Comparison of the two time schedules for endoscopic sclerotherapy: a prospective randomised controlled study

Reasons and risk factors for irregular-interval endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy in patients with esophageal variceal bleeding

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) is usually carried out at weekly intervals in patients with esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB). However, some patients receive sclerotherapy at irregular intervals. In this study we aimed to elucidate the reasons and risk factors for irregular-interval sclerotherapy in patients with EVB, and to evaluate the safety and efficacy of interrupted irregular intervals in these patients.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who were admitted to the Chinese PLA General Hospital from December 2013 to June 2015 for EVS were retrospectively analyzed. EVS sessions were scheduled to be repeated at regular weekly intervals. However, some of these patients received at least one treatment session at irregular intervals (mainly <7 days). This irregular-interval group was further divided into those whose treatment was rescheduled for emergency and elective reasons.

RESULTS

Irregular treatment intervals were mainly caused by early rebleeding, initial emergency treatment, and holidays. However, there were no differences in the rates of complication and variceal eradication between patients treated at weekly and irregular intervals. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified ascites (P = 0.0009), variceal erosion (P = 0.0003), and maximum injected volume of sclerosing agent per session (P = 0.0008) to be associated with emergency irregular-interval treatment. Only age differed between the elective irregular-treatment and weekly treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Early rebleeding, initial emergency treatment, and treatment over holidays may necessitate irregular sclerotherapy intervals in patients with EVB. Moreover, ascites, variceal erosion, and maximum injected volume of sclerosing agent per session are risk factors for emergency sclerotherapy, whereas elective adjustments to treatment schedules as a result of holidays do not affect the outcomes of patients undergoing EVS for EVB.

Sucralfate and Lidocain: Antacid 50:50 solution in Post Esophageal Variceal Band Ligation Pain

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of pain relief of Sucralfate and lidocain antacid 50:50 solution in post esophageal variceal band ligation pain.

METHODS

All patients who had under gone Esophageal Variceal Band Ligation (EVBL) were included in the study. Patients un-willing to be included in the study or those who didn't have post EVBL pain were excluded. Patients with post EVBL pains were divided into two groups: one group was given sucralfate and other was given lidocaine: antacid 50:50 solution. Both were inquired about the duration of the pain relief after the medication. The results were analyzed on SPSS 23. Independent samples T-test was performed to find out whether the difference in duration of pain relief was significantly different in the two groups.

RESULTS

Out of 110 patients who have EVBL, 66(60.00%) had pain and 44(40.00%) were pain free. In the pain group 46 (69.7%) were given sucralfate and 20 (30.3%) were given lidocain: antacid 50:50 solution. Mean duration of pain relief in two groups was 2.78 (SD ± 2.096) and 2.5 days (SD ±. 0.76) respectively. Independent samples T-test results revealed that there was no statistically significant difference in the duration of pain relief between these two groups with p value 0.426.

CONCLUSION

Both Sucralfate and Lidocain: antacid 50:50 solutions are effective in relieving the post EVBL pain. However, no statistically significant difference in duration of pain relief was detected in separate groups of patients treated with either treatment.

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

The appropriate interval between ligation sessions for treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding is uncertain. The optimal interval would provide variceal eradication as rapidly as possible to lessen early rebleeding while minimizing ligation-induced adverse events. We randomly assigned patients hospitalized with acute esophageal variceal bleeding who had successful ligation at presentation to repeat ligation at 1-week or 2-week intervals. Beta-blocker therapy was also prescribed. Ligation was performed at the assigned interval until varices were eradicated and then at 3 and 9 months after eradication. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with variceal eradication at 4 weeks. Four-week variceal eradication occurred more often in the 1-week than in the 2-week group: 37/45 (82%) versus 23/45 (51%); difference = 31%, 95% confidence interval 12%-48%. Eradication occurred more rapidly in the 1-week group (18.1 versus 30.8 days, difference = -12.7 days, 95% confidence interval -20.0 to -5.4 days). The mean number of endoscopies to achieve eradication or to the last endoscopy in those not achieving eradication was comparable in the 1-week and 2-week groups (2.3 versus 2.1), with the mean number of postponed ligation sessions 0.3 versus 0.1 (difference = 0.2, 95% confidence interval -0.02 to 0.4). Rebleeding at 4 weeks (4% versus 4%) and 8 weeks (11% versus 9%), dysphagia/odynophagia/chest pain (9% versus 2%), strictures (0% versus 0%), and mortality (7% versus 7%) were similar with 1-week and 2-week intervals.

CONCLUSION

One-week ligation intervals led to more rapid eradication than 2-week intervals without an increase in complications or number of endoscopies and without a reduction in rebleeding or other clinical outcomes; the decision regarding ligation intervals may be individualized based on patient and physician preferences and local logistics and resources. (Hepatology 2016;64:549-555).

Randomized controlled trial of monthly versus biweekly endoscopic variceal ligation for the prevention of esophageal variceal rebleeding

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is effective in preventing esophageal variceal rebleeding. However, the optimal EVL interval remains unclear.

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of EVL using two intersession intervals. methods: From January 2009 to October 2012, 214 patients with acute esophageal variceal bleeding were screened. Emergency ligation was performed for patients with acute variceal bleeding. After achieving hemodynamic stability, eligible patients (n = 70) were randomized to either the monthly group or the biweekly group.

