Primary Prophylaxis for Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Children With Biliary Atresia and Portal Hypertension Candidates for Liver Transplantation: A Single-Center Experience

Endoscopic Primary Prophylaxis to Prevent Bleeding in Children with Esophageal Varices: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare endoscopy as primary versus secondary prophylaxis to prevent future bleeding in children with esophageal varices.

Methods

A systematic literature search using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses method was conducted using the Scopus, PubMed, and Cochrane databases for relevant studies on the outcome of rebleeding events after endoscopy in primary prophylaxis compared to that in secondary prophylaxis. The following keywords were used: esophageal varices, children, endoscopy, primary prophylaxis and bleeding. The quality of eligible articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and statistically analyzed using RevMan 5.4 software.

Results

A total of 174 children were included from four eligible articles. All four studies were considered of high-quality based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Patients who received primary prophylaxis had 79% lower odds of bleeding than those who received secondary prophylaxis (odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.66; I2=0%, p=0.008). Patients in the primary prophylaxis group underwent fewer endoscopic procedures to eradicate varices than those in the secondary prophylaxis group, with a mean difference of 1.73 (95% CI, 0.91-2.56; I2=62%, p<0.0001).

Conclusion

Children with high-risk varices who underwent primary prophylaxis were less likely to experience future bleeding episodes and required fewer endoscopic procedures to eradicate the varices than children who underwent secondary prophylaxis.

A Model for Early Endoscopic Detection of High-Risk Gastroesophageal Varices in Children With Biliary Atresia

OBJECTIVE

In children with biliary atresia and portal hypertension, progression to gastroesophageal varices carrying a risk of bleeding depends on age, total serum bilirubin concentration and initial endoscopic features. We report an attempt to use these factors for early detection of high-risk varices (HRVs).

METHODS

Based on different combinations of these factors, a model was set to estimate the probabilities of emergence of HRVs at various time intervals. A 10% probability was chosen to set the date of the next endoscopy in children who did not display HRVs initially. A total of 113 children without HRVs who underwent their first endoscopy before age 8 in 2013-2020 were included. A comparison was made with children seen during the period 1990-2012 when this model was not used.

RESULTS

In all, 65 of the 113 children underwent one to five additional endoscopies at dates set according to the model. The emergence of HRVs was recorded in 22 children after a mean interval of 14 months and was managed by endoscopic primary prophylaxis in all but one who underwent liver transplantation. Three other children bled before the next planned endoscopy. Compared with 175 children of the same age ranges without HRVs in the period 1990-2012, the use of the model was associated with a faster detection of HRVs with a lower number of endoscopic procedures (P  = 0.0022 and P  = 0.023, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that the model reported may be a useful tool for the early detection of HRVs to allow primary prophylaxis of bleeding.

Use and safety of prophylactic endoscopy from a single center serving urban and rural children with portal hypertension

Prophylactic endoscopy is routine in adults with portal hypertension (PHTN), but there is limited data in pediatrics. We sought to describe our experience with prophylactic endoscopy in pediatric PHTN. This is a retrospective study of 87 children who began surveillance endoscopy prior to gastrointestinal bleeding (primary prophylaxis) and 52 who began after an episode of bleeding (secondary prophylaxis) from 01/01/1994 to 07/01/2019. Patients who underwent primary prophylaxis had a lower mean number of endoscopies (3.897 vs 6.269, p = 0.001). The primary prophylaxis group was less likely to require a portosystemic shunt (6% vs 15%, p < 0.001) with no difference in immediate complications (1% vs 2%, p = 0.173) or 2-week complications (1% vs 2%, p = 0.097). No deaths were related to variceal bleeding or endoscopy. Kaplan–Meier Survival Curve suggests improved transplant and shunt free survival in the primary prophylaxis group (log-rank p < 0.001). Primary and secondary endoscopic prophylaxis should be considered safe for the prevention of variceal hemorrhage in pediatric portal hypertension. There are differences in outcomes in primary and secondary prophylaxis, but unclear if this is due to patient characteristics versus treatment strategy. Further study is needed to compare safety and efficacy to watchful waiting.

