however, despite the control of bleeding, a high proportion of these patients die of liver and multiorgan failure. Strategies intended to improve the prognosis of these patients should focus on identifying those high-risk patients in whom standard therapy is likely to fail, and who are therefore candidates for more aggressive therapies early after the development of AVB.

Efficacy and safety of terlipressin in cirrhotic patients with variceal bleeding or hepatorenal syndrome

Terlipressin is an analog of the natural hormone arginine-vasopressin. It is used in the treatment of patients with cirrhosis and bleeding esophageal varices (BEV) and in patients with hepatorenal syndrome (HRS): two of the most dramatic and feared complications of cirrhosis. Terlipressin exerts its main pharmacological effect through stimulation of vasopressin-1 receptors. These receptors are located in vascular smooth muscle and mediate vasoconstriction. In patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension, treatment with terlipressin increases mean arterial pressure and decreases portal flow and pressure within minutes of administration. Furthermore, in patients with ascites terlipressin improves glomerular filtration and excretion of sodium. Terlipressin decreases failure of initial hemostasis by 34%, decreases mortality by 34%, and is considered a first-line treatment for BEV, when available. Terlipressin in combination with albumin reverses type 1 HRS in 33%-60% of cases and is the only treatment with proven efficacy in randomized trials. The safety profile is favorable when considering the clinical efficacy and the high mortality of these clinical entities. Adverse events are mostly cardiovascular and related to vasoconstriction. Mortality and withdrawal of terlipressin due to adverse events occurs in less than 1% of cases. Mild adverse events related to terlipressin treatment occur in 10%-20% of patients. The benefit, however, of terlipressin on long-term survival in HRS remains to be determined. At present, treatment with terlipressin and albumin is considered the most efficient therapy and should therefore be recommended for the treatment of type 1 HRS-1.

Acute variceal bleeding: pharmacological treatment and primary/secondary prophylaxis

Variceal bleeding is one of the most severe complications of portal hypertension related to liver cirrhosis. Primary prophylaxis is considered mandatory in patients with cirrhosis and high-risk oesophageal varices, and once varices have bled, every effort should be made to arrest the haemorrhage and prevent further bleeding episodes. In acute variceal bleeding, vasoactive drugs that lower portal pressure should be started even before endoscopy, and should be maintained for up to 5 days. The choice of vasoactive drug should be made according to local resources. Terlipressin, somatostatin and octreotide can be used; vasopressin plus transdermal nitroglycerin may be used if no other drug is available. In variceal bleeding, antibiotic therapy is also mandatory. In primary and secondary prophylaxis, beta-blockers are the mainstay of therapy. In secondary prophylaxis (but not in primary prophylaxis) these drugs can be combined with organic nitrates.

Pharmacology, clinical efficacy and safety of terlipressin in esophageal varices bleeding, septic shock and hepatorenal syndrome

Terlipressin, a vasopressin agonist, is a commonly used drug with different indications, particularly in patients with end-stage liver disease. As a V(1) receptor agonist, it increases systemic vascular resistance, particularly in the splanchnic area, resulting in a decrease of portal pressure. Besides the approved use for variceal bleeding, terlipressin also has beneficial effects in the treatment of hepatorenal syndrome and norepinephrine-resistant septic shock. In patients with cirrhosis and variceal bleeding, the use of terlipressin reduces the portal vein pressure and decreases the pressure in esophageal varices. This can save lives when skilled endoscopists are not immediately available. Hepatorenal syndrome is associated with vasodilation in the mesenteric circulation with arterial underfilling and consecutive renal vasoconstriction. Restoration of an effective arterial blood volume can be achieved by the combination of terlipressin and volume expansion. In some cases, a success rate of up to 75% is reported. The early use of terlipressin in catecholamine-resistant shock can improve organ perfusion.

Systematic review: terlipressin in acute oesophageal variceal haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists surrounding pharmacological therapy in acute variceal bleeding.

AIM

To determine the efficacy and safety of terlipressin.

