Long-term outcome after endoscopic ligation of acute esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis

Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) has been the standard treatment for acute variceal bleeding (AVB). However, reports of long-term prognosis after EVL are scarce. Therefore, the current work aimed to investigate the long-term outcome and prognostic modifiers of cirrhotic cases presented with acute esophageal variceal bleeding and managed with EVL. The current prospective work comprised primarily 276 consecutive grown-up cirrhotic cases presenting with AVB and managed with EVL. Two-hundred patients who completed the study till death or 3-year follow-up were enrolled in final analysis. The primary outcome measure was occurrence of rebleeding and all-cause mortality. By the end of follow up 56 patients (28%) developed rebleeding and 78 (39%) died. The independent factors associated with rebleeding were lacking follow up EVL (OR: 4.8, 95%CI: 1.9-12.2), BMI > 30 kg/m2 (OR: 0.-, 95%CI: 0.2-0.9), Child class C (OR: 3.8, 95%CI: 1.8-7.8), and grade IV varices (OR: 2.6, 95%CI: 1.3-5.3). The independent factors associated with mortality were: Age > 65 years (OR: 32.4, 95%CI: 8.7-120.3), rebleeding (OR: 98.4, 95%CI: 27.9-347.0), coexistence of HCC (OR: 7.4, 95%CI: 2.0-27.4), and lacking follow up EVL (OR: 6.1, 95%CI: 1.2-31.1). Recurrent bleeding after emergency endoscopic ligation of acute esophageal variceal bleeding in cirrhotic cases is a rather common complication that significantly increases the mortality rate. The liver condition, lack of follow up endoscopy, old age, and severity of esophageal varices are independent prognostic indicator of rebleeding and morality.

Hepatic venous pressure gradient-guided laparoscopic splenectomy and pericardial devascularisation versus endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis for variceal rebleeding in portal hypertension (CHESS1803): study protocol of a multicenter randomised controlled trial in China

INTRODUCTION

Gastro-oesophageal variceal bleeding is one of the most common and severe complications with high mortality in cirrhotic patients who developed portal hypertension. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is a globally recommended golden standard for the portal pressure assessment and an HVPG ≥16 mm Hg indicates a higher risk of death and rebleeding. This study aims to compare the effectiveness and safety of splenectomy and pericardial devascularisation (laparoscopic therapy) plus propranolol and endoscopic therapy plus propranolol for variceal rebleeding in cirrhotic patients with HVPG between 16 and 20 mm Hg.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicenter, randomised, controlled clinical trial. Participants will be 1:1 assigned randomly into either laparoscopic or endoscopic groups. Forty participants whose transjugular HVPG lies between 16 and 20 mm Hg with a history of gastro-oesophageal variceal bleeding will be recruited from three sites in China. Participants will receive either endoscopic therapy plus propranolol or laparoscopic therapy plus propranolol. The primary outcome measure will be the occurrence of gastro-oesophageal variceal rebleeding. Secondary outcome measures will include overall survival, occurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma, the occurrence of venous thrombosis, the occurrence of adverse events, quality of life and tolerability of treatment. Outcome measures will be evaluated at baseline, 12 weeks, 24 weeks, 36 weeks, 48 weeks and 60 weeks. Multivariate COX regression model will be introduced for analyses of occurrence data and Kaplan-Meier analysis with the log-rank test for intergroup comparison.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from all three participating sites. Primary and secondary outcome data will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and widely disseminated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03783065; Pre-results.

TRIAL STATUS

Recruitment for this study started in December 2018 while the first participant was randomised in January 2019. Recruitment is estimated to stop in October 2019.

Positive consequences of splenectomy for patients with schistosomiasis-induced variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Patients with hepatic schistosomiasis are at high risk of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding, which is highly torrential and life threatening. This study aimed to assess the effects of splenectomy on patients with schistosomiasis-induced variceal bleeding, especially those influences related to overall survival (OS) rate.

METHODS

From January 2005 to December 2018, 112 patients with schistosomiasis-induced varices were enrolled. In that period, all the patients with hepatic schistosomiasis who received endoscopic treatment for primary and secondary prophylaxis of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding were found eligible. The patients were divided into splenectomized group (n = 44, 39.3%) and control group (n = 68, 60.7%).