RESULTS

Median time from randomization to variceal obliteration was 2.7 months in the monthly group and 1.7 months in the biweekly group, at a mean of 2.3 ± 2.0 and 3.0 ± 1.8 sessions, respectively. After a median follow up of 23 months, six patients (17%) in the monthly group and nine patients (26%) in the biweekly group developed upper gastrointestinal rebleeding (P = 0.382). Esophageal variceal rebleeding occurred in six patients (17%) in the monthly group and in seven patients (20%) in the biweekly group (P = 0.759). No rebleeding from EVL ulcers occurred in the monthly group and was 5.7% (n = 2) for the biweekly group. Both treatment groups had similar rates of esophageal variceal recurrence and mortality. Notably, the incidence of post-EVL ulcers in the monthly group was lower than that in the biweekly group (11% vs 57%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving EVL monthly had similar rebleeding rate, variceal recurrence, and mortality to those receiving EVL biweekly for secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding; however, the monthly interval was associated with fewer post-EVL ulcers found at follow-up endoscopies.

Avoiding pitfalls: what an endoscopist should know in liver transplantation--part 1

Cirrhosis is associated with global homodynamic changes, but the majority of the complications are usually manifested through the gastrointestinal tract. Therefore, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy has become an important tool in the multidisciplinary approach in the management of these patients. With the ever growing number of cirrhotic patients requiring pre-transplant endoscopic management, it is imperative that the community endoscopists are well aware of the pathologies that can be potentially noted on Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Their timely management is also considered to have the utmost importance in being able to stabilize the patient until their transfer to a Liver Transplant Center. The aim of this manuscript is to give a comprehensive update and review of various endoscopic findings that a non-transplant endoscopist will encounter in the pre-transplant setting.

Acute variceal hemorrhage

Variceal bleeding is a frequent and life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. The first episode of variceal bleeding is associated not only with a high mortality, but also with a high recurrence rate in those who survive. Therefore, management should focus on different therapeutic strategies aiming to prevent the first episode of variceal bleeding (primary prophylaxis), to control hemorrhage during the acute bleeding episode (emergency treatment), and to prevent rebleeding (secondary prophylaxis). These strategies involve pharmacological, endoscopic, surgical, and interventional radiological modalities. This article reviews management of acute variceal bleeding.

Natural history of a randomized trial comparing distal spleno-renal shunt with endoscopic sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding: A lesson from the past

AIM: To compare endoscopic sclerotherapy (ES) with distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) in the prevention of recurrent variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients during a long-term follow-up period.

METHODS: In 1984 we started a prospective, controlled study of patients with liver cirrhosis. Long-term follow-up presents a natural history of liver cirrhosis complicated by advanced portal hypertension. In this study the effects of 2 types of treatment, DSRS or ES, were evaluated. The study population included 80 patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension referred to our department from October 1984 to March 1991. These patients were drawn from a pool of 282 patients who underwent either elective surgery or ES during the same period of time. Patients were assigned to one of the 2 groups according to a random number table: 40 to DSRS and 40 to ES using polidocanol.

RESULTS: During the postoperative period, no DSRS patient died, while one ES patient died of uncontrolled hemorrhage. One DSRS patient had mild recurrent variceal hemorrhage despite an angiographically patent DSRS and another patient suffered duodenal ulcer rebleeding. Eight ES patients suffered at least one episode of gastrointestinal bleeding: 4 from varices and 4 from esophageal ulcerations. Eight ES patients developed transitory dysphagia. Long-term follow-up was completed in all patients except for 5 cases (2 DSRS and 3 ES patients). Five-year survival rates for shunt (73%) and ES (56%) groups were statistically different: in this follow-up period and in subsequent follow-ups this difference decreased and ceased to be of statistical relevance. The primary cause of death became hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Four DSRS patients rebled due to duodenal ulcer, while eleven ES patients had recurrent bleeding from esophago-gastric sources (seven from varices, three from hypertensive gastropathy, one from esophageal ulcerations) and two from unknown sources. Nine DSRS and 2 ES patients developed a chronic encephalopathy; 13 DSRS and 5 ES patients suffered at least one episode of acute encephalopathy. Five ES patients had esophageal stenoses, which were successfully dilated.

CONCLUSION: In a subgroup of patients with good liver function, DSRS with a correct portal-azygos disconnection more effectively prevents variceal rebleeding than ES. However, this positive effect did not influence the long-term survival because other factors (e.g. HCC) were more important in deciding the fate of the cirrhotic patients with portal hypertension.

Complications of upper GI endoscopy

This is one of a series of statements discussing the utilization of gastrointestinal endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy prepared this text. In preparing this guideline, a MEDLINE literature search was performed, and additional references were obtained from the bibliographies of the identified articles and from recommendations of expert consultants. When little or no data exist from well-designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results from large series and reports from recognized experts. Guidelines for appropriate utilization of endoscopy are based on a critical review of the available data and expert consensus. Further controlled clinical studies are needed to clarify aspects of this statement, and revision may be necessary as new data appear. Clinical consideration may justify a course of action at variance to these recommendations.