METHODS

Randomized trials were identified and duplicate, independent, review identified 20 randomized trials involving 1609 patients that compared terlipressin with placebo, balloon tamponade, endoscopic treatment, octreotide, somatostatin or vasopressin for treatment of acute oesophageal variceal haemorrhage.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis showed that compared to placebo, terlipressin reduced mortality (relative risk 0.66, 95% CI 0.49-0.88), failure of haemostasis (relative risk 0.63, 95% CI 0.45-0.89) and the number of emergency procedures per patient required for uncontrolled bleeding or rebleeding (relative risk 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.93). When used as an adjuvant to endoscopic sclerotherapy, terlipressin reduced failure of haemostasis (relative risk 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.96), and had an effect on reducing mortality that approached statistical significance (relative risk 0.74, 95% CI 0.53-1.04). No significant difference was demonstrated between terlipressin and endoscopic sclerotherapy, balloon tamponade, somatostatin or vasopressin. Haemostasis was achieved more frequently with octreotide compared to terlipressin (relative risk 1.62, 95% CI 1.05-2.50), but this result was based on unblinded studies. Adverse events were similar between terlipressin and the other comparison groups except for vasopressin, which caused more withdrawals due to adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Terlipressin is a safe and effective treatment for acute oesophageal variceal bleeding, with or without adjuvant endoscopic sclerotherapy. Terlipressin appears to reduce mortality in acute oesophageal variceal bleeding compared to placebo, and is the only pharmacological agent shown to do so. Future studies will be required to detect potential mortality differences between terlipressin and other therapeutic approaches.

Management of variceal bleeding

Variceal hemorrhage complicates cirrhosis in as many as 50% of patients and results in considerable morbidity and mortality. This review covers all areas of importance in the prevention and treatment of this area, highlighting recent developments. Primary prophylaxis prevents first bleed, and pharmacotherapy with beta-blockade is the most widely accepted option. In an acute variceal hemorrhage, initial resuscitation and multiple organ support are paramount and are recommended along with antibiotic prophylaxis and specific medical therapies that may be given empirically before emergency endoscopy to reduce bleeding. Endoscopic techniques usually arrest bleeding, but when they fail, salvage therapy in the form of balloon tamponade, then transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts or surgery, may be appropriate. Secondary prophylaxis to prevent rebleeding is often instituted in the ICU and is vital to prevent recurrence of this life-threatening complication.

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.

Portal hypertension

Many advances in the management of portal hypertension and variceal hemorrhage have occurred during the last 10 years. Effective therapy for primary prevention of variceal hemorrhage is now available in the form of nonselective beta-blockers. Active bleeding should be managed with terlipressin, somatostatin or its analogues, and endoscopic therapy; TIPS and surgery are reserved as salvage therapy for patients who fail endoscopic treatment. Survivors of a variceal hemorrhage should be evaluated for liver transplantation. Specific treatment may be provided with EVL while these patients await transplantation. Patients who fail endoscopic treatment may be treated by TIPS or surgery.

