Acute variceal bleed in a patient with idiopathic myelofibrosis successfully treated with endoscopic variceal band ligation

Characteristics of myeloproliferative neoplasm-associated portal hypertension and endoscopic management of variceal bleeding

Background:

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are a rare yet important clinical cause of portal hypertension, which may cause recurrent gastroesophageal variceal bleeding (GVB). MPN-associated variceal bleeding lacks specific guidelines and clinical consensus and desiderates cohort studies. We performed a multicenter retrospective study to investigate the efficacy of endoscopic management of bleeding in MPNs.

Methods:

We included consecutive MPN patients with gastroesophageal varices in eight tertiary university hospitals between January 2007 and March 2020. The clinical characteristics of participants were summarized. MPN patients with a history of GVB were followed up for the rebleeding and death, compared with controls suffering from schistosomiasis-associated portal hypertension who received endoscopic treatment for variceal bleeding at the same period.

Results:

A total of 62 MPN patients with gastroesophageal varices were identified, and 37 had a history of GVB. Of these, 24 patients received endoscopic variceal ligation and endoscopic injection of cyanoacrylate for the prophylaxis of variceal rebleeding. Endoscopic treatment significantly reduced the rebleeding rate in MPN patients with a history of GVB (28.2% versus 68.3%, p = 0.0269). Multivariable Cox regression indicated that endoscopic treatment (HR = 0.10, 95% CI: 0.02–0.54, p = 0.008) was the independent protective factor for decreasing the 3-year rebleeding rate, while the use of non-selective beta-blockers (NSBB) (HR = 13.41, 95% CI: 2.15–83.42, p = 0.005) was the risk factor for increasing the 3-year rebleeding rate. As for the efficacy of endoscopic management, 3-year rebleeding rate was significantly lower in MPN patients in contrast to 46 controls with schistosomiasis-associated variceal bleeding (32.9% versus 59.0%, p = 0.0346).

Conclusion:

Endoscopic treatment might be a feasible and potent approach in the management of gastroesophageal variceal rebleeding in MPNs, while NSBB might be ineffective.

Portal hypertension and myeloproliferative neoplasms: a relationship revealed

Background/Objectives. Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms have a well-established increased risk of thrombosis. Many trials report identification of an underlying myeloproliferative neoplasm by investigation of the patients developing portal hypertensive esophagus and/or fundus variceal hemorrhage in the absence of any known etiology. This trial was designed to investigate the association between myeloproliferative neoplasms and portal hypertension and to detect the frequency of portal hypertension development in this subset of patients. Methodology. Twenty-nine patients previously diagnosed with polycythemia vera, essential thrombocytopenia, and primary myelofibrosis, who were under followup at the hematology outpatient clinic of our hospital, were included in the trial. Results. In our trial, we detected portal hypertension in 13.8% of the patients (n = 4), as a finding that was similar to those obtained in other studies performed to date. Conclusions. Considering the fact that diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasms usually takes a long time, treatment should be started (while, on the other hand, assessing the investigational and therapeutical choices for the complications) right after the bone marrow biopsy or cytogenetic studies required for establishing the final diagnosis have been performed.

Portal hypertension secondary to myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia: A study of 13 cases

AIM: To describe the clinical presentation and complications of portal hypertension (PH) secondary to myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia (MMM).

METHODS: Medical records for 123 patients with MMM were reviewed.

RESULTS: Thirteen patients with PH secondary to MMM were identified. Median ages at time of MMM and PH diagnosis were 61 and 66 years, respectively. The interval from MMM diagnosis to presentation with one of the PH features ranged from 1 to 11 years. Variceal bleeding and ascites were the most common presentations. Of the eight patients who presented with variceal bleeding, six patients underwent endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) with no variceal recurrence or hematological worsening during a 12-mo follow up period.

CONCLUSION: Patients with MMM might develop PH. Exact mechanisms leading to PH in MMM are still controversial. As in other etiologies, variceal bleeding and ascites are the most common presentations. Anemia may correlate with, and/or predict, the severity of the PH presentation in these patients. EVL can successfully control variceal bleeding in MMM. Further clinical studies are required.