Reduction in early recurrence of variceal bleeding by propranolol

Treatment for bleeding oesophageal varices in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% to 95% of people with liver cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed within about one to three years after diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, including, among others, endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, and balloon tamponade. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the individual and relative benefits and harms of these treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with decompensated liver cirrhosis, through a network meta-analysis; and to generate rankings of the different treatments for acute bleeding oesophageal varices, according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until 17 December 2019, to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in people with cirrhosis and acute bleeding from oesophageal varices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only RCTs (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and acutely bleeding oesophageal varices. We excluded RCTs in which participants had bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those in whom initial haemostasis was achieved before inclusion into the trial, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS software, using Bayesian methods, and calculated the differences in treatments using odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed also the direct comparisons from RCTs using the same codes and the same technical details.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 RCTs (4580 participants) in the review. Forty-eight trials (4042 participants) were included in one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those with and without a previous history of bleeding. We included outcomes assessed up to six weeks. All trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 19 interventions were compared in the trials (sclerotherapy, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues, variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade, somatostatin analogues plus variceal band ligation, nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, no active intervention, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy, balloon tamponade plus somatostatin analogues, balloon tamponade plus vasopressin analogues, variceal band ligation plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus variceal band ligation, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and sclerotherapy plus vasopressin analogues). We have reported the effect estimates for the primary and secondary outcomes when there was evidence of differences between the interventions against the reference treatment of sclerotherapy, but reported the other results of the primary and secondary outcomes versus the reference treatment of sclerotherapy without the effect estimates when there was no evidence of differences in order to provide a concise summary of the results. Overall, 15.8% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment of sclerotherapy (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) died during the follow-up periods, which ranged from three days to six weeks. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.57, 95% CrI 1.04 to 2.41; network estimate; direct comparison: 4 trials; 353 participants) and vasopressin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.70, 95% CrI 1.13 to 2.62; network estimate; direct comparison: 2 trials; 438 participants). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, a higher proportion of people receiving balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy had more serious adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 4.23, 95% CrI 1.22 to 17.80; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 60 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, people receiving vasopressin analogues alone and those receiving variceal band ligation had fewer adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (rate ratio 0.59, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.96; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 219 participants; and rate ratio 0.40, 95% CrI 0.21 to 0.74; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 77 participants; respectively). Based on low-certainty evidence, the proportion of people who developed symptomatic rebleed was smaller in people who received sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.94; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 105 participants). The evidence suggests considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons where sclerotherapy was the control intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone and vasopressin analogues alone (with supportive therapy) probably result in increased mortality, compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, vasopressin analogues alone and band ligation alone probably result in fewer adverse events compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy may result in large increases in serious adverse events compared to sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues may result in large decreases in symptomatic rebleed compared to sclerotherapy. In the remaining comparisons, the evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the interventions, compared to sclerotherapy.

[Prevention of esophageal variceal bleeding]

Esophageal varices(EV) are present in 40% and 60% of Child-Pugh A and C patients, respectively when cirrhosis is diagnosed. EV bleeding is a life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis with a high probability of recurrence. Treatment to prevent first EV bleeding or rebleeding is mandatory. In small EV with high risk of bleeding, nonselective β-blockers should be used for the prevention of first variceal bleeding. For medium to large EV, nonselective β-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) may be recommended to high risk varices. But, nonselective β-blockers are the first treatment option to non-high risk varices and EVL is an alternative when nonselective β-blockers are contraindicated or not tolerated. For the prevention of rebleeding, a combination of nonselective β-blockers and EVL may be the best option. A great improvement in the prevention of variceal bleeding has emerged over the last years. However, further therapeutic options that combine higher efficacy, better tolerance and fewer side effects are needed.

Meta analysis of propranolol effects on gastrointestinal hemorrhage in cirrhotic patients

AIM: To assess the effects of propranolol as compared with placebo on gastrointestinal hemorrhage and total mortality in cirrhotic patients by using meta analysis of 20 published randomized clinical trials.

METHODS: A meta analysis of published randomized clinical trials was designed. Published articles were selected for study based on a computerized MEDLINE and a manual search of the bibliographies of relevant articles. Data from 20 relevant studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were retrieved by means of computerized and manual search. The reported data were extracted on the basis of the intention-to-treat principle, and treatment effects were measured as risk differences between propranolol and placebo. Pooled estimates were computed according to a random-effects model. We evaluated the pooled efficacy of propranolol on the risk of gastrointestinal hemorrhage and the total mortality.

