Randomized trial of 1-week versus 2-week intervals for endoscopic ligation in the treatment of patients with esophageal variceal bleeding

Visual prediction models for predicting rebleeding events after the first esophageal variceal ligation

BACKGROUND

Sequential endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is a standard therapy for esophageal variceal bleeding, yet poor compliance often compromises its efficacy. This study aimed to identify high-risk factors for rebleeding after initial EVL and establish a visual predictive model to improve patient follow-up and education.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we enrolled patients who underwent first-time EVL for esophageal variceal bleeding at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, between January 2017 and January 2023. Patients were allocated to training and validation cohorts. Clinical data were systematically collected, and rebleeding incidence rates within 6 weeks and 6 months post-EVL were analyzed. Logistic regression was used to explore high-risk factors influencing postoperative rebleeding and to establish visual models, evaluated with a validation set.

RESULTS

The study involved 629 patients in the training set and 312 in the validation set. Rebleeding occurred in 34.8% (219/629) and 80.1% (504/629) of patients within 6 weeks and 6 months after initial EVL, respectively. Esophageal variceal severity and platelet count emerged as shared independent risk factors for both 6-week and 6-month rebleeding. The nomogram models demonstrated robust predictive accuracy in the validation cohort, with areas under the curve (AUC) of 0.942 (95% CI 0.901-0.983) for 6-week rebleeding risk and 0.852 (95% CI 0.759-0.945) for 6-month rebleeding risk.

CONCLUSION

This study proposes a visual prediction model designed to assess the risk of rebleeding following initial EVL in patients with esophageal variceal hemorrhage to optimize clinical decision-making and improve patient management strategies.

Impact of sarcopenia on variceal rebleeding in patients after endoscopic therapy: a multicenter retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching

BACKGROUND

Sarcopenia is a common complication of liver cirrhosis and can be used for predicting dismal prognostic outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the role of sarcopenia in rebleeding and mortality of liver cirrhosis patients after endoscopic therapy.

METHODS

The liver cirrhosis patients who received endoscopic treatment were enrolled. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to overcome selection bias. Two-year rebleeding episodes and mortality after endoscopic therapy were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 109 (32.4%) sarcopenia patients were reported. Before PSM, the frequency of rebleeding was significantly higher in the sarcopenia group relative to the non-sarcopenia group (41.3% vs. 15.9%, p < 0.001). Moreover, the multivariable analysis revealed that sarcopenia (p < 0.001, HR:2.596, 95% CI 1.591-4.237) was independently associated with a 2-year rebleeding episode. After PSM, the sarcopenia group exhibited an increased rebleeding rate as compared with non-sarcopenia group (44.4% vs. 15.3%, p < 0.001). According to multivariable analysis, sarcopenia (p < 0.001, HR:3.490, 95% CI 1.756-6.938) was identified as a significant predictor for 2-year rebleeding.

CONCLUSION

Sarcopenia was significantly associated with a high 2-year rebleeding rate in liver cirrhosis patients after endoscopic treatment. Therefore, the precise evaluation of a patient's nutritional status, including sarcopenia becomes mandatory before endoscopic treatment.

Balloon-occluded Esophageal Varices Obliteration Versus Ligation for the Management of F2 Esophageal Varices: A Randomized Controlled Trial

AIM

To compare balloon-occluded esophageal varices obliteration (BEVO) with esophageal variceal ligation (EVL) in the management of cirrhotic patients with type F2 esophageal varices (F2-EVs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 157 patients with F2-EVs were randomly assigned to either BEVO (n=79) or EVL (n=78) group in the prospective study between July 2021 and December 2021. Primary outcomes included recurrence and eradication rates. Secondary outcomes included rebleeding rate, and procedural complications.

RESULTS

The recurrence rate of EVs was notably lower in the BEVO group than in the EVL group (3.80% vs. 21.79%; P =0.001). The rate of complete eradication in the BEVO group was significantly higher than that of the EVL group (96.20% vs. 74.36%; P <0.001). The incidence of rebleeding in the BEVO group was markedly lower than that of the EVL group (7.59% vs. 20.51%; P =0.02). There was a higher incidence of transient dysphagia in the EVL group than in the BEVO group (10.26% vs. 1.27%; P =0.015).