Operational Definitions for Chronic Liver Disease Manifestations and Recurring Clinical Events in Biliary Atresia

BACKGROUND

The disease course of biliary atresia (BA) may be complicated by development of chronic liver disease (CLD) manifestations (eg, ascites) and recurring clinical events (eg, cholangitis). Most pediatric CLD-manifestations/events lack standardized operational definitions, leading to inconsistent identification in clinical research. This study aimed to develop operational research definitions of CLD-manifestations/events in BA for application in retrospective analysis.

METHODS

Operational definitions of CLD-manifestations/events were developed by literature review and revised by a panel of experienced pediatric hepatologists. Definitions were applied to a single-center review of infants with BA post-Kasai. Manifestations/events were captured until last clinical visit with native liver (SNL), liver transplantation (LT), or death. Native liver survival and event-free survival were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Cluster analysis was performed to identify similar patterns of manifestation/event development.

RESULTS

Of 65 infants with BA post-Kasai (2006-18; median Kasai 56.8 days; 65% girls), 29 underwent LT (median 12.9 months) and 4 died without LT (median 6.9 months). Seventy-six percent of CLD-manifestations/events presented within the first year. Presence of definite clinically evident portal hypertension, thrombocytopenia, and dCE ascites were associated with poor transplant-free survival (P < 0.01). Similar pattern developments of CLD-manifestations/events identified 3 outcome groups: poor outcomes (87.8% LT/death), SNL with manifestations/events, and SNL with few/no events.

CONCLUSIONS

Operational definitions can provide a timely description of the disease course progression in infants with BA. Research definitions may provide better consistency in future pediatric CLD studies. Furthermore, definitions may serve as endpoints in therapeutic trials or used as variables for disease pattern identification in potential multicenter studies.

Beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Therefore, prevention is important. Band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in paediatric patients because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of beta-blockers compared with placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (April 2020). We screened the reference lists of the retrieved publications and manually searched the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to December 2019. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status to assess benefits and harms. We included observational studies, retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials, for a narrative report of harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to asses risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to use intention-to-treat principle. We planned to analyse data with RevMan Analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no randomised clinical trials that assessed beta-blockers compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We found four observational studies that reported on harms. As a systematic search for observational studies was not planned, we only listed the reported harms in a table.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of beta-blockers versus placebo on patient-relevant clinical outcomes, such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.

Band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. In adults, numerous randomised clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation as primary prevention in decreasing the risk of variceal haemorrhage. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in children because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or cause harm when used for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (27 April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of retrieved publications, and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to 2019. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EMA, and WHO for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to assess risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to analyse data with intention-to-treat. We planned to use Review Manager 5 to analyse the data.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no randomised clinical trials assessing band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy on patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of these two interventions.

Effect of Lockdown in Surgical Emergency Accesses: Experience of a COVID-19 Hospital

BACKGROUND/AIM

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic imposed extraordinary restriction measures and a complete reorganization of the Health System. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on emergency surgical department accesses.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients admitted to surgical emergency departments was retrospectively recorded during the Lockdown (March 11, 2020-May 3, 2020) and compared with the same number of days in 2019 and immediately before Lockdown (January 16, 2020-March 10, 2020). Diagnoses, priority levels, modes of patient's transportation, waiting times and outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

During the lockdown phase, we ob-served a reduction in the access to emergency surgical departments of 84.45% and 79.78%, com-pared with the Pre-Lockdown2019 and Pre-Lockdown2020 groups, respectively. Patient's transportation, hospitalization and patients discharge with indications to an outpatient visit, waiting and total times exhibited a significant difference during the lockdown (p<0.005).

CONCLUSION

We observed a reduction of surgical emergency accesses during the lockdown. Implementing the use of the regional systems and preventing overcrowding of emergency departments could be beneficial for reducing waiting times and improving the quality of treatments for patients.

Long-term Outcomes and Health Perceptions in Pediatric-onset Portal Hypertension Complicated by Varices

OBJECTIVES

Outcomes of pediatric-onset portal hypertension are poorly defined. We aimed to assess population-based long-term outcomes of pediatric-onset portal hypertension complicated by varices.

METHODS

All children with esophageal varices (n = 126) were identified from 14,144 single nationwide referral center endoscopy reports during 1987 to 2013, and followed up through national health care and death registers. A questionnaire was sent to survivors (n = 94) of whom 65 (69%) responded.