RESULTS

Multivariate regression analysis of OS showed that splenectomy, hepatic carcinoma, and times of endoscopic treatment were independent prognostic factors for OS. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the 5-year OS rate was 82.7% in splenectomized group versus 53.2% in control group (P = 0.037). The rate of no recurrence of variceal bleeding during 5-year (56.8% vs. 47.7%, P = 0.449) indicated that there was no significant difference between the two groups. Patients who received splenectomy had increased risk of portal vein thrombosis (52.3% vs. 29.4%, P = 0.012) and decreased proportion of severe ascites (20.5% vs 50.0%, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Splenectomy prior to endoscopic treatment provides a superior long-term survival for patients with schistosomiasis-induced variceal bleeding.

Precision medicine in variceal bleeding: Are we there yet?

Variceal bleeding is one of the most feared complications of portal hypertension in patients with cirrhosis because of its deleterious impact on prognosis. Adequate management of patients at risk of developing variceal bleeding includes the prevention of the first episode of variceal bleeding and rebleeding, and is crucial in modifying prognosis. The presence of clinically significant portal hypertension is the main factor determining the risk of development of varices and other liver-related decompensations; therefore, it should be carefully screened for and monitored. Treating patients with clinically significant portal hypertension based on their individual risk of portal hypertension-related bleeding undoubtedly improves prognosis. The evaluation of liver haemodynamics and liver function can stratify patients according to their risk of bleeding and are no question useful tools to guide therapy in an individualised manner. That said, recent data support the idea that tailoring therapy to patient characteristics may effectively impact on prognosis and increase survival in all clinical scenarios. This review will focus on evaluating the available evidence supporting the use of individual risk characteristics for clinical decision-making and their impact on clinical outcome and survival. In primary prophylaxis, identification and treatment of patients with clinically significant portal hypertension improves decompensation-free survival. In the setting of acute variceal bleeding, the risk of failure and rebleeding can be easily predicted, allowing for early escalation of treatment (i.e. pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt) which can improve survival in appropriate candidates. Stratifying the risk of recurrent variceal bleeding based on liver function and haemodynamic response to non-selective beta-blockers allows for tailored treatment, thereby increasing survival and avoiding adverse events.

Imaging features and clinical relevance of portal venous systems shown by extrahepatic portal angiography in children with extrahepatic portal venous obstruction

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated the morphologic changes of portal cavernoma in children with extrahepatic portal venous obstruction and explored the relationship with prognosis.

METHODS

From February 2008 to October 2017, there were 107 patients with cavernous transformation of the portal vein admitted to our hospital. Rex shunts were performed in 99 cases, Warren shunts in 7 cases, and laparoscopic splenic vessel ligation in 1 case. Intraoperative superior mesenteric venography was used to determine the structure of the portal venous system. According to the morphologic features of the portal vein shown by portal venography, groups were assigned as follows: patients with the cotton form of portal cavernoma; patients with visible collateral veins of portal cavernoma; patients with and without a visible left gastric vein; and patients with and without a clearly visible intrahepatic portal vein. The preoperative and postoperative portal pressure, preoperative incidence of esophageal varices, time at onset, incidence of postoperative rebleeding, preoperative and postoperative size of the spleen, and age at time of operation were compared between these groups.

RESULTS

The preoperative incidence of esophageal varices, time at onset, postoperative size of spleen, and age at time of operation were significantly lower in the group with the cotton form than in those with visible collateral veins (P < .05). There was a significant correlation between the visible left gastric vein and esophageal varices (P = .002). The time at onset, preoperative and postoperative size of the spleen, and age at time of operation were markedly lower in the group with a good visible intrahepatic portal vein than in those without a clearly visible intrahepatic portal vein (P < .05). The visible left gastric vein was notably associated with the performance of a gastroportal shunt (P = .000), and the group with a visible left gastric vein had a higher ratio of children undergoing a gastroportal shunt.

CONCLUSIONS

The cotton form, an early-stage manifestation of cavernous transformation of the portal vein, typically occurs in younger children with a shorter time to onset. Children with the cotton form of portal cavernoma typically have a better prognosis after Rex shunt.

