Variation in care for children with esophageal varices: a study of physicians', patients', and families' approaches and attitudes

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.

Risk of variceal hemorrhage and pretransplant mortality in children with biliary atresia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The natural history of gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage (VH) in biliary atresia (BA) is not well characterized. We analyzed risk factors, incidence, and outcomes of VH in a longitudinal multicenter study.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Participants enrolled in either an incident (Prospective Database of Infants with Cholestasis [PROBE]) or prevalent (Biliary Atresia Study of Infants and Children [BASIC]) cohort of BA were included. Variceal hemorrhage (VH) was defined based on gastrointestinal bleeding in the presence of varices accompanied by endoscopic or nontransplant surgical intervention. Cumulative incidence of VH and transplant-free survival was compared based on features of portal hypertension (e.g., splenomegaly, thrombocytopenia) and clinical parameters at baseline in each cohort (PROBE: 1.5 to 4.5 months after hepatoportoenterostomy [HPE]; BASIC: at enrollment > 3 years of age). Analyses were conducted on 869 children with BA enrolled between June 2004 and December 2020 (521 in PROBE [262 (51%) with a functioning HPE] and 348 in BASIC). The overall incidence of first observed VH at 5 years was 9.4% (95% CI: 7.0-12.4) in PROBE and 8.0% (5.2-11.5) in BASIC. Features of portal hypertension, platelet count, total bilirubin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST), albumin, and AST-to-platelet ratio index at baseline were associated with an increased risk of subsequent VH in both cohorts. Transplant-free survival at 5 years was 45.1% (40.5-49.6) in PROBE and 79.2% (74.1-83.4) in BASIC. Two (2.5%) of 80 participants who had VH died, whereas 10 (12.5%) underwent transplant within 6 weeks of VH.

CONCLUSIONS

The low risk of VH and associated mortality in children with BA needs to be considered in decisions related to screening for varices and primary prophylaxis of VH.

Role of primary prophylaxis in preventing variceal bleeding in children with gastroesophageal varices

BACKGROUND

Primary endoscopic prophylaxis in pediatric gastroesophageal varices is not universally practiced. We aimed to determine the role of primary endoscopic prophylaxis in preventing variceal bleeding in gastroesophageal varices in children.

METHODS

We reviewed all children with gastroesophageal varices seen in our unit from 2000 to 2019. Primary prophylaxis was defined as endoscopic procedure without a preceding spontaneous bleeding and secondary prophylaxis as preceded by spontaneous bleeding. High-risk varices were defined as presence of grade III esophageal varices, cardia gastric varices or cherry red spots on the varices. Outcome measures (spontaneous rebleeding within 3 months after endoscopic procedure, number of additional procedures to eradicate varices, liver transplant [LT], death) were ascertained.

RESULTS

Sixteen of 62 (26%) patients (median [± S.D.] age at diagnosis = 5.0 ± 4.3 years) with varices had primary prophylaxis, 38 (61%) had secondary prophylaxis while 8 (13%) had no prophylaxis. No difference in the proportion of patients with high-risk varices was observed between primary (88%) and secondary (92%; P = 0.62) prophylaxis. As compared to secondary prophylaxis, children who had primary prophylaxis were significantly less likely to have spontaneous rebleeding (6% vs. 38%; P = 0.022) and needed significantly fewer repeated endoscopic procedures (0.9 ± 1.0 vs. 3.1 ± 2.5; P = 0.021). After 8.9 ± 5.5 years of follow-up, overall survival was 85%; survival with native liver was 73%. No statistical difference was observed in the eventual outcome (alive with native liver) between primary and secondary (71% vs. 78%, P = 0.78).

CONCLUSION

Children with PHT who had primary prophylaxis had less subsequent spontaneous rebleeding and needed fewer additional endoscopic procedures as compared to secondary prophylaxis but did not have an improved eventual outcome. Screening endoscopy in all children who have signs of PHT and primary prophylaxis in high-risk esophageal varices should be considered before eventual LT.

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 sham or no intervention 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 and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Prevention is, therefore, important. Randomised clinical trials have shown that non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal band ligation decrease the incidence of variceal bleeding in adults. In children and adolescents, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as primary prophylaxis alternatives for oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether these interventions are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham or no intervention 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, and two other databases (April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and we also handsearched abstract books of the two main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences from January 2008 to December 2019. We also 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 aimed to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and other observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each 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 used the intention-to-treat principle. We analysed data using Review Manager 5.