Terlipressin for acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Terlipressin (triglycyl lysine vasopressin) is a synthetic analogue of vasopressin, which has been used in the treatment of acute variceal hemorrhage. In contrast to vasopressin, terlipressin can be administered as intermittent injections instead of continuous intravenous infusion and it has a safer adverse reactions profile. However, its effectiveness remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if treatment with terlipressin improves outcome in acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage and is safe.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomized clinical trials were identified by searching the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, Biosis, and Current Contents. The bibliographies of identified publications were checked. Experts in the field and the manufacturers of terlipressin were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomized clinical trials which compared terlipressin with: (a) placebo or no treatment, (b) balloon tamponade, (c) endoscopic treatment, (d) octreotide, (e) somatostatin and (f) vasopressin, in the setting of acute variceal hemorrhage.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eligibility, trial quality assessment and data extraction were done independently by two reviewers. The primary outcome measure was mortality. Secondary outcomes were failure of initial hemostasis, rebleeding, procedures required for uncontrolled bleeding or rebleeding, transfusion requirements and length of hospitalization.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty studies were identified for all the comparison groups, involving 1609 patients. There were seven studies (with 443 patients) comparing terlipressin to placebo, five of which were considered to be high quality studies based on the Jadad scale. The meta-analysis indicates that terlipressin was associated with a statistically significant reduction in all cause mortality compared to placebo (relative risk 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.88). Three studies (with 302 patients) were identified comparing terlipressin to somatostatin, two of which were high quality studies; only one high quality study (219 patients) comparing terlipressin to endoscopic treatment was identified. Within the limited power provided by these small numbers of patients, no statistically significant difference was demonstrated between terlipressin and either somatostatin or endoscopic treatment in any of the outcomes. For the remaining comparison groups (terlipressin versus balloon tamponade, terlipressin versus octreotide and terlipressin versus vasopressin) only small, low quality studies were identified and no difference was demonstrated in any of the major outcomes. There was no difference between the terlipressin group and any of the comparison groups in the number of adverse events that caused death or withdrawal of medication.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of a 34% relative risk reduction in mortality, terlipressin should be considered to be effective in the treatment of acute variceal hemorrhage. Further, since no other vasoactive agent has been shown to reduce mortality in single studies or meta-analyses, terlipressin might be the vasoactive agent of choice in acute variceal bleeding.

Multicenter randomized controlled trial of terlipressin versus sclerotherapy in the treatment of acute variceal bleeding: the TEST study

Failure to control bleeding and early rebleeding account for the high mortality associated with variceal hemorrhage in cirrhosis. We compared endoscopic sclerotherapy to terlipressin, a drug that effectively controls acute bleeding while reducing in-hospital mortality. This multicenter randomized controlled trial included 219 cirrhotic patients admitted for endoscopy-proven acute variceal bleeding and randomized to receive repeated injections of terlipressin during 6 days (n = 105) or emergency sclerotherapy (n = 114). Success was defined as obtaining control of bleeding (24-hour bleeding-free period during the first 48 hours) and lack of early rebleeding (any further bleeding from initial control to 5 days later) and survival during the study. Both groups were similar at inclusion. Failure rate for terlipressin was 33% and 32% for sclerotherapy (not significant [NS]). Early rebleeding was responsible for 43% and 44% of failures, respectively. This high efficacy was observed in both Child-Pugh class A + B and Child-Pugh class C patients. Both treatments were similar regarding transfusion requirements, in-hospital stay, and 6-week mortality (26 vs. 19 patients). Side effects appeared in 20% of patients receiving terlipressin and in 30% of those on sclerotherapy (P =.06); being serious in 4% and 7%, respectively (NS). In conclusion, terlipressin and sclerotherapy are equally highly effective therapies achieving the initial control of variceal bleeding and preventing early rebleeding. Both treatments are safe, but terlipressin is better tolerated. Therefore, terlipressin may represent a first-line treatment in acute variceal bleeding until the administration of elective therapy, especially in hospitals where a skilled endoscopist is not available 24 hours a day.

Terlipressin plus albumin infusion: an effective and safe therapy of hepatorenal syndrome

BACKGROUND/AIM

Ornipressin, a vasopressin analog with potent splanchnic vasoconstrictor action, has been shown to reverse hepatorenal syndrome. However, its usefulness in clinical practice is limited by frequent ischemic complications. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of terlipressin, an analog of vasopressin with a low profile of side effects, plus albumin in this condition.

METHODS

Nine consecutive patients with cirrhosis and hepatorenal syndrome were included in a pilot study of terlipressin (0.5-2 mg/4 h i.v.) therapy associated with iv albumin.

RESULTS

Treatment (9 days, range 5-15) was associated with a marked reduction of serum creatinine (3.9+/-0.7 to 1.3+/-0.1 mg/dl, p<0.001, mean+/-SE). Reversal of hepatorenal syndrome (reduction of creatinine below 1.5 mg/dl) was observed in seven of the nine patients. There was a remarkable improvement in circulatory function, with an increase in mean arterial pressure (68+/-2 to 80+/-4 mmHg, p<0.05) and suppression of vasoconstrictor systems activity (plasma renin activity and plasma norepinephrine decreased from 23+/-12 ng/ml x h and 1549+/-373 pg/ml to 3.5+/-2 ng/ml x h and 373+/-98 pg/ml, respectively, p<0.01 for both). No patient developed signs of intestinal, myocardial or distal ischemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Terlipressin associated with albumin appears to be a safe and effective treatment of hepatorenal syndrome.

