Gastric perforation after endoscopic ligation for gastric varices

Spontaneous healing of gastric perforation after endoscopic ligation for gastric varices

Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) can be performed as an optional therapy for gastric variceal bleeding if endoscopic sclerotherapy (ES) is not readily available or if practitioners lack experience. EVL using an endoscopic pneumo-activated ligating device was performed on a 53-year-old male patient with liver cirrhosis who presented with hematemesis. Follow-up esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) performed two days after the EVL showed gastric perforation at the EVL-procedure site on the gastric fundus. However, the patient refused emergency surgery, and therefore received only supportive management, including intravenous antibiotics. EGD 10 days later showed healing of the perforation site. This is the first report of a case of gastric variceal bleeding with development of a gastric perforation soon after EVL, which showed complete recovery with conservative therapy and without surgical intervention.

Is it safe to perform endoscopic band ligation for the duodenum? A pilot study in ex vivo porcine models

AIM

In the digestive tract, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) has been routinely used for the treatment of variceal bleeding and superficial malignancies. In recent years, endoscopic treatments for duodenal varices, adenoma, and cancer have also actively incorporated EBL. Although there have been a number of reports on the risks associated with the use of EBL in the esophagus, stomach, and colon, few studies have focused on EBL in the duodenum. We performed EBL procedures to evaluate the risks associated with the use of EBL in the duodenum.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Overall, EBLs were performed at nine sites in duodenum sampled from a pig immediately after sacrifice. Submucosal saline injections were placed in three of the nine studied sites.

RESULTS

Regardless of saline injection, the full thickness of the duodenal wall was ligated in all attempts.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine EBL is not recommended in the duodenum because the risk of perforation is unacceptably high.

Review article: recent advances in the management of bleeding gastric varices

Gastric variceal bleeding can be challenging to the clinician. Tissue adhesives can control acute bleeding in over 80%, with rebleeding rates of 20-30%, and should be first-line therapy where available. Endoscopic ultrasound can assist in better eradication of varices. The potential risks of damage to equipment and embolic phenomena can be minimized with careful attention to technique. Variceal band ligation is an alternative to tissue adhesives for the management of acute bleeding, but not for secondary prevention due to a higher rate of rebleeding. Endoscopic therapy with human thrombin appears promising, with initial haemostasis rates typically over 90%. The lack of controlled studies for thrombin prevents universal recommendation outside of clinical trials. Balloon occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration is a recent technique for patients with gastrorenal shunts, although its use is limited to clinical trials. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt is an option for refractory bleeding and secondary prophylaxis, with uncontrolled studies demonstrating initial haemostasis obtained in over 90%, and rebleeding rates of 15-30%. Non-cardioselective beta-blockers are an alternative to transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunt for secondary prophylaxis, although the evidence is limited. Shunt surgery should be considered in well-compensated patients. Splenectomy or embolization is an option in patients with segmental portal hypertension.

Management of iatrogenic perforation

Iatrogenic perforation of the gastrointestinal tract is a medical emergency and is inevitable. An endoscopist must maintain a high index of suspicion despite minimal or atypical symptoms and negative radiologic studies, because perforation is a complication with tremendous morbidity and mortality. The endoscopist must know how to manage this complication appropriately and to seek immediate surgical consultation. There is ongoing controversy about when a patient should undergo nonoperative or surgical therapy. An evidence-based approach to manage iatrogenic perforation is not possible. The trend in the modern era is to less invasive, nonoperative therapy, given advancements in ICU care and antibiotics. Laparoscopy or laparoscopic-assisted (minilaparotomy) surgery is also being increasingly used with outcomes comparable with conventional laparotomy. Experience and advancements in accessories have enabled endoscopic repair of iatrogenic perforation in many situations [84]. The management algorithms provided synthesize the pertinent literature into reasonable guidelines to follow. Ultimately, an individualized approach must be taken to manage the patient with an iatrogenic perforation.