MAIN RESULTS

One conference abstract, describing a feasibility multi-centre randomised clinical trial, fulfilled our review inclusion criteria. We judged the trial at overall high risk of bias. This trial was conducted in three hospital centres in the United Kingdom. The aim of the trial was to determine the feasibility and safety of further larger randomised clinical trials of prophylactic band ligation versus no active treatment in children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Twelve children received prophylactic band ligation and 10 children received no active treatment. There was no information on the age of the children included, or about the diagnosis of any child included. All children were followed up for at least six months. Mortality was 8% (1/12) in the band ligation group versus 0% (0/10) in the no active intervention group (risk ratio (RR) 2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The abstract did not report when the death occurred, but we assume it happened between the six-month follow-up and one year. No child (0%) in the band ligation group developed adverse events (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.25; very low certainty of evidence) but one child out of 10 (10%) in the no active intervention group developed idiopathic thrombocytopaenic purpura. One child out of 12 (8%) in the band ligation group underwent liver transplantation versus none in the no active intervention group (0%) (RR 2.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The trial reported no other serious adverse events or liver-related morbidity. Quality of life was not reported. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 8% (1/12) of the children in the band ligation group versus 30% (3/10) of the children in the no active intervention group (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.27; very low certainty of evidence). No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. Two children were lost to follow-up by one-year. Ten children in total completed the trial at two-year follow-up. There was no information on funding.  We found two observational studies on endoscopic variceal ligation when searching for randomised trials. One found no harm, and the other reported E nterobacter cloacae septicaemia in one child and mild, transient, upper oesophageal sphincter stenosis in another. We did not assess these studies for risk of bias. We did not find any ongoing randomised clinical trials of interest to our review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence, obtained from only one feasibility randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very scanty. It is very uncertain about whether prophylactic band ligation versus sham or no (active) intervention may affect mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. We have no data on quality of life. No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. The results presented in the trial need to be interpreted with caution. In addition, the highly limited data cover only part of our research question; namely, children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Data on children with portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Larger randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham treatment for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, quality of life, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Poor performance of noninvasive predictors of esophageal varices during primary prophylaxis surveillance in biliary atresia

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to analyze performance of noninvasive markers for significant esophageal varices in relation to outcomes of endoscopic surveillance and primary prophylaxis in biliary atresia (BA).

METHODS

This was a prospective follow-up study of a national cohort of BA patients born between 1989 and 2017, including 72 consecutive patients who underwent variceal surveillance endoscopies. The risk for developing significant varices (grade ≥ 2) and variceal bleeding was compared between successful (postoperative total bilirubin ≤34 μmol/L) and failed portoenterostomy (PE) patients. AUROC analyses and Wilcoxon signed ranks test were used to assess accuracy of noninvasive measures to predict the presence of significant varices after successful PE.

RESULTS

In total, 72 patients underwent 471 endoscopies during 427 follow-up years. Among 45 successful PE patients (63%), varices appeared later [at median age 1.6 (0.7-14) vs. 0.8 (0.4-1.9) years] and bled less often [7% vs. 41%, p < 0.001 for both] than after failed PE. Liver biochemistry, stiffness, and predictive scores showed poor accuracy for the presence of significant varices. After failed PE, lowered plasma albumin concentration predicted varices with an AUROC of 0.69 (95% CI 0.52-0.85, p = 0.030). After successful PE the varices prediction rule with AUROC 0.72 (95% CI 0.64-0.79) was the most accurate predictor. Individual predictors showed no meaningful changes between the two consecutive endoscopies leading to discovery of varices.

CONCLUSION

Accurate targeting of endoscopies based on noninvasive predictors remains difficult during primary variceal prophylaxis protocol in BA. The differing prognoses after successful and failed PE should be considered in variceal surveillance and future studies.

TYPE OF STUDY

Diagnostic/prognosis study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

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.

Pharmacological management of portal hypertension and its complications in children: lessons from adults and opportunities for the future

INTRODUCTION

Portal hypertension (PHT) and its complications in children are thought to be distinct from adult PHT in several areas, including the underlying bio-physiology of a child in which PHT develops, but also because of the pediatric-specific etiologies that drive disease progression. And yet pharmacologic approaches to PHT in children are mainly based on adult data, modified for pediatric practice. This reality has been driven by a lack of data specific to children.