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.

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.

Time profile of the haemodynamic effects of terlipressin in portal hypertension

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Terlipressin is a long-acting vasopressin analogue that has been proved useful in the treatment of variceal haemorrhage. This study investigates the time profile of the haemodynamic effects of terlipressin on portal hypertension as well as the efficacy in decreasing portal-pressure and collateral blood flow of reduced doses, suitable for longer therapy to prevent early rebleeding.

METHODS

Splanchnic and systemic haemodynamics were measured in 23 patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension in baseline conditions and at 30 min, 1, 2, 3 and/or 4 h after the double-blind administration of a single intravenous injection of 1 mg (n=8) or 2 mg (n=8) of terlipressin, or placebo (n=7).

RESULTS

Placebo caused no significant effects. At 30 min of terlipressin administration, the hepatic venous pressure gradient (1 mg: -16+/-9%, 2 mg: -21+/-11%; p<0.01) and azygos blood flow (1 mg: -19+/-13%, 2 mg: -25+/-17%; p<0.05) were significantly reduced. These effects were still significant at 4 h (2 mg) or 3 h (1 mg). Both doses moderately increased arterial pressure at 1 h. At 4 h, neither arterial pressure nor peripheral vascular resistance was significantly modified by either dose of terlipressin. Terlipressin caused no significant changes in hepatic blood flow.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with cirrhosis, a single injection of 2 mg of terlipressin significantly and markedly reduces portal pressure and azygos blood flow for up to 4 h. The effects of a reduced dose (1 mg) were almost as pronounced and prolonged, suggesting that after the initial control of variceal bleeding, terlipressin therapy could be maintained for several days at low dosage to reduce the risk of early rebleeding.

Review article: the role of pharmaco-therapy for acute variceal haemorrhage in the era of endoscopic haemostasis

In the last decade, endoscopic haemostasis, including injection sclerotherapy and variceal ligation has become the standard method for the treatment of variceal haemorrhage. While the use of vasopressin has been hampered by severe side effects, the development of new vasoactive agents such as terlipressin, somatostatin and octreotide has opened new indications for these pharmacological therapies. These agents are effective, safe and easy to use. They could be recommended as stop-gap treatment before endoscopy can be arranged. They can also be used as adjunct therapy for endoscopic haemostasis in acute variceal haemorrhage.

Early administration of terlipressin plus glyceryl trinitrate to control active upper gastrointestinal bleeding in cirrhotic patients

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a major complication in cirrhotic patients. Endoscopy and oesophageal sclerosis are reference treatments and must be done as soon as possible. However, such treatment is not possible unless the patient is admitted to hospital. In a prospective, randomised, double-blind trial, we compared the efficacy of terlipressin combined with glyceryl trinitrate (TER-GTN), administered as early as possible to 76 patients with cirrhosis who had active GIB (84 bleeding episodes). Infusion was done at the patient's home by the physician on the emergency team (a mobile intensive care unit) if the patient had GIB and a history and clinical signs of cirrhosis. Patients received either an intravenous injection (1 to 2 mg) of TER-GTN or a double-placebo injection, and then another injection at 4 and 8 h. Control of bleeding, rebleeding, and mortality rate at days 15 and 42 were evaluated. In most patients, endoscopy confirmed the rupture of oesophageal varices (75.7%). Bleeding control was significantly better in the TER-GTN group (n = 41) than in the double-placebo group (n = 43) (p = 0.034). Mortality due to bleeding episodes was significantly lower in the TER-GTN group than in the double-placebo group at day 15 (p = 0.035) and at day 42 (p = 0.06). There were no serious side-effects. Early administration of TER-GTN lowers the deleterious consequences of prolonged hypovolaemia on the hepatic function of these patients.