Management of portal hypertension after variceal hemorrhage

Each variceal bleed is associated with 20% to 30% risk of dying. Management of portal hypertension after a bleed consists of (1) control of bleeding and (2) prevention of rebleeding. Effective control of bleeding can be achieved either pharmacologically by administering somatostatin or octreotide or endoscopically via sclerotherapy or variceal band ligation. In practice, both pharmacologic and endoscopic therapy are used concomitantly. Rebleeding can be prevented by endoscopic obliteration of varices. In this setting, variceal ligation is the preferred endoscopic modality. B-blockade is as effective as endoscopic therapy and, in combination, the two modalities may be additive.

Esophageal motility changes after endoscopic intravariceal sclerotherapy with absolute alcohol

Endoscopic sclerotherapy (EST) leads to structural and motility changes in the esophagus; the former are thought to be commoner after EST with absolute alcohol (AA), which is a commonly used sclerosant in India as it is cheap and effective. There are no previous studies on changes in esophageal motility after EST with AA. Accordingly, we studied patients with portal hypertension before (n = 24) and after (n = 22) variceal obliteration by EST with AA using a water perfusion esophageal manometry system. Contraction amplitude in the distal esophagus was reduced in the post-EST group compared with the pre-EST group (63.4 +/- 24.9 vs. 18.2 +/- 14.3 mmHg, p < 0.01). Duration of esophageal contraction in both the proximal and distal esophagus became prolonged in the post-EST compared with the pre-EST group (3.3 +/- 0.8 vs. 5.4 +/- 2.6 and 4.3 +/- 1.1 vs. 6.6 +/- 2.3 s, p < 0.001 for both). Lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure was reduced in the post-EST compared with the pre-EST group, although the difference was not significant statistically. Abnormal contraction waveforms were more frequent in the post-EST group. One patient in the post-EST group had persistent dysphagia in the absence of endoscopically documented stricture at the time of manometric study. This study shows frequent occurrence of esophageal dysmotility after EST with AA; however, esophageal dysmotility after EST was infrequently associated with motor dysphagia.

Esophageal varices. I. Clinical presentation, medical therapy, and endoscopic therapy

The last half century has witnessed great advances in the understanding of the pathogenesis and natural history of portal hypertension in cirrhotics. Several pharmacologic and endoscopic techniques have been developed for the treatment of portal hypertension. The use of these agents in a given patient must be based on an understanding of the stage in the natural history of the disease and the relative efficacy and safety of the available treatment options.

Drug-induced oesophageal disorders: pathogenesis, incidence, prevention and management

Drug-induced injury of the oesophagus is a common cause of oesophageal complaints. 'Pill-induced' oesophagitis is associated with the ingestion of certain drugs and accounts for many cases of erosive oesophagitis. To date, more than 70 drugs have been reported to induce oesophageal disorders. Antibacterials such as doxycycline, tetracycline and clindamycin are the offending agents in more than 50% of cases. Other commonly prescribed drugs that cause oesophageal injury include aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid), potassium chloride, ferrous sulfate, quinidine, alprenolol and various steroidal and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents. However, many physicians and even more patients are not aware of this problem. Capsules or tablets are commonly delayed in their passage through the oesophagus. Highly caustic coatings, direct medication injury and poor oesophageal clearance of pills can lead to acute inflammation. Oesophageal damage occurs when the caustic contents of a drug remain in the oesophagus long enough to produce mucosal lesions. Taking medications at bedtime or without fluids is a common cause of oesophagitis. The possibility of drug-related damage should be suspected in all cases of oesophagitis, chest pain and dysphagia. History and gastrointestinal endoscopy will confirm the diagnosis. Treatment is supportive, although acid reduction is used frequently as an adjunct. This review reflects the current state of knowledge in this field.

A multicentre randomised trial comparing octreotide and injection sclerotherapy in the management and outcome of acute variceal haemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Few studies have compared vasoactive drugs with endoscopic sclerotherapy in the control of acute variceal haemorrhage. Octreotide is widely used for this purpose, but its value remains undetermined.

AIMS

To compare octreotide with endoscopic sclerotherapy for acute variceal haemorrhage.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with acute variceal haemorrhage.

METHODS

Patients were randomised at endoscopy to receive either a 48 hour intravenous infusion of 50 pg/h octreotide (n = 73), or emergency sclerotherapy (n = 77).

RESULTS

Overall control of bleeding and mortality was not significantly different between octreotide (85%, 62 patients) and sclerotherapy (82%, 63 patients) over the 48 hour trial period (relative risk of rebleeding 0.83; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.82), irrespective of Child's grading or active bleeding at endoscopy. One major complication was observed in the sclerotherapy group (aspiration) and two in the octreotide group (pulmonary oedema, severe paralytic ileus). During 60 days of follow up there was an overall trend towards an increased mortality in the octreotide group which was not statistically significant (relative risk of dying at 60 days 1.91, 95% CI 0.97 to 3.78, p = 0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study indicate that intravenous octreotide is as effective as injection sclerotherapy in the control of acute variceal bleeding, but further controlled trials are necessary to evaluate the safety of this treatment.