RESULTS: A total of 1859 patients were included in 20 trials, 931 in the propranolol groups and 928 as controls. Among the 652 patients with upper gastrointestinal tract hemorrhage, 261 patients were treated with propranolol, and 396 patients were treated with placebo or non-treated. Pooled risk differences of gastrointestinal hemorrhage were -18% [95%CI, -25%, -10%] in all trials, -11% [95%CI, -21%, -1%] in primary prevention trials, and -25% [95%CI, -39%, -10%] in secondary prevention trials. A total of 440 patients died, 188 in propranolol groups and 252 in control groups. Pooled risk differences of total death were -7% [95%CI, -12%, -3%] in all trials, -9% [95%CI, -18%, -1%] in primary prevention trials, and -5% [95%CI, -9%, -1%] in secondary prevention trials.

CONCLUSION: Propranolol can markedly reduce the risks of both primary and recurrent gastrointestinal hemorrhage, and also the total mortality.

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 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.

Octreotide compared with placebo in a treatment strategy for early rebleeding in cirrhosis. A double blind, randomized pragmatic trial

beta-Blockers and sclerotherapy prevent long-term upper digestive rebleeding in cirrhosis but they seem ineffective for early rebleeding. We compared octreotide with a placebo for the prevention of early rebleeding in cirrhotic patients. After control of acute upper digestive bleeding, 262 consecutive cirrhotic patients were randomized to octreotide 100 microgram subcutaneously three times a day for 15 days (n = 131) or to the placebo (n = 131), in a double blind pragmatic trial in which beta-blockers and/or sclerotherapy were allowed together with the experimental treatment. Separate randomization and analysis were performed according to whether patients were eligible for beta-blockers and/or sclerotherapy (101 placebo, 97 octreotide) or not (30 placebo, 34 octreotide). Rebleeding within 15 days was the primary measure of treatment efficacy; 6-week rebleeding rate was also assessed as a secondary measure. Fifteen-day cumulative proportions of patients rebleeding were 28% in the placebo group and 24% in the octreotide group (P = .40); corresponding figures among the 198 patients eligible to beta-blockers and/or sclerotherapy were 26% and 16% (P = .05) and among the 64 not eligible for these treatments 33% and 49% (P = .29). Among patients eligible to beta-blockers and/or sclerotherapy, a significant reduction of rebleeding episodes (35 vs. 18, P = .03), blood transfusions (75 vs. 50, P = .04), and days of stay in hospital (1,544 vs. 1,190, P = .0001) was also found in the octreotide group: this beneficial effect was confirmed 6 weeks after randomization. Mortality was not affected by octreotide in either group of patients. It is suggested that octreotide may reduce the risk of early rebleeding in cirrhotic patients treated with beta-blockers and/or sclerotherapy after control of acute upper digestive bleeding. Further studies are needed to confirm this result.

Pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension: hemodynamic effects and prevention of bleeding

In the past 10 years, it has been clearly shown that vasoactive substances reduce portal pressure in patients or animals with portal hypertension. Some of these substances act by inducing splanchnic vasoconstriction, while others reduce hepatic and porto-systemic collateral vascular resistance and, thus, induce a portal hypotensive effect. Still others induce arterial hypotension, which causes a vasoconstrictive effect in the splanchnic territory. Since these drugs act on different vascular receptors, their combination should have a more marked effect on portal hypertension. Up to now, only nonselective beta-blockers have been used in the prevention of first gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with portal hypertension and esophageal varices and in the prevention of recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding. These trials have shown that propranolol or nadolol significantly reduce either a first episode of bleeding or recurrent bleeding. This pharmacological treatment also improves the survival rate in these patients. All of these studies have helped us to understand, in part, why gastrointestinal hemorrhage occurs in certain patients. Additional studies of beta-blockers or other substances are, nevertheless, necessary to select patients who will respond to this type of treatment. Finally, it is possible that the pharmacological treatment of portal hypertension may also be used before esophageal varices occur.