AREAS COVERED

The authors discuss current therapeutic approaches to PHT in children, including management of acute gastrointestinal variceal bleed, pharmacotherapy in prophylaxis, and established and emerging therapies to combat systemic co-morbidities that result from PHT. The few areas where pediatric-specific data exist are highlighted and the many gaps in knowledge that remain unresolved are underscored.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite decades of experience, optimal management of pediatric PHT remains undefined. In large part, this can be directly linked to a lack of basic understanding related to the unique pathophysiology and natural history that defines PHT in children. As a result, meaningful research into the utility and effectiveness of pharmacotherapy in children with PHT remains in its infancy. Large, multi-center, prospective studies will be needed to begin to establish an infrastructure on which a pediatric-specific research agenda can be built.

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.

Esophageal Capsule Endoscopy in Children and Young Adults With Portal Hypertension

OBJECTIVES

Variceal hemorrhage (VH) is a serious complication of portal hypertension (PH). We evaluated the feasibility, safety, and clinical impact of esophageal capsule endoscopy (ECE) in pediatric and young adult patients with known or suspected PH.

METHODS

Children and young adults with PH at Boston Children's Hospital (2005-2017) were offered ECE for variceal screening or surveillance. Patient histories, ECE findings, and clinical outcomes were reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-nine ECE studies were performed in 98 patients (57.1% male patients) using 3 ECE devices for variceal screening (66.5%) or surveillance (33.5%). Three readers interpreted the studies (88.3%, 10.3%, and 1.4%, respectively). Median age was 16 years (IQR 13.7-18.5). One hundred and three ECE studies involved patients <18 years (69.1%). Fifteen patients (29 ECE studies) had a gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding (GIB) history, 5 in the preceding 12 months.Sixty-two ECE studies (44.9%) detected varices: 59 esophageal (40 small, 19 medium/large), 17 gastric, 6 duodenal. Other findings included: portal gastropathy (25, 18.1%), esophagitis (20, 14.5%), ulcers (5, 3.6%), erosions (31, 22.5%), heterotopic tissue (13, 9.4%), blood flecks (23, 16.7%), and mucosal scars (17, 12.3%). There were 2 transient capsule retentions and no major adverse events.ECE led to follow-up EGD in 11 (7 variceal banding) and medication initiation in 12 (4 proton-pump inhibitor, 7 nonselective beta blocker, 2 other) cases. Four patients had GIB within 12 months of ECE.

CONCLUSION

ECE is a feasible alternative to EGD for screening and surveillance of esophageal varices in children and young adults.

Band ligation versus beta-blockers 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. Following numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal haemorrhage, primary prophylaxis of variceal haemorrhage in adults has become the established standard of care. Hence, band ligation and beta-blockers have been proposed to be used as primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with any type of beta-blocker 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 (February 2019), CENTRAL (December 2018), PubMed (December 2018), Embase Ovid (December 2018), LILACS (Bireme; January 2019), and Science Citation Index Expanded (Web of Science; December 2018). 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 2009 to 2018. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov 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. We planned to also 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 summarise data from randomised clinical trials using standard Cochrane methodologies.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no randomised clinical trials assessing band ligation versus beta-blockers 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 beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. There is a need for well-designed, adequately powered randomised clinical trials to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Those randomised clinical trials should include patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.

Technical Feasibility and Clinical Effectiveness of Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt Creation in Pediatric and Adolescent Patients

PURPOSE

To examine the technical feasibility and clinical efficacy of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) creation in children and adolescents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review was performed of 59 patients (mean age 12.6 y [range, 1.5-20 y], mean weight 47.5 kg [range, 11.4-112.2 kg], mean Model for End-stage Liver Disease/Pediatric End-stage Liver Disease score 12.5 [range, 6-33]) who underwent 61 TIPS attempts at 3 tertiary children's hospitals from 2001 to 2017 for acute esophageal or gastroesophageal variceal bleeding, primary and secondary prevention of variceal bleeding, and refractory ascites. Pediatric liver disease etiologies included biliary atresia, cystic fibrosis, and ductal plate anomalies. Technical, hemodynamic, and clinical success and patency rates were reported at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months. Statistical analysis evaluated reasons for clinical failure. Kaplan-Meier analysis measured clinical success, patency, and transplant-free survival.