Frequency and factors influencing portal hypertensive gastropathy and duodenopathy in cirrhotic portal hypertension

Portal hypertensive gastropathy and duodenopathy are distinct clinical and endoscopic entities. Data on factors influencing the development of these lesions are still emerging. Data on portal hypertensive duodenopathy are scarce. We prospectively studied 230 patients with liver cirrhosis and oesophageal varices attending the liver clinic of the Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences. One hundred and forty-two patients had no history of upper gastrointestinal bleeding, while the remainder had bled in the past. Endoscopic appearances were recorded before starting patients on a sclerotherapy programme. Forty-four patients were re-evaluated after variceal eradication. The frequency of portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) and duodenopathy (PHD) was 61 and 14%, respectively. Mild PHG was present in 85% and was severe in the rest. Portal hypertensive duodenopathy was mild in 50%, while in the other half it was severe. There was no relationship of PHG and PHD to: (i) a history of upper gastrointestinal bleed; (ii) size of oesophageal varices; (iii) aetiology of liver cirrhosis; or (iv) liver function status as assessed by Child Pugh's scores (P = NS for all). The prevalence of PHG was higher in those patients with oesophagogastric varices (74 of 107; 69%) compared with patients with oesophageal varices alone (68 of 123; 55%; P < 0.05). However, no such increase in frequency of PHD was noted in patients with oesophagogastric varices. Sclerotherapy increased the frequency of PHG. Twenty-four patients had PHG before starting sclerotherapy, while it was noted in 33 patients 1-3 months after variceal eradication (P < 0.05). In contrast, there was no increase in the prevalence of portal hypertensive duodenopathy after sclerotherapy (P = NS). There was no correlation between endoscopic and histological changes of PHG and PHD. In conclusion, PHG is quite frequent in patients with cirrhosis and its frequency increases with the presence of oesophagogastric varices and after sclerotherapy. However, the frequency of PHD is low and is not affected by the factors studied.

Distal spleno-renal shunt versus endoscopic sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. A meta-analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials

Meta-analysis was used to evaluate 4 clinical trials comparing distal spleno-renal shunt (DSRS) with endoscopic sclerotherapy (EVS) in the prevention of variceal rebleeding: the interval between bleeding and therapy ranges from < 14 days to > 100 days. A questionnaire was sent to each author of the published trials concerning methods, definitions and results of the trials in order to obtain more detailed and up-to-date information. The selected end-points for the meta-analysis were: rebleeding, mortality and chronic encephalopathy. Analysis of the results in the questionnaires was made using the method proposed by Collins. The pooled relative risk (i.e. the combined Odds ratio of each trial as an estimate of overall efficacy) of rebleeding was statistically reduced by DSRS (0.16; 95% confidence interval 0.10-0.27). Despite this, the overall risk of death following DSRS was only marginally decreased (0.78; 95% confidence interval 0.47-1.29); the lack of homogeneity in the results does not permit any significant conclusions on this end-point. However, in non-alcoholic patients, the decrease in risk of death was greater, and this without heterogeneity, following DSRS than EVS (0.59; 95% confidence interval 0.23-1.50). The overall risk of chronic encephalopathy was slightly increased after DSRS (1.86; 95% confidence interval 0.90-3.86). In conclusion, DSRS significantly reduced the risk of rebleeding compared to EVS without increasing the risk of chronic hepatic encephalopathy. However, DSRS did not significantly affect the overall death risk. Only in non-alcoholic disease did it seem to show an advantage over EVS.

Mechanism of action of injection therapy for bleeding peptic ulcer

The effects of intramucosal injection of 1:100,000 adrenaline, 5 per cent ethanolamine and normal saline were determined in experimentally created, acutely bleeding gastric mucosal wounds in rabbits. The mean(s.d.) bleeding rate was decreased from 2.3(0.4) to 0.2(0.02) ml/min by adrenaline (P < 0.01), but increased by 1 ml 5 per cent ethanolamine to 4.0(0.6) ml/min (P < 0.05). Normal saline had no haemostatic effect, suggesting that local tamponade is not important. In separate experiments endoscopic injections of 5 per cent ethanolamine, 1:100,000 adrenaline and normal saline were made in the gastric antrum of rabbits. After 48 h the degree of inflammation was greatest with ethanolamine but, despite tissue necrosis and venous thrombosis, neither endarteritis nor arterial thrombosis occurred. Injections of 5 per cent ethanolamine and 80 per cent ethanol placed next to the ear arteries of rabbits caused local ulceration and necrosis, but endarteritis and arterial thrombosis were again absent.

Esophageal strictures following endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy. Antecedents, clinical profile, and management

We have evaluated 169 patients with portal hypertension receiving endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy in order to assess the predisposing factors, clinical profile, and treatment response of sclerotherapy-induced esophageal strictures. Of the 129 patients included in the final analysis, 20 (15.5%) developed persistent esophageal stricture. No significant difference was found with respect to age, nature of sclerosant (absolute alcohol, ethanolamine oleate, or sodium tetradecyl sulfate), etiology of portal hypertension, Child's class, initial variceal score, or intensity of sclerotherapy schedule between the patients who developed strictures and those who did not. However, female sex (P less than 0.01) and persistent esophageal ulceration (P less than 0.05) did predispose to stricture formation. Sclerotherapy-induced strictures presented with a variable grade of dysphagia, were always solitary, and were localized to the lower end of esophagus. Most of these could be dilated rapidly using Eder-Puestow metal olives (3.15 +/- 0.80 dilatation sessions per patient). Stricture formation did interrupt an effective sclerotherapy program but only temporarily, and successful variceal obliteration could be obtained after stricture dilatation.

