1
|
Cifuentes LI, Gattini D, Torres-Robles R, Gana JC. Band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 1:CD011561. [PMID: 33522602 PMCID: PMC8094619 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011561.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Prevention is, therefore, important. Randomised clinical trials have shown that non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal band ligation decrease the incidence of variceal bleeding in adults. In children and adolescents, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as primary prophylaxis alternatives for oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether these interventions are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES To assess the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and two other databases (April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and we also handsearched abstract books of the two main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences from January 2008 to December 2019. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search. SELECTION CRITERIA We aimed to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and other observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We used the intention-to-treat principle. We analysed data using Review Manager 5. MAIN RESULTS One conference abstract, describing a feasibility multi-centre randomised clinical trial, fulfilled our review inclusion criteria. We judged the trial at overall high risk of bias. This trial was conducted in three hospital centres in the United Kingdom. The aim of the trial was to determine the feasibility and safety of further larger randomised clinical trials of prophylactic band ligation versus no active treatment in children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Twelve children received prophylactic band ligation and 10 children received no active treatment. There was no information on the age of the children included, or about the diagnosis of any child included. All children were followed up for at least six months. Mortality was 8% (1/12) in the band ligation group versus 0% (0/10) in the no active intervention group (risk ratio (RR) 2.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The abstract did not report when the death occurred, but we assume it happened between the six-month follow-up and one year. No child (0%) in the band ligation group developed adverse events (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.01 to 6.25; very low certainty of evidence) but one child out of 10 (10%) in the no active intervention group developed idiopathic thrombocytopaenic purpura. One child out of 12 (8%) in the band ligation group underwent liver transplantation versus none in the no active intervention group (0%) (RR 2.54, 95% CI 0.11 to 56.25; very low certainty of evidence). The trial reported no other serious adverse events or liver-related morbidity. Quality of life was not reported. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 8% (1/12) of the children in the band ligation group versus 30% (3/10) of the children in the no active intervention group (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.03 to 2.27; very low certainty of evidence). No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. Two children were lost to follow-up by one-year. Ten children in total completed the trial at two-year follow-up. There was no information on funding. We found two observational studies on endoscopic variceal ligation when searching for randomised trials. One found no harm, and the other reported E nterobacter cloacae septicaemia in one child and mild, transient, upper oesophageal sphincter stenosis in another. We did not assess these studies for risk of bias. We did not find any ongoing randomised clinical trials of interest to our review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The evidence, obtained from only one feasibility randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very scanty. It is very uncertain about whether prophylactic band ligation versus sham or no (active) intervention may affect mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. We have no data on quality of life. No adverse events considered non-serious were reported. The results presented in the trial need to be interpreted with caution. In addition, the highly limited data cover only part of our research question; namely, children with portal hypertension and large oesophageal varices. Data on children with portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Larger randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham treatment for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, quality of life, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorena I Cifuentes
- Division of Paediatrics, Evidence-based Health Care Programme, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Daniela Gattini
- Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Romina Torres-Robles
- Sistema de Bibliotecas UC, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Juan Cristóbal Gana
- Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Cifuentes LI, Gattini D, Torres-Robles R, Gana JC. Beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 1:CD011973. [PMID: 33498095 PMCID: PMC8078150 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011973.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Therefore, prevention is important. Band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in paediatric patients because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES To determine the benefits and harms of beta-blockers compared with placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (April 2020). We screened the reference lists of the retrieved publications and manually searched the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to December 2019. We searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search. SELECTION CRITERIA We planned to include randomised clinical trials, irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status to assess benefits and harms. We included observational studies, retrieved with the searches for randomised clinical trials, for a narrative report of harm. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to asses risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and health-related quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to use intention-to-treat principle. We planned to analyse data with RevMan Analysis. MAIN RESULTS We found no randomised clinical trials that assessed beta-blockers compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. We found four observational studies that reported on harms. As a systematic search for observational studies was not planned, we only listed the reported harms in a table. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of beta-blockers versus placebo or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of beta-blockers versus placebo on patient-relevant clinical outcomes, such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of the two interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lorena I Cifuentes