Hemodynamic effects of combined treatment with somatostatin analogue (SMS 201-995) and low-dose isosorbide dinitrate on portal hypertension in conscious cirrhotic rats

The authors investigated whether combined treatment with the somatostatin analogue, SMS 201-995, and low-dose isosorbide dinitrate enhanced the hemodynamic effects of the individual agents on rats with thioacetamide-induced cirrhosis. Four groups of cirrhotic rats received SMS 201-995 (0.1 microgram.min-1.kg-1), isosorbide dinitrate (10 micrograms.min-1.kg-1), both agents, or placebo, respectively. Hemodynamics were measured serially in conscious rats, using a radioactive microsphere method. SMS 201-995 reduced portal venous inflow 21 +/- 4% and portal pressure 17 +/- 3%. Isosorbide dinitrate decreased portal venous inflow 20 +/- 4%, by inducing splanchnic vasoconstriction mediated by low pressure baroreflexes, and this agent also decreased portal pressure, by 14 +/- 2%. Portal venous resistance rose 7.6 +/- 3% with isosorbide dinitrate alone, but decreased 18 +/- 4% with combination therapy. This effect may have been induced by the pronounced vasodilatory effect of isosorbide dinitrate on the venous vasculature, since the reflex splanchnic vasoconstriction that occurs with low-dose isosorbide dinitrate disappears when this agent is combined with SMS 201-995. The decrease in portal pressure was more marked (22 +/- 4%) and changes in systemic hemodynamics were milder with the combined treatment. It was concluded that combination therapy with SMS 201-995 and low-dose isosorbide dinitrate may be beneficial for portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis.

Terlipressin or vasopressin plus transdermal nitroglycerin in a treatment strategy for digestive bleeding in cirrhosis. A randomized clinical trial. Liver Study Group of V. Cervello Hospital

Between 1988 and 1990 an unblinded, randomized trial of terlipressin or vasopressin plus transdermal nitroglycerin, as part of a treatment strategy including emergency sclerotherapy for actively bleeding varices, was conducted during 165 admissions in 137 patients with cirrhosis and upper digestive bleeding. Eighty-four patient admissions were assigned to terlipressin (2 mg every 6 h) and 81 to vasopressin (0.4 to 0.8 unit per min) plus transdermal nitroglycerin (20 to 80 mg). The two groups were comparable for relevant clinical data, but there were slightly more patients with hepatocellular carcinoma or terminal conditions in the terlipressin group. After the 24-h study period, failure to control bleeding was 20/84 (25%) in the vasopressin and 14/81 (17%) in the terlipressin group (p = 0.19). Corresponding figures for patients bleeding from varices (emergency sclerotherapy in 43 and 45, respectively) were 13/55 (24%) and 5/56 (9%; p = 0.035), from other sources 5/16 (31%) and 2/15 (13%; p = 0.23), from undefined sources 2/10 (20%) and 7/13 (54%; p = 0.1). In a logistic multivariate regression model the odds ratio for terlipressin adjusted for prognostic factors was 0.45 (p = 0.07). There were seven major side effects requiring treatment discontinuation in the vasopressin and one in the terlipressin group. These results suggest that terlipressin alone is as effective as vasopressin plus transdermal nitroglycerin, with less severe side effects, in 24-h control of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis.

Balloon tamponade technique and efficacy in variceal haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

The option of using direct compression to arrest haemorrhage from an oesophageal varix was introduced by Westphal in 1930. Since then, different types of oesophageal and or gastric balloons have become available for use. The published data concerning the efficacy and complications of the balloon tamponade in the treatment of variceal haemorrhage is evaluated. METHOD-RESULTS: Balloon tamponade as a single therapy may control initial variceal haemorrhage in more than 80% of cases. However, haemostasis is usually transient and is associated with a high rate of complications. As regards the comparison of balloon tamponade with vasoactive drugs such as vasopressin alone or vasopressin + terlipressin or terlipressin + nitroglycerin, it appears that both regimens are comparable in respect to initial control of bleeding, rebleeding, mortality, and complications. There is also evidence suggesting that balloon tamponade is as equally effective as octreotide and somatostatin in the initial control of variceal haemorrhage, but early rebleeding and complications are significantly less with the administration of both drugs. Finally, it appears that balloon tamponade is inferior to endoscopic sclerotherapy in both the acute and the long-term control of variceal haemorrhage.