Factors influencing development of portal hypertensive gastropathy in patients with portal hypertension

Portal hypertensive gastropathy (PGP) is an important cause of bleeding in portal hypertension patients. Although hyperdynamic congestion seems to be the underlying mechanism, the factors that influence the development of PGP are not understood. To investigate these, 107 patients [cirrhosis, 35; noncirrhotic portal fibrosis (NCPF), 24; extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO), 46; Budd-Chiari syndrome, 2] were prospectively studied. Eighty-three patients had Child's A, 17 had Child's B, and 7 had Child's C liver disease. Before sclerotherapy, although intravariceal pressure was similar, 4 cirrhosis patients (3.7%) but no NCPF or EHPVO patients had PGP. After sclerotherapy, 21 additional patients (20.3%) developed PGP during a follow-up of 23.2 +/- 3.4 months (range, 1-52). The incidence of PGP was higher in cirrhotic patients (37.1%) than in NCPF (16.7%; P less than 0.05) or EHPVO (8.7%; P less than 0.01) patients. The probability of developing PGP among all patients at the end of 52 months of follow-up was 30%, more in cirrhosis than in EHPVO (55% vs. 15%; P less than 0.005). Only 2 patients bled from PGP during follow-up. Development of PGP correlated with severity of liver disease, being more common in Child's C than Child's A patients (87% vs. 13%; P less than 0.001). PGP was seen more often in patients with gastroesophageal varices than in patients with esophageal varices alone (42% vs. 11%; P less than 0.01). In conclusion, the results show that development of PGP is significantly influenced by sclerotherapy, severity of liver disease, etiology of portal hypertension, coexisting gastric varices and is not directly correlated with intravariceal pressure.

Long term management of oesophageal varices

Effective control of variceal rebleeding (secondary prophylaxis) or prevention of the initial bleeding (primary prophylaxis) are the main objectives of the treatment of portal hypertension. Endoscopic sclerotherapy is the treatment of choice for secondary prophylaxis, since it significantly decreases rebleeding and, to some extent, mortality. A combination of propranolol and sclerotherapy may be of benefit by decreasing postsclerotherapy rebleeding. Endoscopic variceal band ligation and transjugular intrahepatic shunt are emerging as useful alternative techniques. Devascularisation and preferably selective shunts should be reserved for use as salvage of sclerotherapy failures. Liver transplantation, if feasible, could become the ultimate therapy by controlling variceal bleeding and improving hepatic function. Pharmacotherapy, while not very successful for secondary prophylaxis, has shown promise for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding. Nonselective beta-blockers significantly decrease the rebleeding rates but are associated with only marginal survival benefits. beta-Blockers alone cannot decrease the hepatic venous pressure gradient adequately (to less than 12mm Hg). Combination with nitrates and other drugs may prove beneficial and requires clinical evaluation. Endoscopic sclerotherapy and surgery have little role in primary prevention of variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis but need evaluation in noncirrhotic patients.

The management of variceal bleeding

Variceal bleeding has a high mortality, as the majority of patients have cirrhosis, with hepatic coma, renal failure, ascites and clotting deficiencies as complicating factors. Bleeding varices must therefore be treated as an emergency. Resuscitation, endoscopic diagnosis and haemostasis are the cornerstones of treatment. Once bleeding varices have been identified, attempts to stop the bleeding must be made at once as this will lessen the chances of hepatic failure developing. Endoscopic sclerotherapy at the time of diagnosis is the best available treatment at present, although profusely bleeding varices can be difficult to see and inject. In these circumstances the passage of a Sengstaken tube should stop the bleeding, allowing later sclerotherapy to be successful. If rebleeding recurs and cannot be controlled, oesophageal transection with a stapling gun may be life-saving, although the varices may later recur and long-term endoscopic follow-up will be necessary. Portacaval shunting and the distal splenorenal shunt involve arduous surgery and are followed by a significant incidence of hepatic encephalopathy; they should be reserved for those few cases when simpler measures have failed, although shunts do lead to permanent decompression of the portal system. The acute variceal bleed may also be dealt with pharmacologically. Vasopressin, used in combination with nitroglycerin to lessen the harmful side-effects, is cheaper and as effective as terlipressin or somatostatin and its synthetic analogue octreotide. Several courses of injection sclerotherapy will be required to eliminate oesophageal varices. Thereafter, long-term follow-up will be necessary to deal with any recurrence. The place of non-selective beta-blockers is still contentious, but they do reduce portal pressure and may lessen the chance of rebleeding. There is also a growing role for hepatic transplantation, which not only eliminates the varices but also restores liver function to normal and greatly reduces the risk of subsequent hepatoma development.