- Division of Paediatrics, Evidence-based Health Care Programme, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Daniela Gattini
- Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Romina Torres-Robles
- Sistema de Bibliotecas UC, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Juan Cristóbal Gana
- Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gana JC, Cifuentes LI, Gattini D, Torres-Robles R. Band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 11:CD011803. [PMID: 33164205 PMCID: PMC8078550 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011803.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including haemorrhage from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal haemorrhage commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Prevention is therefore important. In adults, numerous randomised clinical trials have demonstrated benefits of non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal ligation as primary prevention in decreasing the risk of variceal haemorrhage. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, primary prophylaxis is not the current standard of care in children because it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or cause harm when used for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES To determine the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, LILACS, and Science Citation Index Expanded (27 April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of retrieved publications, and performed a manual search from the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstract books from 2008 to 2019. We searched ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, EMA, and WHO for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA We planned to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status for assessment of benefits and harms. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harms. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We planned to summarise data from randomised clinical trials by standard Cochrane methodologies. We planned to assess risk of bias and use GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We planned to analyse data with intention-to-treat. We planned to use Review Manager 5 to analyse the data. MAIN RESULTS We found no randomised clinical trials assessing band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Randomised clinical trials assessing the benefits or harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are lacking. Therefore, trials with adequate power and proper design, assessing the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sclerotherapy on patient-relevant clinical outcomes such as mortality, quality of life, failure to control variceal bleeding, and adverse events are needed. Unless such trials are conducted and the results become published, we cannot make any conclusions regarding the benefits or harms of these two interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan Cristóbal Gana
- Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Lorena I Cifuentes
- Division of Paediatrics, Evidence-based Health Care Programme, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Daniela Gattini
- Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| | - Romina Torres-Robles
- Sistema de Bibliotecas UC, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Wong GLH, Wong VWS, Thompson A, Jia J, Hou J, Lesmana CRA, Susilo A, Tanaka Y, Chan WK, Gane E, Ong-Go AK, Lim SG, Ahn SH, Yu ML, Piratvisuth T, Chan HLY. Management of patients with liver derangement during the COVID-19 pandemic: an Asia-Pacific position statement. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 5:776-787. [PMID: 32585136 PMCID: PMC7308747 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(20)30190-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2020] [Revised: 05/25/2020] [Accepted: 05/26/2020] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has spread rapidly worldwide. It is common to encounter patients with COVID-19 with abnormal liver function, either in the form of hepatitis, cholestasis, or both. The clinical implications of liver derangement might be variable in different clinical scenarios. With growing evidence of its clinical significance, it would be clinically helpful to provide practice recommendations for various common clinical scenarios of liver derangement during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Asia-Pacific Working Group for Liver Derangement during the COVID-19 Pandemic was formed to systematically review the literature with special focus on the clinical management of patients who have been or who are at risk of developing liver derangement during this pandemic. Clinical scenarios covering the use of pharmacological treatment for COVID-19 in the case of liver derangement, and assessment and management of patients with chronic hepatitis B or hepatitis C, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, liver cirrhosis, and liver transplantation during the pandemic are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grace Lai-Hung Wong
- Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, and Medical Data Analytic Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
| | - Vincent Wai-Sun Wong
- Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, and Medical Data Analytic Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China
| | - Alex Thompson
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Jidong Jia
- Liver Research Centre, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China
| | - Jinlin Hou
- Hepatology Unit and Department of Infectious Diseases, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Cosmas Rinaldi Adithya Lesmana
- Department of Gastroenterology, Dr Cipto Mangunkusumo National General Hospital, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Adityo Susilo
- Division of Tropical Medicine and Infection, Department of Internal Medicine, Dr Cipto Mangunkusumo National General Hospital, Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia
| | - Yasuhito Tanaka
- Department of Virology and Liver Unit, Nagoya City University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya, Japan
| | - Wah-Kheong Chan
- Department of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - Ed Gane
- New Zealand Liver Transplant Unit, Auckland City Hospital, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Arlinking K Ong-Go
- Department of Gastroenterology, Metropolitan Medical Center, Manila, Philippines
| | - Seng-Gee Lim
- Department of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore
| | - Sang Hoon Ahn
- Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
| | - Ming-Lung Yu