CONCLUSIONS

Balloon tamponade should be reserved for those patients with variceal haemorrhage in whom bleeding continues despite conservative treatment, or as the first form of treatment only if sclerotherapy is not available.

Treatment of acute gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage

About 30% to 35% of patients with portal hypertension bleed from gastroesophageal varices and mortality remains high reflecting the challenges of effectively dealing with the bleeding event itself and the problems of underlying liver disease. Careful resuscitation and control of risk of complications is the most essential element of medical therapy (Fig. 2). Use of newer, more effective drug combinations with vasopressin or somatostatin permit control of hemorrhage in the majority of patients with fewer drug-induced complications. Endoscopic sclerotherapy and, more recently, banding therapy provide immediate control of hemorrhage and eradication of varices and rebleeding in up to 90% of patients. Persistent, recurrent bleeding in the small number of remaining patients can be effectively managed by "portacaval shunt rescue" or orthotopic liver transplantation in selected cases with acceptable surgical morbidity and mortality. The contribution and role of the TIPS procedure is unknown but very promising; at least as a bridge procedure in patients awaiting transplantation. Until appropriate prospective, comparative trials are performed, the role of TIPS as a long-term alternative to portacaval shunt surgery or other endoscopic or surgical options remains unknown.

Terlipressin vs. somatostatin in bleeding esophageal varices: a controlled, double-blind study

Fifty episodes of bleeding from esophageal or gastric varices in 33 patients with cirrhosis were randomized to treatment with either intravenous terlipressin (2 mg initially and 1 mg every 4 hr for 24 hr together with bolus injection and continuous infusion of placebo) or with somatostatin (250 micrograms as a bolus and continuous infusion of 250 micrograms/hr somatostatin for 24 hr and placebo injections). Standard therapy with transfusions, fluid and electrolyte correction and lactulose was administered in both groups. In the terlipressin group, 22 of 25 bleeding episodes (88%) were initially stopped by the vasoactive drugs, and in the somatostatin group 19 of 25 bleeding episodes (76%) were initially stopped by the vasoactive drugs. Two of the three bleeding episodes not arrested by terlipressin and five of the six bleeding episodes not arrested by somatostatin were controlled by balloon tamponade. In one patient in each group variceal bleeding initially could not be stopped, and the patients died. The failure rate of the vasoactive treatment alone, including rebleeding episodes within the study period, was 20% in the terlipressin group and 32% in the somatostatin group. The control rate, including balloon tamponade, was 96% in both groups. The hospital mortality rate was 16% (4 of 25) in the terlipressin group and 24% (6 of 25) in the somatostatin group. Blood transfusions, use of balloon tamponade and duration of bleeding did not differ significantly.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

A randomized controlled study of low-dose and high-dose terlipressin in the control of acute oesophageal variceal haemorrhage

A randomized controlled trial was designed to investigate whether a high dose of terlipressin could control acute variceal haemorrhage more effectively than a low dose of terlipressin. Forty cirrhotic patients with bleeding oesophageal varices were included, with low-dose terlipressin in 21 patients and high-dose terlipressin in 19 patients. The two groups of patients were similarly matched for all parameters on admission. High-dose terlipressin (84%) seemed to be more effective in the initial control of bleeding than low-dose terlipressin (67%); however this difference was not significant. Complete control of bleeding during 24 h of drug infusion was achieved in 53% of patients receiving high-dose terlipressin and in 48% of those treated with low-dose terlipressin (P greater than 0.05). There were no major complications in either group. Mortality in relation to variceal bleeding and transfusion requirements were similar in the two groups. This study shows that high dose terlipressin is not superior to low dose terlipressin in acute variceal bleeding.