Portacaval shunt versus endoscopic sclerotherapy in the elective treatment of variceal hemorrhage

Eighty-two consecutive Child-Campbell class A and B cirrhotic patients were included in a prospective controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of portacaval anastomosis vs. endoscopic sclerotherapy as elective treatment of variceal hemorrhage. Forty-one patients were randomized to portacaval anastomosis and 41 to sclerotherapy. After excluding dropouts, 34 patients were treated with portacaval anastomosis and 35 with sclerotherapy. The incidence of variceal rebleeding during follow-up (mean +/- SD, 20.6 +/- 14.2 months) was significantly higher in the sclerotherapy than in the portacaval groups, either considering the overall treated group or only patients completing sclerotherapy (40% and 25% vs. 2.9%; P = 0.0002 and P = 0.01, respectively). The 2-year probability of suffering from at least one episode of hepatic encephalopathy was significantly higher in patients submitted to portacaval anastomosis than in those treated with endoscopic sclerotherapy (40% vs. 12%; P = 0.04). However, disabling encephalopathy only appeared in 3 of 34 patients who underwent surgery (8.8%). Early and long-term mortality did not differ between the therapeutic groups; 2-year survival rates were 83% for portacaval anastomosis and 79% for sclerotherapy. It is concluded that portacaval anastomosis is more effective than endoscopic sclerotherapy in preventing variceal rebleeding in spite of the greater incidence of hepatic encephalopathy. The role of portacaval anastomosis in the elective treatment of variceal rebleeding should be reassessed.

Variceal injection sclerotherapy

With the development and widespread use of flexible endoscopes, injection sclerotherapy of oesophageal varices has advanced beyond the early stages. Although slightly different techniques and different sclerosants are used, the results are not strikingly different. The cumulative rate of adverse effects is in the range of 20 to 40%, with a procedure-related mortality of around 1 to 2%. Sclerotherapy is the best available treatment for haemostasis of acute oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, as a long-term therapy it is less effective in the prevention of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding events, since obliteration of all varices often takes several months. Furthermore, extra-oesophageal bleeding is not amenable to sclerotherapy. Thus, if repeated injections fail to prevent recurrent bleeding, other options such as shunt surgery, transection, chronic medical portal decompression with beta-blockers or even liver transplantation should be considered according to the needs of the individual patient. Prophylaxis of first variceal haemorrhage was beneficial in selected patients with a high bleeding risk. It cannot, however, be generally recommended at present.

Has sclerotherapy altered the management of patients with variceal bleeding?

Sclerotherapy is currently the primary treatment of choice for the majority of patients who present with esophageal variceal bleeding. Although it has altered the management of these patients, unanswered questions and controversies remain. Patients with acute variceal bleeding should preferably be treated in a specialized center. The primary treatment should be immediate sclerotherapy, when possible. Portosystemic shunts and esophageal transection should be reserved for the 5% to 10% of patients in whom sclerotherapy fails to control acute bleeding. There are several treatment options for long-term management after a variceal bleeding episode. Sclerotherapy is one option and has become the primary treatment in most major centers. All patients with end-stage liver disease must be considered for liver transplantation, and sclerotherapy should be the primary method of treatment in those who are selected. Pharmacologic therapy remains controversial. I propose that portosystemic shunts and devascularization and transection operations be reserved for those few patients in whom sclerotherapy fails to eradicate the varices and to prevent recurrent variceal bleeding. Patients in whom sclerotherapy is unsuccessful should be identified and treated early.

Endoscopic sclerotherapy

Various sclerotherapy techniques have proved successful in the management of acute variceal bleeding and in long-term control of patients after a variceal bleed. We prefer either an intravariceal or a combined intravariceal and paravariceal technique using ethanolamine oleate, but we advocate that individual units utilize the technique with which they have the most experience. The use of an unmodified flexible endoscope has been almost universally accepted. Once active variceal bleeding is diagnosed on emergency endoscopy, immediate emergency sclerotherapy should be performed. When this is not possible, bleeding should be controlled by balloon-tube tamponade with subsequent delayed emergency sclerotherapy after resuscitation. Patients with variceal bleeding that has stopped at the time of the diagnostic endoscopy can either be treated by immediate sclerotherapy or be observed initially and subsequently treated using the long-term management policy of the unit concerned. Over 90% of actively bleeding patients should be controlled using emergency sclerotherapy. Failures are defined as patients who have more than two acute variceal bleeds during a single hospital admission. Such patients should be identified early and treated either by simple staple-gun transection or by an emergency portosystemic shunt. Repeated injection sclerotherapy using a flexible endoscope and the technique with which the group concerned has the most experience is recommended as the primary form of treatment for the majority of patients after a proven esophageal variceal bleed. Repeat injection treatments should probably be performed at weekly intervals until the esophageal varices are eradicated, with follow-up at 6-month or yearly intervals thereafter. Recurrent varices should be treated similarly. Failures of sclerotherapy are defined as patients who have either recurrent bleeds or in whom varices are difficult to eradicate. They require either a portosystemic shunt or a devascularization and transection operation. All patients presenting with cirrhosis and variceal bleeding should be evaluated for liver transplantation; unfortunately, however, few variceal bleeders are candidates for transplantation. Prophylactic sclerotherapy in patients with esophageal varices that have not bled remains unjustified outside of controlled trials. Available trials have produced conflicting data.

A comparative evaluation of sclerosants for esophageal varices: a prospective randomized controlled study

The aim of this prospective randomized controlled study was to find a safe and effective sclerosing solution for endoscopic injection sclerotherapy in the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding. Ninety consecutive patients with portal hypertension and variceal bleeding were randomized to receive sclerotherapy with 5% ethanolamine oleate, 3% sodium tetradecyl sulfate, or absolute alcohol at an interval of 3 weeks. Sixty-four patients who received more than three sessions were analyzed. All three agents were found to have similar success and complication rates (p greater than 0.05). However, absolute alcohol required fewer sessions (p less than 0.01) and lesser amounts (p less than 0.01) to produce successful variceal sclerosis and had the added advantage of low cost and easy availability.

