Endoscopic variceal ligation in children

Band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension commonly accompanies advanced liver disease and often gives rise to life-threatening complications, including bleeding (haemorrhage) from oesophageal and gastrointestinal varices. Variceal bleeding commonly occurs in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. Prevention is, therefore, important. Randomised clinical trials have shown that non-selective beta-blockers and endoscopic variceal band ligation decrease the incidence of variceal bleeding in adults. In children and adolescents, band ligation, beta-blockers, and sclerotherapy have been proposed as primary prophylaxis alternatives for oesophageal variceal bleeding. However, it is unknown whether these interventions are of benefit or harm when used for primary prophylaxis in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of band ligation compared with sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children and adolescents with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, and two other databases (April 2020). We scrutinised the reference lists of the retrieved publications, and we also handsearched abstract books of the two main paediatric gastroenterology and hepatology conferences from January 2008 to December 2019. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the European Medicines Agency (EMA), and the World Health Organization (WHO) for ongoing clinical trials. We imposed no language or document type restrictions on our search.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We aimed to include randomised clinical trials irrespective of blinding, language, or publication status, to assess the benefits and harms of band ligation versus sham or no intervention for primary prophylaxis of oesophageal variceal bleeding in children with chronic liver disease or portal vein thrombosis. If the search for randomised clinical trials retrieved quasi-randomised and other observational studies, then we read them through to extract information on harm.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology to perform this systematic review. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events and liver-related morbidity, and quality of life. Our secondary outcomes were oesophageal variceal bleeding and adverse events not considered serious. We used the intention-to-treat principle. We analysed data using Review Manager 5.

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

Assessment of risk of bleeding from esophageal varices during management of biliary atresia in children

OBJECTIVES

The management of esophageal varices (EV) in children experiencing biliary atresia (BA) remains controversial. Recent studies in children proposed initiating a prophylactic treatment in patients with severe (grade III) EV and/or EV associated with red color signs. Our study was aimed at assessing the risk of bleeding from EV in a series of patients with BA, identifying risk factors for bleeding to develop a predictive model of bleeding.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study including 83 eligible patients with BA. Clinical, ultrasonographic, endoscopic, and laboratory parameters were studied from the beginning of medical management up to the occurrence of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In patients not presenting any bleeding, data were analyzed until liver transplantation, endoscopic treatment of EV was performed, or last follow-up. Risk factors were investigated using univariate and multivariate statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Seventeen of 83 patients (20%) presented gastrointestinal bleeding, with a median age of 9.5 months (6-50 months). In univariate and multivariate analyses, high-grade EV, red color signs on endoscopic examination, and low fibrinogen levels, at first endoscopy, were identified as risk factors for bleeding. When tested in >10,000 different models, these 3 variables appeared to play the most significant role in predicting bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study confirmed that grade III EV and red color signs are risk factors for bleeding in patients followed up for BA. We identified low fibrinogen levels as an additional risk factor. The relevance of these 3 factors to predict bleeding from EV requires validation in a prospective study.

Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) in children

INTRODUCTION

Extrahepatic portal vein obstruction is an important cause of portal hypertension among children. The etiology is heterogeneous and there are few evidences related to the optimal treatment.

AIM AND METHODS

To establish guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of EHPVO in children, a group of gastroenterologists and pediatric surgery experts reviewed and analyzed data reported in the literature and issued evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

Pediatric EHPVO is idiopathic in most of the cases. Digestive hemorrhage and/or hypersplenism are the main symptoms. Doppler ultrasound is a non-invasive technique with a high degree of accuracy for the diagnosis. Morbidity is related to variceal bleeding, recurrent thrombosis, portal biliopathy and hypersplenism. Endoscopic therapy is effective in controlling acute variceal hemorrhage and it seems that vasoactive drug therapy can be helpful. For primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding, there are insufficient data for the use of beta blockers or endoscopic therapy. For secondary prophylaxis, sclerotherapy or variceal band ligation is effective; there is scare evidence to recommend beta-blockers. Surgery shunt is indicated in children with variceal bleeding who fail endoscopic therapy and for symptomatic hypersplenism; spleno-renal or meso-ilio-cava shunting is the alternative when Mesorex bypass is not feasible due to anatomic problems or in centers with no experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Prospective control studies are required for a better knowledge of the natural history of EHPVO, etiology identification including prothrombotic states, efficacy of beta-blockers and comparison with endoscopic therapy on primary and secondary prophylaxis.

Band ligation plus sclerotherapy versus sclerotherapy alone in children with extrahepatic portal venous obstruction

Although endoscopic band ligation (EVL) plus sclerotherapy (EST) has shown to be superior to any individual method, there is no study in children. We therefore analyzed our experience of EST and EVL + EST in children with extrahepatic portal venous obstruction (EHPVO). Over a period of 8 years, 136 children who presented with a history of recent variceal bleeding due to EHPVO were studied; 30 of them received EVL + EST and 106 received EST alone. In the EVL + EST group, after the first session of EVL, EST was done three times weekly until variceal eradication was achieved. The mean age of these children was 7 +/- 3.6 years with a male-to-female ratio of 2.6:1. The rate of eradication was comparable in both groups (100% in EVL + EST and 96% in EST). However, EVL + EST group required a significantly fewer sessions and lower volume of sclerosant (2 +/- 1 vs. 4.4 +/- 2 sessions, P < 0.001 and 3.1 +/- 2 mL versus 7.5 +/- 4 mL, P < 0.001 respectively). There were significantly less complications in EVL + EST group (10% vs. 36%, P < 0.01). Over a mean follow-up of 27 months, varices recurred in 6.6% and 10% cases, respectively. EVL + EST is a better method in the treatment of esophageal varices in children with EHPVO than EST alone, as it required fewer session and had fewer complication.