Left-sided portal hypertension due to retroperitoneal fibrosis treated with an oesophagus preserving, modified Sugiura procedure

Left-sided portal hypertension is a very uncommon condition and retroperitoneal fibrosis has rarely been reported as a cause. We present the case of a 77-year-old man with retroperitoneal fibrosis obstructing the splenic vein and causing recurrent episodes of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Computed tomography showed a retroperitoneal mass as being responsible for the obstruction of the splenic vein, splenomegaly, and diffuse varices around the gastrosplenic and gastrohepatic ligaments. An oesophagus preserving, modified Sugiura procedure was performed with disconnection of the gastric vessels on the lesser curve of the stomach, preserving the pylorus branches of the nerves of Latarjet.

Ulcer bleeding after band ligation of esophageal varices: Risk factors and prognosis

BACKGROUND

Post-banding ulcer bleeding is a rare complication of endoscopic band ligation of esophageal varices with high morbidity and mortality. There exist no management guidelines for this complication.

AIMS

To determine the incidence, outcome and risk factors of post-banding ulcer bleeding.

METHODS

Data for cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding during a six-year period were prospectively collected, and all band ligation sessions performed were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic, analytic and endoscopic data were recorded, as well as complications, outcome and management of each episode of post-banding ulcer bleeding.

RESULTS

The study includes 521 band ligation sessions performed on 175 patients. There were 24 cases of post-banding ulcer bleeding in 21 patients (incidence 4.6%). Independent risk factors for post-banding ulcer bleeding were MELD score, hepatocellular carcinoma and total beta-blocker dose. Mortality during the bleeding episode was 23.8%. Active bleeding or adherent clots at the time of endoscopy was associated with treatment failure or death.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-banding ulcer bleeding is an uncommon but severe complication of esophageal banding. Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, poor liver function and a low beta-blocker dose have higher risk of post-banding ulcer bleeding. An aggressive treatment should be considered in case of active bleeding at endoscopy.

Polycythaemia Vera Presenting As A Porta Hepatis Mass

Polycythaemia Vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative disorder in which bone marrow has increased production of red blood cells, white blood cells and platelets. The hallmarks of the disease are veno-occlusive events, secondary to increased blood viscosity. Polycythaemia Vera rarely presents with portal vein thrombosis below age of 55 years especially in absence of any chronic liver disease. We report a case of 30-years-old South Asian male presenting with abdominal pain, weight loss and vomiting for 3 months. On evaluation, he was found to have oesophageal varices. Furthermore, CT scan showed infiltration at porta-hepatis and portal venous thrombosis. Polycythaemia Vera was diagnosed with a positive JAK2 mutation and increased haemoglobin. Laparoscopy was done to perform biopsy of the porta-hepatis mass. Biopsy showed engorged vessels with no sign of malignancy. Patient underwent repeated sessions of upper GI endoscopy for band ligation and multiple sessions of venous phlebotomy which drastically improved his blood indices. He was started on lifelong aspirin and was advised regular follow-ups. With early recognition and prompt management patients can be prevented from potential complications which can prove to be detrimental.

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.

Selective Balloon-occluded Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration for Gastric Varices

Objective Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (B-RTO) for gastric varices (GV) is associated with drawbacks including a postoperative increase in portal pressure and the risk of subsequent worsening of esophageal varices (EV). Selective B-RTO that embolizes only the varices may have the potential to minimize such risks. The aim of this study is to retrospectively compare the postoperative course of patients after selective B-RTO (Group S) and conventional B-RTO (Group B). Methods One hundred four patients treated from January 2007 to April 2012 were classified into Groups S (n=5) and B (n=99). In the univariate analysis, the volume of 5% ethanolamine oleate iopamiodol (EOI) administered at baseline and the GV blood flow on endoscopic ultrasound after B-RTO were considered as covariates. The rates of GV recurrence and EV aggravation was also compared between Groups B and S. Results In Group S, the volume of 5% EOI was significantly lower (Group S vs. Group B: 14.6±5.5 vs. 28.5±16.4 mL; p=0.0012) and the rate of EV aggravation was lower in comparison to Group B (p=0.045). However, in Group S, the rate of complete eradication of GV blood flow was significantly lower (Group S vs. Group B: 0% vs. 89.9%; p<0.001) and the rate of re-treatment for GV was higher in comparison to Group B (Group S vs. Group B: 60% vs. 1.0%; p<0.001). Conclusion Selective B-RTO for GV could minimize the risk of a worsening of EV or reduce the amount of sclerosants; however, the rate of recurrence was high in comparison to conventional B-RTO.