RESULTS

Technical success was 93.4% (57/61) in 59 consecutive patients. Most common TIPS indications were treating and preventing esophageal and gastroesophageal variceal bleeding (57/59; 96.6%). Hemodynamic success was 94% (47/50). Clinical success was 80.7% (45/56). Two-year clinical success for acute variceal bleeding and ascites was 94.1% and 100%, respectively. Overall patency at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months was 98.0%, 97.8%, 94.3%, and 91.3%. Two-year transplant-free survival was 88.8%. Overall and major complication rates were 21.2% (13/61) and 8.2% (5/61), with 3 mortalities. Gradient reduction < 12 mm Hg correlated with clinical success (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS creation in pediatric patients is technically feasible and clinically efficacious for treatment and prevention of esophageal and gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage. High 2-year clinical success, patency, and survival rates should encourage providers to consider portosystemic shunts as a bridge to liver transplantation.

Portal hypertension and its management in children

Portal hypertension (PHT), defined as raised intravascular pressure in the portal system, is a complication of chronic liver disease or liver vascular occlusion. Advances in our ability to diagnose and monitor the condition but also predict the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding have enabled us to optimise the management of children with PHT either at a surveillance or at a postbleeding stage. A consensus among paediatric centres in the classification of varices can be beneficial in streamlining future paediatric studies. New invasive (endoscopic and surgical procedures) and non-invasive (pharmacotherapy) techniques are currently used enabling clinicians to reduce mortality and morbidity in children with PHT.

King's Variceal Prediction Score: A Novel Noninvasive Marker of Portal Hypertension in Pediatric Chronic Liver Disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Variceal haemorrhage can be a life-threatening complication of chronic liver disease in children. There is limited evidence about the optimal prophylactic management and selection criteria of children who will benefit from upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

METHODS

Children presenting in our centre with suspected portal hypertension or gastrointestinal bleeding and undergoing their first oesophagogastroduodenoscopy between 2005 and 2012 were included. Clinical, biochemical, and radiological data were collected. A separate validation cohort from May 2013 to October 2014 was obtained.

RESULTS

Data on 124 treatment-naïve patients were collected; 50% had biliary atresia. Thirty-five (28%) children presented with gastrointestinal bleeding and overall 79 (64%) had clinically significant (grade II-III) varices. Clinical prediction rule, aspartate aminotransferase-platelet ratio index, and varices prediction rule had at optimal cut-off sensitivity and specificity of 76% and 59%, 60% and 55%, and 80% and 59%, respectively. Logistic regression yielded a new prediction rule of (3 × albumin ([g/dL]) -  (2 - equivalent adult spleen size [cm]). This King's variceal prediction score had a favourable areas under the curve of 0.772 (0.677-0.867) compared to clinical prediction rule 0.732 (0.632-0.832). At the optimal cut-off of 76 this yielded a sensitivity and specificity of 72% and 73% and a positive and negative predictive value of 82% and 60%, respectively. In the validation cohort areas under the curve was 0.818 (0.654-0.995) with sensitivity and specificity of 78% and 73%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our new prediction score may be a useful tool in the selection of children with clinically significant varices eligible for a screening endoscopy.

Portal hypertension in children: High-risk varices, primary prophylaxis and consequences of bleeding

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Primary prophylaxis of bleeding is debated for children with portal hypertension because of the limited number of studies on its safety and efficacy, the lack of a known endoscopic pattern carrying a high-risk of bleeding for all causes, and the assumption that the mortality of a first bleed is low. We report our experience with these issues.

METHODS

From 1989 to 2014, we managed 1300 children with portal hypertension. Endoscopic features were recorded; high-risk varices were defined as: grade 3 esophageal varices, grade 2 varices with red wale markings, or gastric varices. Two hundred forty-six children bled spontaneously and 182 underwent primary prophylaxis. The results of primary prophylaxis were reviewed as well as bleed-free survival, overall survival and life-threatening complications of bleeding.

RESULTS

High-risk varices were found in 96% of children who bled spontaneously and in 11% of children who did not bleed without primary prophylaxis (p<0.001), regardless of the cause of portal hypertension. Life-threatening complications of bleeding were recorded in 19% of children with cirrhosis and high-risk varices who bled spontaneously. Ten-year probabilities of bleed-free survival after primary prophylaxis in children with high-risk varices were 96% and 72% for non-cirrhotic causes and cirrhosis respectively. Ten-year probabilities of overall survival after primary prophylaxis were 100% and 93% in children with non-cirrhotic causes and cirrhosis respectively.