- Hepatobiliary Division, Department of Internal Medicine and Hepatitis Center, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Taiwan
| | - Teerha Piratvisuth
- Department of Gastroenterology, NKC Institute of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Faculty of Medicine, Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai, Thailand
| | - Henry Lik-Yuen Chan
- Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, and Medical Data Analytic Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gattini D, Cifuentes LI, Torres-Robles R, Gana JC. Sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2020; 3:CD011573. [PMID: 32133620 PMCID: PMC7059883 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd011573.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein obstruction. Therefore, prevention is important. Primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding in adults is the established standard of care because of the results of numerous randomised clinical trials demonstrating the efficacy of non-selective beta-blockers or endoscopic variceal ligation in decreasing the incidence of variceal bleeding. In children, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as alternatives for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether those treatments are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children. OBJECTIVES To assess the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. SEARCH METHODS We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase Elsevier, and two other registers in February 2019. We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and performed a manual search of the main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conference (NASPGHAN and ESPGHAN) abstracts from January 2008 to December 2018. We searched four registries for ongoing clinical trials. There were no language or document type restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status assessing sclerotherapy versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used the intention-to-treat principle to analyse outcome data, and GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence per outcome. MAIN RESULTS We found only one randomised clinical trial that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. The trial was at high risk of bias. The trial included 108 Brazilian children with median age of 4.3 years (range 11 months to 13 years). Fifty-six children were randomised to prophylactic sclerotherapy (ethanolamine oleate 2%) and 52 children to no intervention (control). Children were followed up for a median of 4.5 years. Eight children (six from the sclerotherapy group versus two from the control group) dropped out before the end of the trial. The follow-up was from 18 months to eight years. Mortality was 16% (9/56 children) in the sclerotherapy group versus 15% (8/52 children) in the control group (risk ration (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 2.50; very low-certainty evidence). Upper gastrointestinal bleeding occurred in 21% (12/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 46% (24/52) in the control group (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.83; very low-certainty evidence). There were more children with congestive hypertensive gastropathy in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (14% (8/56) versus 6% (3/52); RR 2.48, 95% CI 0.69 to 8.84; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of gastric varices was similar between the sclerotherapy group and the control group (11% (6/56) versus 10% (5/52); RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.43; very low-certainty evidence). The incidence of bleeding from gastric varices was higher in the sclerotherapy group than in the control group (4% (3/56) versus 0% (0/52); RR 6.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 123.06; very low-certainty evidence). The study did not assess health-related quality of life. Oesophageal variceal bleeding occurred in 5% (3/56) of the children in the sclerotherapy group versus 40% (21/52) of the children in the control group (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.42; very low-certainty evidence). The most prevalent complications (defined as non-serious) were pain and fever after the procedure, which promptly resolved with analgesics. However, numerical data on the frequency of these adverse events and their occurrences in the two groups were lacking. No funding information was provided. We found no ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS The evidence, obtained from one randomised clinical trial at high risk of bias, is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on mortality and if it may decrease first upper gastrointestinal or oesophageal variceal bleeding in children. The evidence is very uncertain on whether sclerotherapy has an influence on congestive hypertensive gastropathy, incidence on gastric varices, and incidence of bleeding from gastric varices. Health-related quality of life was not measured. There were no serious events caused by sclerotherapy, and analysis of non-serious adverse events could not be performed due to lack of numerical data. The GRADE assessment of each outcome showed a very low-certainty evidence. The results of the trial need to be interpreted with caution. Larger randomised clinical trials, following the SPIRIT and CONSORT statements, assessing the benefits and harms of sclerotherapy compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis are needed. The trials should include important clinical outcomes such as death, failure to control bleeding, and adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniela Gattini
- Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Paediatrics, Santiago, Chile
| | - Lorena I Cifuentes
- Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Division of Paediatrics, Evidence-based Health Care Programme, Lira 85, 5º piso, Santiago, Metroplitana, Chile, 833-0074
| | - Romina Torres-Robles
- Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Sistema de Bibliotecas UC, Santiago, Región Metropolitana, Chile, 8330074
| | - Juan Cristóbal Gana
- Division of Pediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Diagonal Paraguay 362, 8th Floor, Santiago, Region Metropolitana, Chile, 8330074
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gana JC, Cifuentes LI, Gattini D, Villarroel Del Pino LA, Peña A, Torres-Robles R. Band ligation versus beta-blockers for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019; 9:CD010546. [PMID: 31550050 PMCID: PMC6758973 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd010546.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Juan Cristóbal Gana
- Gastroenterology and Nutrition Department, Division of Pediatrics, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, 85 Lira, Santiago, Region Metropolitana, Chile, 8330074
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|