Distal splenorenal shunt versus endoscopic sclerotherapy in the prevention of variceal rebleeding. First stage of a randomized, controlled trial

In 1984 we started a prospective controlled trial comparing endoscopic sclerotherapy (ES) with the distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) in the elective treatment of variceal hemorrhage in cirrhotic patients. The study population included 40 patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension referred to our department from October 1984 to March 1988. These patients were drawn from a pool of 173 patients who underwent either elective surgery or endoscopic sclerotherapy during this time. Patients were assigned to one of the two groups according to a random-number table: 20 to DSRS and 20 to ES. During the postoperative period, no DSRS patient died, while one ES patient died of uncontrolled hemorrhage. One DSRS patient had mild recurrent variceal hemorrhage despite an angiographically patent DSRS. Four ES patients suffered at least one episode of gastrointestinal bleeding: two from varices and two from esophageal ulcerations. Five ES patients developed transitory dysphagia. Long-term follow-up was complete in all patients. Two-year survival rates for shunt (95%) and ES (90%) groups were similar. One DSRS patient rebled from duodenal ulcer, while three ES patients had recurrent bleeding from esophagogastric sources (two from varices and one from hypertensive gastropathy). One DSRS and two ES patients have evolved a mild chronic encephalopathy; four DSRS and two ES patients suffered at least one episode of acute encephalopathy. Two ES patients had esophageal stenoses, which were successfully dilated. Preliminary data from this trial seem to indicate that DSRS, in a subgroup of patients with good liver function and a correct portal-azygos disconnection, more effectively prevents variceal rebleeding than ES. However no significant difference in the survival of the two treatment groups was noted.

Frequent endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy increases risk of complications. Prospective randomized controlled study of two treatment schedules

In an effort to determine the optimal dose and frequency of chronic endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy, a prospective randomized controlled study comparing two treatment schedules of sclerotherapy was carried out over a 21-month period. Patients with variceal hemorrhage were randomly assigned to receive sclerotherapy at weekly intervals using injection volumes of greater than 15 cc at each treatment or at mean intervals of three days using volumes of less than 10 cc per treatment. Esophageal perforation occurred in three patients (15%) in the small-dose, frequent-injection group as compared to none in the large-dose weekly treatment group (P = 0.07), leading to premature termination of the study. The mean time to rebleeding was significantly shorter in the small-dose, frequent-treatment group (P = 0.05). Variceal obliteration was achieved in a mean of 66% of patients in both groups with no difference in the time to obliteration or the frequency of other complications. Sclerotherapy offered at less than weekly intervals is less effective and is associated with an increased frequency of serious and life threatening complications.

Rigid endoscopy under general anaesthesia is safe for chronic injection sclerotherapy

Injection sclerotherapy for acutely bleeding oesophageal varices has been used in Belfast since 1958. However, a chronic injection sclerotherapy programme with rigid oesophagoscopy under general anaesthesia commenced only in 1979. So far, 82 patients have entered the programme; 57 patients had already received 73 acute injections before commencing chronic sclerotherapy. Subsequently, the 82 patients received 221 chronic injections plus a further 29 acute injections for rebleeding episodes which occurred during the programme. There were 24 Child's grade A patients, 23 B and 35 C; 48 per cent had alcoholic cirrhosis. Forty-eight patients achieved variceal obliteration with a mean of four injections. During the programme 24 patients experienced 42 acute bleeds. There were only two bleeding episodes within 1 week of a chronic injection and eight within 4 weeks. In the 8-year period there have been four early deaths. One occurred 17 days after a chronic injection and three followed acute injections required for rebleeding during the programme. There were 21 late deaths, mostly due to progressive liver failure, and none from rebleeding. We conclude that chronic injection sclerotherapy using rigid oesophagoscopy under general anaesthesia is both safe and effective.

Prophylactic endoscopic sclerotherapy of oesophageal varices in liver cirrhosis. A multicentre prospective controlled randomised trial in Vienna

The effect of prophylactic treatment of oesophageal varices by endoscopic injection sclerotherapy before the first episode of variceal haemorrhage was studied in patients with cirrhosis in a prospective, randomised and controlled multicentre trial. From February 1984 to March 1987 patients with liver cirrhosis and large varices (stage III-IV according to Paquet) were treated and followed up. The sample comprised 87 patients: 45 in the prophylactic treatment and 42 in the control group. After excluding drop outs, 41 patients were treated in each group. Twenty nine per cent of patients in the sclerotherapy group and 34% in the control group had a variceal haemorrhage during the period of observation. There was no significant difference in the distributions of the bleeding free intervals between the sclerotherapy and the control groups. During the follow up period 24% of patients in the sclerotherapy group and 46% in the control group died. The distribution of survival times indicates a tendency towards longer survival of patients with prophylactic sclerotherapy, particularly in those with alcoholic cirrhosis.