Current Approaches to the Treatment of Gastric Varices: Glue, Coil Application, TIPS, and BRTO

Gastric varices are less common than esophageal varices, and their treatment is quite challenging. Gastric varix bleedings (GVB) occur less frequently than esophageal varix (EV) bleedings and represent 10% to 30% of all variceal bleedings. They are; however, more severe and are associated with high mortality. Re-bleeding may occur in 35% to 90% of cases after spontaneous hemostasis. GV bleedings represent a serious clinical problem compared with esophageal varices due to their location. Sclerotherapy and band ligation, in particular, are less effective. Based on the anatomic site and location, treatment differs from EV and is categorized into two groups (i.e., endoscopic or radiologic treatment). Surgical management is used less frequently. Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) and cyanoacrylate are safe but there is a high risk of re-bleeding. Portal pressure elevates following BRTO and leads to worsening of esophageal varix pressure. Other significant complications may include hemoglobinuria, abdominal pain, fever, and pleural effusion. Shock and atrial fibrillation are major complications. New and efficient treatment modalities will be possible in the future.

Predictors of Re-bleeding and Mortality Among Patients with Refractory Variceal Bleeding Undergoing Salvage Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS)

BACKGROUND

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has proven clinical efficacy as rescue therapy for cirrhotic patients with acute portal hypertensive bleeding who fail endoscopic treatment.

AIMS

To investigate predictive factors of 6-week and 1-year mortality in patients undergoing salvage TIPS for refractory portal hypertensive bleeding.

METHODS

A total of 144 consecutive patients were retrospectively evaluated. Three logistic regression multivariate models were estimated to individualize prognostic factors for 6-week and 12-month mortality. Log-rank test was used to evaluate survival according to Child-Pugh classes and Bureau's criteria.

RESULTS

Mean age 51 ± 10 years, 66% male, mean MELD 18.5 ± 8.3, Child-Pugh A/B/C 8%/38%/54%. TIPS failure occurred in 23(16%) patients and was associated with pre-TIPS portal pressure gradient and pre-TIPS intensive care unit stay. Six-week and 12-month mortality was 36% and 42%, respectively. Pre-TIPS intensive care unit stay, MELD, and Child-Pugh score were independently associated with mortality at 6 weeks. Independent predictors of mortality at 12 months were pre-TIPS intensive care unit stay and Child-Pugh score.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large cohort of patients undergoing salvage TIPS, MELD and Child-Pugh scores were predictive of short- and long-term mortality, respectively. Pre-TIPS intensive care unit stay was independently associated with TIPS failure and mortality at 6 weeks and 12 months. Salvage TIPS is futile in patients with Child-Pugh score of 14-15.

Treatment outcomes of percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for gastric variceal bleeding

There have been few studies comparing percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization (PTVE) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for the prevention of recurrent gastric variceal bleeding (GVB).Compare the outcomes of these 2 procedures in patients with GVB.A total of 74 cirrhosis patients with GVB who underwent TIPS and modified PTVE were enrolled. The rebleeding and mortality rates, portal vein pressure (PVP) variation, and rates of hepatic encephalopathy (HE) were compared between the 2 groups.A total of 43 PTVE and 31 TIPS patients were enrolled in this study. The difference of rebleeding rate in the 2 groups was not statistically significant (P = .190). The difference of early rebleeding rates and cumulative rebleeding-free rates were all not statistically significant (P = .256, P = .200). The difference of mortality rates in the 2 groups was not statistically significant (χ = 1.206, P = .272). The rate of HE in TIPS group was statistically higher than that in PTVE group (P < .0001).Both PTVE and TIPS were effective for preventing rebleeding of GVs. There were no significant differences in rebleeding and mortality rates. The incidence of HE after TIPS was higher than PTVE.

Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Shunt Surgery Combined with Foam Sclerotherapy of Varices for Prehepatic Portal Hypertension: A Pilot Study

OBJECTIVES

This pilot study investigated the safety and efficacy of a novel shunt surgery combined with foam sclerotherapy of varices in patients with prehepatic portal hypertension.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients who were diagnosed with prehepatic portal hypertension and underwent shunt surgeries were divided into three groups by surgery type: shunt surgery alone (Group A), shunt surgery and devascularization (Group B), and shunt surgery combined with foam sclerotherapy (Group C). Between-group differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, portal pressure decrease, postoperative complications, rebleeding rates, encephalopathy, mortality rates and remission of gastroesophageal varices were compared.