Portal hypertension management

Injection sclerotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for acute variceal bleeding and for long-term management after a variceal bleed. In those few patients in whom sclerotherapy fails to control acute bleeding, either a surgical shunt or a simple esophageal transection is recommended. A surgical shunt or a more extensive esophagogastric devascularization and transection operation is advocated for the failures of long-term sclerotherapy management. The role of pharmacological agents in acute variceal bleed management remains in question, and the use of propranolol in long-term management, either as an alternative to sclerotherapy or in combination with sclerotherapy, is controversial. The definitive roles of the newly described variceal banding and transjugular intrahepatic porto-systemic shunts (TIPS) procedures have yet to be established. All patients presenting with end-stage liver disease and esophageal variceal bleeding should be evaluated for a liver transplant, although few will qualify. A possible future transplant should be kept in mind when emergency treatment is planned. Any form of prophylactic therapy for patients with esophageal varices that have not yet bled will remain unjustified until those patients at high risk of a first variceal bleed can be identified. The gastric mucosal lesion, portal hypertensive gastropathy, has been underdiagnosed in the past. Although bleeding does occur, it is seldom a major clinical problem. When necessary, bleeding can be controlled by propranolol or a surgical shunt.

Meta-analysis of value of propranolol in prevention of variceal haemorrhage

A meta-analysis of all controlled clinical trials of beta-adrenoceptor blocking drugs, principally propranolol, in the prevention of primary or secondary variceal bleeding has shown that beta-blockade significantly reduced the occurrence of variceal bleeding, deaths from variceal bleeding, and overall mortality. There was some heterogeneity between trials in the effect of beta blockade on secondary prevention. When only fully reported, randomised, placebo-controlled studies were included the heterogeneity disappeared, and the reductions in bleeding episodes and mortality became more striking. Separate analyses of primary and secondary prevention studies also showed clear reductions in occurrence of variceal bleeding and deaths. These results seem to indicate the value of beta-adrenoreceptor blocking drugs for the primary prevention of haemorrhage from large oesophageal varices. However, there is still a need for large multicentre trials of beta-blockade for primary prevention of variceal bleeding in patients without large varices and of comparisons between beta-blocker therapy with other treatments in secondary prevention.

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.

Long-term pharmacologic therapy of portal hypertension

Beta-blockers modify splanchnic hemodynamics in cirrhotic patients. Nonselective beta-blockers are more effective than selective beta-blockers. Azygos blood flow, as a measure of collateral circulation, including that through varices, is always reduced, but the effects on portal pressure, whether measured directly or by the wedged hepatic venous pressure, are variable. The initial reported correlation between a 25% reduction of resting pulse rate and similar percentage reduction in the wedged free hepatic venous gradient has not been reproduced in subsequent studies. Therefore, to study the effect of changes in hemodynamic indices and the likelihood of variceal bleeding, direct measurements of such indices need to be made in clinical trials. At present, only one primary-prevention trial of propranolol suggests that a hemodynamic index can be used to identify patients given propranolol who will not bleed. Some clinical factors may be important in identifying nonresponders in trials of secondary prevention, but these are not universally recognized. The results of secondary-prevention studies are very heterogeneous, and it is difficult to understand why this is so. However, comparative studies versus sclerotherapy suggest that reductions in rebleeding and mortality are similar. Pharmacologic treatment, including beta-blockade, is ideal for primary prevention of variceal bleeding. The initial results from randomized studies are more homogeneous regarding the benefit of beta-blockers than in the secondary-prevention studies, although there is still doubt about the response in cirrhotics with ascites. No fatal complications due to propranolol administration have been reported in cirrhotic patients, and the complications are reversible. The future of pharmacologic therapy for portal hypertension lies in combination therapy. The addition of vasodilators to beta-blockers appears to potentiate their effect on portal pressure reduction. The results of clinical trials are awaited with great interest.

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.

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.

Propranolol in prevention of rebleeding from oesophageal varices during the course of endoscopic sclerotherapy

Thirty-one patients admitted with the first bleeding episode from oesophageal varices were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive oral propranolol, 160 mg daily, for 6 months (n = 15) or matching placebo (n = 16) for the same period. Endoscopy was performed each month during the 6 months and additionally after a further 3 months. The oesophageal varices were injected paravariceally with 2% aethoxysclerol until obliteration. If rebleeding occurred, additional sclerotherapy was performed. In the group treated with sclerotherapy and propranolol 3 patients rebled (20%; 95% confidence limits, 4%-48%), whereas 12 patients treated with sclerotherapy and placebo rebled (75%; 95% confidence limits, 48%-93%; p less than 0.05). There were no side effects to treatment in either of the groups, and it is concluded that administration of propranolol reduces the frequency of variceal rebleeding before variceal obliteration during a course of endoscopic sclerotherapy.