CONCLUSIONS

BEVO exerted an effective treatment option for F2-EVs.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; due to viruses, alcohol, and/or nonobese [BMI < 30 kg/m2] nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) and clinically significant portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] > 10 mmHg and/or liver stiffness by transient elastography > 25 kPa) should receive, if no contraindications, nonselective beta blocker (NSBB) therapy (preferably carvedilol) to prevent the development of variceal bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in those patients unable to receive NSBB therapy with a screening upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy that demonstrates high risk esophageal varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the endoscopic prophylactic treatment of choice. EBL should be repeated every 2-4 weeks until variceal eradication is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3-6 months in the first year following eradication.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage (UGIH) and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 70 g/L prompting RBC transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin of 70-90 g/L is desired.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends that patients with ACLD presenting with suspected acute variceal bleeding be risk stratified according to the Child-Pugh score and MELD score, and by documentation of active/inactive bleeding at the time of upper GI endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5 : ESGE recommends the vasoactive agents terlipressin, octreotide, or somatostatin be initiated at the time of presentation in patients with suspected acute variceal bleeding and be continued for a duration of up to 5 days.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends antibiotic prophylaxis using ceftriaxone 1 g/day for up to 7 days for all patients with ACLD presenting with acute variceal hemorrhage, or in accordance with local antibiotic resistance and patient allergies.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends, in the absence of contraindications, intravenous erythromycin 250 mg be given 30-120 minutes prior to upper GI endoscopy in patients with suspected acute variceal hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends that, in patients with suspected variceal hemorrhage, endoscopic evaluation should take place within 12 hours from the time of patient presentation provided the patient has been hemodynamically resuscitated.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9 : ESGE recommends EBL for the treatment of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH).Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends that, in patients at high risk for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding following successful endoscopic hemostasis (Child-Pugh C  ≤ 13 or Child-Pugh B > 7 with active EVH at the time of endoscopy despite vasoactive agents, or HVPG > 20 mmHg), pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) within 72 hours (preferably within 24 hours) must be considered.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 11 : ESGE recommends that, for persistent esophageal variceal bleeding despite vasoactive pharmacological and endoscopic hemostasis therapy, urgent rescue TIPS should be considered (where available).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 12 : ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for acute gastric (cardiofundal) variceal (GOV2, IGV1) hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 13: ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or EBL in patients with GOV1-specific bleeding.Strong recommendations, moderate quality evidence. 14: ESGE suggests urgent rescue TIPS or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for gastric variceal bleeding when there is a failure of endoscopic hemostasis or early recurrent bleeding.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 15: ESGE recommends that patients who have undergone EBL for acute EVH should be scheduled for follow-up EBLs at 1- to 4-weekly intervals to eradicate esophageal varices (secondary prophylaxis).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 16: ESGE recommends the use of NSBBs (propranolol or carvedilol) in combination with endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis in EVH in patients with ACLD.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

Efficacy of early re-ligation after endoscopic gastric glue injection combined with endoscopic variceal ligation in preventing rebleeding of esophagogastric varices in patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

The rate of rebleeding after successful hemostasis by endoscopic gastric glue injection (EGGI) combined with endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) in ruptured esophagogastric varices (EHV) in cirrhosis is still high, and a second EVL is often required, but the optimal interval between the first and second EVL has not been determined.

AIM

To explore the effect of timing of the second EVL after EGGI combined with EVL in the prevention of rebleeding from esophagogastric varices in patients with liver cirrhosis.

METHODS

A total of 121 patients with cirrhosis and hemorrhage who were treated at our hospital from May 2017 to September 2019 were retrospectively selected and divided into 1 mo group (n = 27), 2 mo group (n = 32), 3 mo group (n = 37), and > 3 mo group (n = 25) based on the interval between the first and second EVL. The curative effect, rebleeding rate, fatality rate, rate of complications and portal hemodynamic changes (splenic vein, portal vein, and left gastric vein diameter and mean blood flow velocity) after the completion of the second EVL were compared among the groups.