RESULTS

Groups A, B and C had similar operation times, intraoperative bleeding, and portal pressure decrease. The remission rates of varices differed significantly (p<0.001): one patient in Group A and 6 patients in Group B had partial response, and all 9 patients in Group C had remission (2 complete, 7 partial). Two Group A patients and one Group B patient developed recurrent gastrointestinal bleeding postoperatively within 12 months. No postoperative recurrence or bleeding was observed in Group C, and no sclerotherapy-related complications were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Shunt surgery combined with foam sclerotherapy obliterates varices more effectively than shunt surgery alone does, decreasing the risk of postoperative rebleeding from residual gastroesophageal varices. This novel surgery is safe and effective with good short-term outcomes.

Endoscopic variceal ligation as primary prophylaxis for oesophageal variceal bleeding at a Malaysian tertiary hospital

OBJECTIVE

Approximately one-third of patients with esophageal varices will develop bleeding which is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with liver cirrhosis. Currently, the two most widely used modalities to prevent variceal bleeding are pharmacologic and oendoscopic variceal band ligation (EVL). However, EVL has been associated with significant complications. Hence we aim to evaluate and to identify the epidemiology, demography, and complications of EVL at our local Malaysian tertiary hospital.

METHOD

This is a retrospective study of all the patients that had undergone endoscopic variceal surveillance at the Gastroenterology endoscopy unit, Serdang Hospital from 1st January 2015 to 31st March 2017. Patients' demography, aetiologies of liver cirrhosis, platelet level and international normalised ratio (INR) prior banding procedure, and the post EVL complications were recorded and further analysed with SPSS version 16.

RESULTS

In this study, 105 patients were screened for varices. Fifty-five of them had undergone EVL, with a quarter of the patients requiring repeated ligation. There was a male preponderance with 76.4%. 56.4% of patients were in age from 40-59 years. The majority of our patients were of the Malay ethnicity. The major aetiology for liver cirrhosis in our patients was viral hepatitis with Hepatitis C (31.0%), and Hepatitis B (20.0%). Most of our patients had platelet count >50,000 and INR <1.5 prior to EVL. There was no major complication in all of our subjects.

CONCLUSION

EVL is relatively safe and feasible treatment for prevention of oesophageal variceal bleeds with a low complication rate.

Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization for portal hypertension: A single-center experience

Many patients in China have portal hypertension secondary to liver cirrhosis. Splenectomy and devascularization have become an efficacious surgical procedure for portal hypertension, and has been recommended in China as the first choice for the treatment of portal hypertension for a long time. As a result of advances in laparoscopic equipment and techniques, splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization have been carried out with laparoscope.From January 2012 to December 2017, 453 patients who were diagnosed with portal hypertension and serious gastroesophageal varices received surgical management in our institution. 250 patients chose laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization and 203 underwent open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization.We retrospectively analyzed the perioperative data and follow-up data of these patients. The operation time of laparoscopic group was longer than open group (P ≤ .001). Intraoperative blood loss was less (P ≤ .001), the passing of flatus was earlier (P = .042), and postoperative hospital stay was shorter (P = .001) in the laparoscopic group. During postoperative follow-up of 4 to 75 months, the incidence of esophagogastric variceal rebleeding, encephalopathy, and secondary liver cancer showed no significant differences.Laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization were safe and more effective than open surgery for portal hypertension and gastroesophageal varices.