CONCLUSION

In children with portal hypertension, bleeding is linked to the high-risk endoscopic pattern reported here. Primary prophylaxis of bleeding based on this pattern is fairly effective and safe.

LAY SUMMARY

In children with liver disease, the risk of bleeding from varices in the esophagus is linked to their large size, the presence of congestion on their surface and their expansion into the stomach but not to the child's age nor to the cause of portal hypertension. Prevention of the first bleed in children with high-risk varices can be achieved by surgery or endoscopic treatment, and decreases mortality and morbidity.

Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in children and the role of MesoRex Bypass: Summary of the Baveno VI Pediatric Satellite Symposium

Approaches to the management of portal hypertension and variceal hemorrhage in pediatrics remain controversial, in large part because they are not well informed by rigorous clinical studies. Fundamental biological and clinical differences preclude automatic application of approaches used for adults to children. On April 11-12, 2015, experts in the field convened at the first Baveno Pediatric Satellite Meeting to discuss and explore current available evidence regarding indications for MesoRex bypass (MRB) in extrahepatic portal vein obstruction and the role of primary prophylaxis of variceal hemorrhage in children. Consensus was reached regarding MRB. The vast majority of children with extrahepatic portal vein obstruction will experience complications that can be prevented by successful MRB surgery. Therefore, children with extrahepatic portal vein obstruction should be offered MRB for primary and secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding and other complications, if appropriate surgical expertise is available, if preoperative and intraoperative evaluation demonstrates favorable anatomy, and if appropriate multidisciplinary care is available for postoperative evaluation and management of shunt thrombosis or stenosis. In contrast, consensus was not achieved regarding primary prophylaxis of varices. Although variceal hemorrhage is a concerning complication of portal hypertension in children, the first bleed appears to be only rarely fatal and the associated morbidity has not been well characterized.

CONCLUSION

There are few pediatric data to indicate the efficacy and safety of pharmacologic or endoscopic therapies as primary prophylaxis or that prevention of a sentinel variceal bleed will ultimately improve survival; therefore, no recommendation for primary prophylaxis with endoscopic variceal ligation, sclerotherapy, or nonspecific beta-blockade in children was proposed.

Interobserver Agreement on Endoscopic Classification of Oesophageal Varices in Children

OBJECTIVES

Data regarding agreement on endoscopic features of oesophageal varices in children with portal hypertension (PH) are scant. The aim of this study was to evaluate endoscopic visualisation and classification of oesophageal varices in children by several European clinicians, to build a rational basis for future multicentre trials.

METHODS

Endoscopic pictures of the distal oesophagus of 100 children with a clinical diagnosis of PH were distributed to 10 endoscopists. Observers were requested to classify variceal size according to a 3-degree scale (small, medium, and large, class A), a 2-degree scale (small and large, class B), and to recognise red wales (presence or absence, class Red). Overall agreement was considered fair if Fleiss and Cohen κ test was ≥0.30, good if ≥0.40, excellent if ≥0.60, and perfect if ≥0.80.

RESULTS

Agreement between observers was fair with class A (κ = 0.34) and class B (κ = 0.38), and good with class Red (κ = 0.49). The agreement was good on presence versus absence of varices (class A = 0.53, class B = 0.48). The agreement among the observers was good in class A when endoscopic features of severe PH (medium and large sizes, red marks) were grouped and compared with mild features (absent and small varices) (κ = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Experts working in different centres show a fairly good agreement on endoscopic features of PH in children, although a better training of paediatric endoscopists may improve the agreement in grading severity of varices in this setting.

Successful use of long-acting octreotide for intractable chronic gastrointestinal bleeding in children

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Octreotide reduces splanchnic blood flow and is effective in controlling gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) caused by portal hypertension. Monthly long-acting octreotide (OCT-LAR) with an efficacy and safety profile similar to subcutaneous daily administration presents an attractive option for long-term therapy. We report our experience with OCT-LAR for severe/recurrent GIB in children with portal hypertension secondary to chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis who were unresponsive to standard interventions.

METHODS

A total of 9 patients, 7 boys, who received OCT-LAR between 2000 and 2009 were studied retrospectively (median age at first bleeding 21 months, range 1 month-14.5 years). The dose (2.5-20 mg intramuscularly monthly) was extrapolated from that used in adult acromegaly and neuroendocrine tumours (10-60 mg/mo). Response to treatment was assessed by comparing the number of bleeding events, hospital admissions for acute bleeding, and number of blood units required during the year before and year after starting OCT-LAR.