RESULTS

The total effective rate in the 1 mo group was 100.00% (27/27), significantly higher than those of the 2 mo [78.13% (25/32)], 3 mo [75.68% (28/37)], and > 3 mo [68.00% (17/25)] groups (P < 0.05). The rebleeding rate in the 1 mo group [3.70% (1/27)] was significantly lower than those of the 2 mo [31.25% (10/32)], 3 mo [37.84% (14/32)], and > 3 mo [68.00% (17/25)] groups (P < 0.05); the rebleeding rate in the 2 mo group was significantly lower than that of the > 3 mo group (P < 0.05). The mortality rate in the 1 mo group (0) was significantly lower than that of the > 3 mo group [24.00% (6/25)] (P < 0.05). The average blood flow velocity of the splenic vein and portal vein after the second EVL in the 1 mo group [(32.42 ± 3.36) cm/s and (27.51 ± 2.79) cm/s, respectively] were significantly higher than those of the 2 mo [(30.02 ± 2.77) cm/s and (24.55 ± 2.61) cm/s, respectively], 3 mo [(29.11 ± 3.24) cm/s and (24.19 ± 2.38) cm/s, respectively], and > 3 mo [(29.04 ± 2.81) cm/s and (23.89 ± 2.11) cm/s, respectively] groups (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Early re-ligation after EGGI combined with EVL can effectively, safely, and reliably improve the severity of varicose veins and reduce the rebleeding rate, and has a positive impact on the portal venous system.

Number of endoscopic sessions to eradicate varices identifies high risk of rebleeding in cirrhotic patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Risk stratification to identify patients with high risk of variceal rebleeding is particularly important in patients with decompensated cirrhosis. In clinical practice, eliminating gastroesphageal varices thoroughly after sequential endoscopic treatment reduces the rebleeding rate, however, no simple method has been build to predict high risk of variceal rebleeding. We conducted this study to explore the value of the number of endoscopic sessions required to eradicate gastroesphageal varices in identifying high risk of rebleeding.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive cirrhotic patients received sequential endoscopic therapy between January 2015 and March 2020 were enrolled. Endoscopic treatment was performed every 1-4 weeks until the eradication of varices. The primary endpoint was variceal rebleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 146 patients were included of which 60 patients received standard therapy and 86 patients underwent sequential endoscopic treatment alone. The cut-off value of the number of sequential endoscopic sessions is 3.5 times. Variceal rebleeding was significant higher in patients with endoscopic sessions > 3 times versus ≤ 3 times (61.5% vs. 17.5%, p < 0.001). Variceal rebleeding of patients with endoscopic sessions ≤ 3 times was significant lower than patients with > 3 times in group of standard therapy (19.6% vs. 88.9%, p < 0.001) and endoscopic therapy (15.9% vs. 47.1%, p = 0.028) respectively.

CONCLUSION

The number of sequential endoscopic sessions required to eradicate the varices is related to the risk of variceal rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis. If three times of endoscopic treatment can not eradicate the varices, a more aggressive treatment such as TIPS should be seriously considered.

Management of portal hypertension based on portal hemodynamics

Portal hypertension is most commonly caused by chronic liver disease. As liver damage progresses, portal pressure gradually elevates and hemodynamics of the portal system gradually change. In normal liver, venous returns from visceral organs join the portal trunk and flow into the liver (hepatopetal blood flow). As portal pressure increases due to liver damage, congestion of some veins of the visceral organ occurs (blood flow to and from). Finally, the direction of some veins (the left gastric vein in particular) of the visceral organ change (hepatofugal blood flow) and develop as collateral veins (portosystemic shunt) to reduce portal pressure. Therefore, esophagogastric varices serve as drainage veins for the portal venous system to reduce the portal pressure. In chronic liver disease, as intrahepatic vascular resistance is increased (backward flow theory) and collateral veins develop, adequate portal hypertension is required to maintain portal flow into the liver through an increase of blood flow into the portal venous system (forward flow theory). Splanchnic and systemic arterial vasodilatations increase the blood flow into the portal venous system (hyperdynamic state) and lead to portal hypertension and collateral formation. Hyperdynamic state, especially around the spleen, is detected in patients with portal hypertension. The spleen is a regulatory organ that maintains portal flow into the liver. In this review, surgical treatment, interventional radiology, endoscopic treatment, and pharmacotherapy for portal hypertension (esophagogastric varices in particular) are described based on the portal hemodynamics using schema.

Evaluation of endoscopic variceal band ligation sessions in obliteration of esophageal varices

OBJECTIVE

To determine number of sessions of Endoscopic variceal band ligation required to obliterate the esophageal varices.