RESULTS

Nineteen underlying disorders included biliary atresia (35%), extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (35%), autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease (7%), and other disorders (23%). During median follow-up of 15.2 (range 0.5-43.1) years patients underwent median 9 (1-74) upper gastrointestinal endoscopies. Esophageal varices were first observed at a median age of 4.0 (0.3-18.2) years, 112 (89%) patients underwent median 6 (1-56) sclerotherapy/banding sessions, and 61 (48%) experienced median 2 (range 1-20) variceal bleeding episodes. Forty-eight surgical shunt procedures were performed to 41 (36%) patients and 38% underwent liver transplantation. Portal hypertensive biliopathy was diagnosed in 4 patients. Hepatopulmonary syndrome necessitated liver transplantation in 2 patients, hepatic encephalopathy in 2, and hepatorenal syndrome in 1. No patient died of variceal bleeding. Patient-reported perception of health on a scale of 1 to 10 was 9 (range 4-10), and 86% reported no current symptoms attributable to esophageal varices.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric-onset portal hypertension is a heterogeneous disease with significant long-term morbidity, requiring multimodal approach with considerable resources and continuation of follow-up in adulthood. Although mortality to variceal bleeding was avoided, bleeding episodes recurred also in adulthood, while patient-reported health of long-term survivors was encouraging.

Sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Therefore, prevention is important. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in adults is the established standard of care because of the results of numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal bleeding. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Elsevier, and two other registers in February 2019. We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and performed a manual search of the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstracts from January 2008 to December 2018. We searched four registries for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status assessing sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used the intention-to-treat principle to analyse outcome data, and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We found only one randomised clinical trial that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The trial was at high risk of bias. The trial included 108 Brazilian children with median age of 4.3 years (range 11 months to 13 years). Fifty-six children were randomised to prophylactic sclerotherapy (ethanolamine oleate 2%) and 52 children to no intervention (control). Children were followed up for a median of 4.5 years. Eight children (six from the sclerotherapy group versus two from the control group) dropped out before the end of the trial. The follow-up was from 18 months to eight years. Mortality was 16% (9/56 children) in the sclerotherapy group versus 15% (8/52 children) in the control group (risk ration (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 2.50; very low-certainty evidence). Upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 21% (12/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 46% (24/52) in the control group (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.83; very low-certainty evidence). There were more children with congestive hypertensive gastropathy in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (14% (8/56) versus 6% (3/52); RR 2.48, 95% CI 0.69 to 8.84; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of gastric varices was similar between the sclerotherapy group and the control group (11% (6/56) versus 10% (5/52); RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.43; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of bleeding from gastric varices was higher in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (4% (3/56) versus 0% (0/52); RR 6.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 123.06; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not assess health-related quality of life. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 5% (3/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 40% (21/52) of the children in the control group (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.42; very low-certainty evidence). The most prevalent complications (defined as non-serious) were pain and fever after the procedure, which promptly resolved with analgesics. However, numerical data on the frequency of these adverse events and their occurrences in the two groups were lacking. No funding information was provided. We found no ongoing trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence, obtained from one randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on mortality and if it may decrease first upper gastrointestinal or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. The evidence is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on congestive hypertensive gastropathy, incidence on gastric varices, and incidence of bleeding from gastric varices. Health-related quality of life was not measured. There were no serious events caused by sclerotherapy, and analysis of non-serious adverse events could not be performed due to lack of numerical data. The GRADE assessment of each outcome showed a very low-certainty evidence. The results of the trial need to be interpreted with caution. Larger randomised clinical trials, following the SPIRIT and CONSORT statements, assessing the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in adults is the established standard of care because of the results of numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal bleeding. However, sclerotherapy is the only endoscopic prophylactic option currently available in infants weighing less than 10 kg of bodyweight due to the size of the endoscopic ligator.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy versus any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Elsevier, LILACS (Bireme), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science) in February 2019. We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from January 2008 to December 2018. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EMA, and WHO, for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, assessing sclerotherapy versus any type of beta-blocker for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We planned to include quasi-randomised and other observational studies retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials for report of harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We planned to collect and summarise data from randomised clinical trials as described in our protocol, using standard Cochrane methodologies.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no randomised clinical trials assessing sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy versus beta-blockers on patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.