Endoscopic ligation of esophageal varices for prophylaxis of first bleeding in children and adolescents with portal hypertension: preliminary results of a prospective study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is effective in controlling rebleeding from esophageal varices in children, but there is no data on the use of EVL to prevent initial bleeding. The objective of this study was to prospectively evaluate the efficacy of EVL in preventing the first hemorrhage from esophageal varices in children.

METHODS

Thirty-seven children with portal hypertension (22 liver cirrhosis, 15 portal vein thrombosis), aged 4 to 17 years (M = 9.5 +/- 4.4 years) were included in the study. The criteria for inclusion were (1) no previous variceal bleeding; (2) the presence of esophageal varices classified grade II or more, and (3) their enlargement by at least I grade after 6 months of observation without endoscopic treatment or appearance of endoscopic signs of high bleeding risk. A Multi-Band Ligator was used, and 2 to 6 bands were fixed under general anesthesia during one procedure depending on the number and size of varices. Follow-up examinations were performed every 3 months, repeating the procedure if necessary. In total, 75 procedures of EVL were performed, from one to 5 in each patient

RESULTS

Four patients underwent liver transplantation before eradication of varices. Two others were excluded from the observation because of lack of compliance to the protocol. Of the remaining 31 patients, eradication of varices was achieved in 28 children (90.3%) after 2.0 EVL sessions performed at 3-month intervals. The average time of follow-up after cessation of treatment is 16 months. No bleeding from varices occurred in any child during or after treatment. There were no differences in results between children with liver cirrhosis and portal vein thrombosis. Development of hypertensive gastropathy was observed in 2 children with one episode of bleeding. Recurrence of varices without bleeding occurred in 3 children after 12, 13, and 28 months from eradication.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results confirmed that endoscopic variceal ligation is a safe and highly effective procedure in children with portal hypertension, regardless of its etiology. Eradication of esophageal varices was followed by 16 months free of bleeding. Prolonged observation is mandatory to conclude if preventive EVL influences the natural history of disease and diminishes the risk of first bleeding onset.

A prospective study of endoscopic esophageal variceal ligation using a multiband ligator

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic variceal band ligation (EVL) is the preferred method of treating variceal hemorrhage in adults. The need to reinsert the endoscope after reloading for each varix ligation has been a drawback. The Saeed multiband ligator allows ligation of multiple varices during a single insertion. The multibander has not been used previously in children.

METHODS

Twenty-eight consecutive children were referred to a pediatric liver unit because of esophageal variceal bleeding from 1998 to 2000. Endoscopic variceal band ligation was performed at initial endoscopy and repeated monthly until varices were obliterated or were too small to ligate.

RESULTS

Results are expressed as median (range). Age at EVL was 11 years (3 months to 16 years) and weight 30 kg (5.4-63 kg). Portal hypertension was caused by cirrhosis in 15 children. Endoscopic variceal band ligation was performed on 66 occasions with 4 bands applied per session. Ten children had active bleeding at initial endoscopy and all responded to EVL. Interval bleeding developed in 2 children before variceal ablation. Varices were obliterated in 26 of 28 patients after 2 sessions. During the 21-month follow-up (2 months to 3 years), six children have undergone elective liver transplantation and three have had mesoportal bypass procedures. Rebleeding developed in 2 of 26; 1 from recurrent esophageal varices that responded to repeat EVL and 1 from gastric varices. Following variceal ablation, 2-year actuarial variceal recurrence risk was 40%.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic variceal ligation is highly effective in obliterating esophageal varices in children. The use of a multibander device for endoscopic variceal ligation is technically feasible and safe even in small children, and its use results in more rapid ablation of esophageal varices.

Causes and management of portal hypertension in the pediatric population

Therapeutic options for children with portal hypertension now include a broad range of pharmacologic, endoscopic, and surgical procedures. Thoughtful application of all of these options can improve quality of life by decreasing the complications of portal hypertension and can decrease mortality by preventing the consequences of variceal hemorrhage. The development of portal hypertensive gastropathy following palliative procedures such as endoscopic sclerotherapy and band ligation may limit their long-term success in children. The excellent results now obtained with selective portosystemic shunts and liver transplantation assure that definitive surgical treatments will continue to be important components in the treatment of children with portal hypertensive complications or progressive liver disease. Evolving procedures, such as TIPS, represent excellent short-term life-preserving techniques to stabilize critically ill patients while awaiting liver transplantation. Their role in the future, long-term management of children is yet to be defined.

Esophageal varices: current management in children

The treatment of esophageal variceal hemorrhage is still the subject of some controversy. The main causes of portal hypertension in children are portal vein thrombosis or cirrhosis, most commonly caused by biliary atresia. Many treatment options are available including endoscopic, radiographic, and surgical strategies. In general, children with presinusoidal obstructions have preserved hepatic synthetic function, and, therefore, treatment options include endoscopic strategies or portosystemic shunts, each with advocates. For children with advanced liver disease, liver transplantation offers the only chance for cure, so primary treatment of variceal bleeding should be by endoscopic means or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). Each modality has specific advantages and disadvantages, and treatment recommendations must therefore be tailored to the individual on a case-by-case basis, largely dependent on the expertise and experience of the health care team.