The surgeon's role in the management of portal hypertension

Patients with portal hypertension are referred to surgeons for several reasons. These include the management of continued active variceal bleeding; therapy after a variceal bleed to prevent further recurrent bleeds; consideration for prophylactic surgical therapy to prevent the first variceal bleed; or, rarely, an unusual cause of portal hypertension which may require some specific surgical therapy. Injection sclerotherapy is the most widely used treatment for both acute variceal bleeding and long-term management after a variceal bleed. Unfortunately it has probably been overused in the past. The need to identify the failures of sclerotherapy early and to treat them by other forms of major surgery is emphasized. The selective distal splenorenal shunt is the most widely used portosystemic shunt today, particularly in nonalcoholic cirrhotic patients. The standard portacaval shunt is still used for the management of acute variceal bleeding as well as for long-term management, particularly in alcoholic cirrhotic patients. For acute variceal bleeding the surgical alternative to sclerotherapy or shunting is simple staple-gun esophageal transection, whereas in long-term management the main alternative is an extensive devascularization and transection operation. Liver transplantation is the only therapy that cures both the portal hypertension and the underlying liver disease. All patients with cirrhosis and portal hypertension should be assessed as potential liver transplant recipients. If they are candidates for transplantation, sclerotherapy should be used to treat bleeding varices whenever possible, as this will interfere least with a subsequent liver transplant.

Endoscopic sclerotherapy for esophago-gastric varices: a critical reappraisal

Amongst the many non-surgical techniques for the treatment of variceal bleeding, endoscopic sclerotherapy (EST) has shown great promise. EST can successfully obliterate esophageal varices and prevent variceal rebleeding. It is also very effective in the control of active bleeding from esophageal varices. The technique of EST is simple and can be carried out with a conventional, forward viewing, flexible endoscope and a teflon injector. Weekly intravariceal injections of an aqueous sclerosant are preferable. Though complications of EST in experienced hands are low, prophylactic EST at present should be advocated only to patients at high risk of bleeding. While controversy exists, most reports indicate that EST improves survival of patients with portal hypertension who have bled from esophageal varices. With regular follow-up endoscopies, recurrence of varices and bleeding from them can be substantially reduced. Sclerotherapy may successfully obliterate gastric varices in some patients either following EST for esophageal varices or by direct gastric variceal injections. For the long-term management of portal hypertension, combination of pharmacotherapy before as well as after eradication of esophageal varices, needs proper evaluation.

Pulmonary hemodynamic changes after intravariceal sclerotherapy with absolute alcohol

To investigate whether alcohol used as variceal sclerosant has any effect on pulmonary hemodynamics, 14 patients with portal hypertension received intravariceal injections of absolute alcohol. Six additional patients were injected with equivalent volumes of saline and they served as controls. After intravariceal injection of absolute alcohol (8 ml in 12 patients and 12 ml in 2 patients), mean +/- SD pulmonary artery pressure was seen to increase significantly (p less than 0.01) at 1 and 5 min and return to basal level by 15 min. Similar changes in pulmonary arterial pressure were seen after intravariceal injection of saline; the difference in the rise in pulmonary arterial pressure between the two groups was not significant. The pulmonary capillary-wedged pressure and systemic blood pressure did not change significantly after intravariceal injection of alcohol. Absolute alcohol in the amount usually used for sclerotherapy has minimal and transient effects on pulmonary hemodynamics and, in this respect, it appears to be a relatively safe sclerosant.

Endoscopic sclerotherapy in the treatment of gastric varices

Of 309 patients with portal hypertension, gastric varices were found in 48 (16 per cent). While the majority (88 per cent) of the patients had gastric varices in association with oesophageal varices, 6 (12 per cent) patients had 'isolated' gastric varices. Gastric varices were seen significantly (P less than 0.01) more often with grade 4 than with grade 3 varices. In 11 (28 per cent) of the 40 patients who completed sclerotherapy for oesophageal varices, gastric varices disappeared concurrently on eradication of oesophageal varices or during the following 6 months. Of the initial five patients with gastric varices who received direct intravariceal injections, four rebled; this technique was therefore replaced by combination (paravariceal + intravariceal) gastric variceal sclerotherapy. Emergency combination sclerotherapy successfully controlled bleeding from gastric varices in six of the eight treated patients. Thirty-two patients entered a programme of elective combination gastric variceal sclerotherapy. Variceal obliteration was achieved in 12 cases (38 per cent) and reduction in size was noted in another 7 patients (22 per cent) after a minimum of four courses. There were 11 (23 per cent) deaths, 8 due to uncontrolled bleeding from gastric varices and 3 due to hepatic coma. The other complications of gastric variceal sclerotherapy were minor and included retrosternal pain, fever and dysphagia. It is concluded that gastric varices often coexist with large oesophageal varices. If they persist for 6 months after eradication of oesophageal varices, a combination of paravariceal and intravariceal sclerotherapy should be attempted for their obliteration.

Relative efficacy and safety of absolute alcohol and 50% alcohol as variceal sclerosants

Absolute alcohol and 50% alcohol were compared as sclerosants in 79 patients who underwent sclerotherapy for esophageal varices every 3 weeks with either of the solutions. Active variceal bleeding could be controlled more often (p less than 0.05) with absolute alcohol (93.3%) compared with 50% alcohol (53.8%). Variceal eradication could be achieved with absolute alcohol in a significantly shorter time with smaller amounts and fewer sclerotherapy sessions than with 50% alcohol. Except for a higher incidence of retrosternal pain and fever noted with the use of absolute alcohol, there was no significant difference in the incidence of various complications, rebleeding rate, or mortality between the two sclerosants. Absolute alcohol is a more effective and equally safe sclerosant compared with 50% alcohol.