RESULTS

OCT-LAR led to a reduction in the number of bleeding episodes in all of the children and to cessation of bleeding in 7. Two children listed for transplantation because of severe GIB were removed from the list. No serious adverse effects immediately attributable to OCT-LAR were observed. One child developed growth hormone deficiency and hypothyroidism during a prolonged period of treatment with subcutaneous octreotide before commencing OCT-LAR.

CONCLUSIONS

OCT-LAR can control severe intractable recurrent GIB in children with portal hypertension. Prospective randomised controlled trials and pharmacokinetic studies are indicated to establish the optimum dose and length of treatment of OCT-LAR and confirm its efficacy and long-term safety in children.

Diversity of endoscopy center operations and practice variation across California's safety-net hospital system: a statewide survey

Background

Little is known about endoscopic services provided or operational practice variation within California public hospital endoscopy centers.

Methods

A survey was distributed to all 18 California public hospitals with endoscopy centers to assess operational practices.

Results

Eight of 18 hospitals responded to the survey. Six of the eight responding hospitals used a closed access system for patient referrals. Mean wait time for an endoscopic procedure was 42.4 ± 37.7 days (N = 8) with a mean procedure no-show/cancellation rate of 14.5 ± 8.0% (N = 7). All responding public hospitals performed colonoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, PEG tube placement, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with two hospitals performing endoscopic ultrasound. There was significant practice variation in the documentation of endoscopic quality and performance measurements among the responding hospitals. Multiple methods were used to communicate pathology results to patients: GI clinic visit (6/8), primary physician (4/8), telephone (2/8) or letter (1/8).

Conclusion

Our study highlights the diversity and practice variations of endoscopy center operations at California public hospitals and serves as a catalyst for future collaborations among safety-net hospitals.

Etiology and management of hemorrhagic complications of portal hypertension in children

PORTAL HYPERTENSION IN CHILDREN REPRESENTS A PARTICULAR DIAGNOSTIC AND MANAGEMENT CHALLENGE FOR SEVERAL REASONS: (1) treatment outcomes should be evaluated in relationship with a long-life expectancy, (2) pediatric patients with portal hypertension constitute an heterogeneous population, both in terms of individual characteristics and diversity of liver diseases; making comparison between treatment outcomes very difficult, (3) application of techniques and procedures developed in adult patients (v.gr. TIPS) face size limitations in small children, and (4) absence of data from well-controlled trials in children forces pediatric specialists to adapt results obtained from adult cohorts suffering from diseases such as HCV and alcoholic cirrhosis. Despite those limitations, substantial progress in the treatment of children with portal hypertension has been achieved in recent years, with better outcomes and survival. Two main factors influence our therapeutic decision: age of the patient and etiology of the liver disease. Therefore, diagnosis and treatment of complications of portal hypertension in children need to be described taking such factors into consideration. This paper summarizes current knowledge and expert opinion.

A clinical prediction rule and platelet count predict esophageal varices in children

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The validation of noninvasive tests to diagnose esophageal varices is a priority in children because repeated endoscopic evaluations are too invasive. We measured the ability of a previously developed noninvasive clinical prediction rule (CPR) to predict the presence of esophageal varices in children.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 108 children, younger than age 18, who received endoscopies at 8 centers, to assess portal hypertension from chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Blood test and abdominal ultrasound scan results were obtained within 4 months of endoscopy. Grading of varices identified by endoscopy was confirmed by independent blinded review. Spleen size, based on data from the ultrasound scan, was expressed as a standard deviation score relative to normal values for age.

RESULTS

Of the children studied, 74 had esophageal varices (69%), including 35 with large varices (32%). The best noninvasive predictors of esophageal varices of any size were as follows: platelet:spleen size z-score ratio (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-0.93), CPR (AUROC, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.91), and platelet count (AUROC, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.69-0.90). The positive predictive values for the CPR and platelet count were 0.87 and 0.86, the negative predictive values were 0.64 and 0.63, the positive likelihood ratios were 3.06 and 2.76, and the negative likelihood ratios were 0.64 and 0.63, respectively. Based on positive and negative predictive values, the most accurate noninvasive tests were the CPR and platelet counts.

CONCLUSIONS

Noninvasive tests such as CPR and platelet count can assist in triaging children for endoscopy to identify esophageal varices.