Surgical portosystemic shunts versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Variceal haemorrhage that is refractory or recurs after pharmacologic and endoscopic therapy requires a portal decompression shunt (either surgical shunts or radiologic shunt, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS)). TIPS has become the shunt of choice; however, is it the preferred option? This review assesses evidence for the comparisons of surgical portosystemic shunts versus TIPS for variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. We also searched on-line trial registries, reference lists of relevant articles, and proceedings of relevant associations for trials that met the inclusion criteria for this review (date of search 8 March 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing surgical portosystemic shunts versus TIPS for the treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data using methodological standards expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias according to domains and risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four randomised clinical trials including 496 adult participants diagnosed with variceal haemorrhage due to cirrhotic portal hypertension. The overall risk of bias in all the trials was judged at high risk. All the trials were conducted in the United States of America (USA). Two of the trials randomised participants to selective surgical shunts versus TIPS. The other two trials randomised participants to non-selective surgical shunts versus TIPS. The diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was by clinical and laboratory findings. We are uncertain whether there is a difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days between surgical portosystemic shunts compared with TIPS (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 1.99; participants = 496; studies = 4). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in encephalopathy between surgical shunts compared with TIPS (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.16; participants = 496; studies = 4). We found evidence suggesting an increase in the occurrence of the following harms in the TIPS group compared with surgical shunts: all-cause mortality at five years (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90; participants = 496; studies = 4); variceal rebleeding (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; participants = 496; studies = 4); reinterventions (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.28; participants = 496; studies = 4); and shunt occlusion (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.51; participants = 496; studies = 4). We could not perform an analysis of health-related quality of life but available evidence appear to suggest improved health-related quality of life in people who received surgical shunt compared with TIPS. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all-cause mortality at 30 days and five years, irreversible shunt occlusion, and encephalopathy to very low because of high risk of bias (due to lack of blinding); inconsistency (due to heterogeneity); imprecision (due to small sample sizes of the individual trials and few events); and publication bias (few trials reporting outcomes). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for variceal rebleeding and reintervention to very low because of high risk of bias (due to lack of blinding); imprecision (due to small sample sizes of the individual trials and few events); and publication bias (few trials reporting outcomes). The small sample sizes and few events did not allow us to produce meaningful trial sequential monitoring boundaries, suggesting plausible random errors in our estimates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence suggesting that surgical portosystemic shunts may have benefit over TIPS for treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension. Given the very low-certainty of the available evidence and risks of random errors in our analyses, we have very little confidence in our review findings.

Is additional 5-day vasoactive drug therapy necessary for acute variceal bleeding after successful endoscopic hemostasis?: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vasoactive drugs and endoscopic therapy have been widely used in the management of acute variceal bleeding of cirrhosis patients. The current standard regimen of vasoactive drugs is in combination with endoscopic therapy and continues for up to 5 days; however, the necessity of vasoactive drugs after endoscopic hemostasis was still controversial. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and optimal duration of adjuvant vasoactive drugs after hemorrhage control by endoscopic therapy.

METHODS

A search was conducted of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases until June, 2018. Lan DeMets sequential monitoring boundary was constructed to assess the reliability and conclusiveness of our major results.

RESULTS

Seven studies (639 patients) and 4 studies (435 patients) were included in the analyses to evaluate the efficacy and optimal duration of adjuvant vasoactive drugs therapy, respectively. Our analyses showed that adjuvant vasoactive drugs facilitated endoscopic hemostasis and reduced very early re-bleeding rate both in sclerotherapy (risk ratio [RR] 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.78, P = .23, I = 31%) and band ligation (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.27-0.83, P = .07, I = 62%). However, the 3 to 5-day therapy duration was not superior to a shorter course in very early re-bleeding rate and mortality rate in 42 days (RR 1.77, 95% CI 0.64-4.89, P = .70, I = 0%; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.43-2.13, P = .81, I = 0%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Additional 5-day vasoactive drug after endoscopic hemostasis may significantly ameliorate very early re-bleeding rate, However, the 3 to 5 days' adjuvant regimen was not superior to a shorter course.

Surgical portosystemic shunts versus devascularisation procedures for prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis

BACKGROUND

Hepatosplenic schistosomiasis is an important cause of variceal bleeding in low-income countries. Randomised clinical trials have evaluated the outcomes of two categories of surgical interventions, shunts and devascularisation procedures, for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis. The comparative overall benefits and harms of these two interventions are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisation procedures for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, reference lists of articles, and proceedings of relevant associations for trials that met the inclusion criteria (date of search 11 January 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisation procedures for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the trials and extracted data using methodological standards expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias according to domains and risk of random errors with GRADE and Trial Sequential Analysis. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We found two randomised clinical trials including 154 adult participants, aged between 18 years and 65 years, diagnosed with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis. One of the trials randomised participants to proximal splenorenal shunt versus distal splenorenal shunt versus oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy, and the other randomised participants to distal splenorenal shunt versus oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. In both trials the diagnosis of hepatosplenic schistosomiasis was made based on clinical and biochemical assessments. The trials were conducted in Brazil and Egypt. Both trials were at high risk of bias.We are uncertain as to whether surgical portosystemic shunts improved all-cause mortality compared with oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy due to imprecision in the trials (risk ratio (RR) 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 9.92; participants = 154; studies = 2). We are uncertain whether serious adverse events differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy (RR 2.26, 95% CI 0.44 to 11.70; participants = 154; studies = 2). None of the trials reported on health-related quality of life. We are uncertain whether variceal rebleeding differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.23; participants = 154; studies = 2). We found evidence suggesting an increase in encephalopathy in the shunts group versus the devascularisation with splenectomy group (RR 7.51, 95% CI 1.45 to 38.89; participants = 154; studies = 2). We are uncertain whether ascites and re-interventions differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. We computed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes, but the trial sequential monitoring boundaries could not be drawn because of insufficient sample size and events. We downgraded the overall certainty of the body of evidence for all outcomes to very low due to risk of bias and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the very low certainty of the available body of evidence and the low number of clinical trials, we could not determine an overall benefit or harm of surgical portosystemic shunts compared with oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. Future randomised clinical trials should be designed with sufficient statistical power to assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisations with or without splenectomy and with or without oesophageal transection.

Long-term outcome of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for portal hypertension in autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Autosomal recessive polycystic kidney disease (ARPKD) with congenital hepatic fibrosis (CHF) causes portal hypertension and its complications. A transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPSS) could serve as a symptomatic treatment for portal hypertension-related symptoms in these children.

AIMS

To study the effect of TIPSS on portal hypertension, liver and kidney function and the long term complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We report on 5 children with CHF treated with a TIPSS to manage severe portal hypertension related symptoms.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time was 7 years and 2 months. At the end of follow-up there was a reduction of spleen size (p = 0.715) and hypersplenism with a rise in platelet count (p = 0.465). Esophageal varices and ascites disappeared in all patients. Liver and kidney function remained stable. In two patients endotipsitis was suspected and two patients developed an in-stent stenosis. There was no sign of encephalopathy in our patients.

CONCLUSION

TIPSS using ePTFE-covered stent is a feasible and effective alternative for surgical portosystemic shunting in children with CHF, also on the long term. It can postpone the need of a liver transplantation but close monitoring remains important for early diagnosis of endotipsitis or stent dysfunction related to stenosis.

Tracheal injury characterized by subcutaneous emphysema and dyspnea after improper placement of a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube: A case report

RATIONALE

Tracheal injury characterized by subcutaneous emphysema and dyspnea can occur following the use of a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube. Should tracheal injury occur, it may be possible to manage resultant airway obstruction with a tracheal stent.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We describe the case of a 51-year-old patient who developed a tracheal injury when a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube was inadvertently inserted into the patient's trachea.

DIAGNOSES

Liver cirrhosis, gastric-fundus variceal bleeding, tracheal injury.

INTERVENTIONS

Polyglycol and tissue glue were injected intravenously, and endoscopic variceal ligation was performed. A Sengstaken-Blakemore tube was used to stop the bleeding. A covered tracheal stent was placed via fiberoptic bronchoscopy to relieve the tracheal injury due to improper placement of a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube.

OUTCOMES

After placement of the tracheal stent, the patient was able to breathe spontaneously and subsequently recovered.

LESSONS

Some precautions must be taken to avoid placing a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube in the trachea. If a tracheal injury occurs following misplacement of a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube, it may be possible to manage resultant airway obstruction by placing a tracheal stent.

Cerebral air embolism following an endoscopic variceal ligation: A case report

BACKGROUND

Cerebral air embolism (CAE) is a rare but potentially devastating complication of endoscopic procedures. Only 3 cases, to our knowledge, have been reported.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 50-year-old female patient presented with hepatitis C virus-related hepatic cirrhosis, emergency endoscopy and endoscopic variceal ligation was performed in an awakened state. CAE occurred during procedure, the patient passed away the next day in the intensive care unit.

CONCLUSIONS

CAE is a rare but potentially devastating complication in endoscopic procedures. We need more preventive tools and treatments.