METHODS

This study was conducted at Civil Hospital Karachi between June 2018 to April 2019. All patients undergoing endoscopic Variceal Band Ligation (EVBL) were inducted. Number of sessions of band ligation required to obliterate the varices were recorded. Number of EVBL sessions were correlated with Child-Pugh's Score and etiology of CLD by χ2 test, while it was compared with duration of Chronic Liver Disease (CLD) by One-way ANOVA test.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-two patients fulfilling selection criteria were admitted after informed consent. These included 101 (52.6%) males and 91 (47.4%) females. Most common cause of cirrhosis was HCV (66.7%) in our patients. Most of the patients were in Child Class-B (71.9%). Majority of patients (52.6%) underwent 3 sessions of EVBL while 68 (35.4%) underwent 4 sessions of EVBL. Duration of CLD was analyzed with number of sessions of EVBL by One-Way ANOVA test and it showed significant more sessions of EVBL were done with longer duration of CLD (p <0.001).

CONCLUSION

Most patients underwent 3-4 sessions of EVBL for obliteration of varices. Number of EVBL sessions increased significantly with duration of disease.

Patient Response to Endoscopic Therapy for Gastroesophageal Varices Based on Endoscopic Ultrasound Findings

Background/Aims

Gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage is a common complication of portal hypertension. Endoscopic therapy is currently recommended for preventing gastroesophageal variceal rebleed. However, the rate of variceal rebleed and its associated mortality remain concerning. This study is aimed at differentiating patient response to endoscopic therapy based on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) findings.

Methods

One-hundred seventy patients previously treated with repeat endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis were enrolled and classified into two groups based on treatment response. Prior to consolidation therapy, all patients received an EUS examination to observe for extraluminal phenomena. All available follow-up endoscopic examination records were retrieved to validate study results.

Results

Of the 170 subjects, 106 were poor responders, while 64 were good responders. The presence of para-gastric, gastric perforating, and esophageal perforating veins was associated with poor patient response (p<0.001). The odds ratio for para-gastric veins was 5.374. Follow-up endoscopic findings for poor responders with incomplete variceal obliteration was closely correlated with the presence of para-gastric veins (p=0.002).

Conclusions

The presence of para-gastric veins is a characteristic of poor response to endoscopic therapy for treating gastroesophageal varices. Early identification of this subgroup necessitates a change in course of treatment to improve overall patient outcome.

Endoscopic treatments for portal hypertension

Acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage is a dreaded complication of portal hypertension. Its management has evolved rapidly in recent years. Endoscopic therapy is often employed to arrest bleeding varices as well as to prevent early rebleeding. The combination of vasoconstrictor and endoscopic therapy is superior to vasoconstrictor or endoscopic therapy alone for control of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage. After control of acute variceal bleeding, combination of banding ligation and beta-blockers is generally recommended to prevent variceal rebleeding. To prevent the catastrophic event of acute variceal bleeding, endoscopic banding ligation is an important tool in the prophylaxis of first bleeding. Endoscopic obturation with cyanoacrylate is usually utilized to arrest acute gastric variceal hemorrhage as well as to prevent rebleeding. It can be concluded that endoscopic therapies play a pivotal role in management of portal hypertensive bleeding.

Variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients

Variceal bleeding is one of the major causes of death in cirrhotic patients. The management during the acute phase and the secondary prophylaxis is well defined. Recent recommendations (2015 Baveno VI expert consensus) are available and should be followed for an optimal management, which must be performed as an emergency in a liver or general intensive-care unit. It is based on the early administration of a vasoactive drug (before endoscopy), an antibiotic prophylaxis and a restrictive transfusion strategy (hemoglobin target of 7 g/dL). The endoscopic treatment is based on band ligations. Sclerotherapy should be abandoned. In the most severe patients (Child Pugh C or B with active bleeding during initial endoscopy), transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) should be performed within 72 hours after admission to minimize the risk of rebleeding. Secondary prophylaxis is based on the association of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) and repeated band ligations. TIPS should be considered when bleeding reoccurs in spite of a well-conducted secondary prophylaxis or when NSBBs are poorly tolerated. It should also be considered when bleeding is refractory. Liver transplantation should be discussed when bleeding is not controlled after TIPS insertion and in all cases when liver function is deteriorated.