EUS-guided angiotherapy for gastric varices: coil, glue, and sticky issues

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided diagnosis and treatment of gastric varices

Gastric varices (GV) represent a common and severe complication in patients with portal hypertension, commonly seen in patients with cirrhosis and severe pancreatic disease. Endoscopic ultrasonography is a safe and efficacious approach that can perform real-time ultrasonic scanning and intervention for the gastrointestinal submucosa, portal vein and its tributaries, and collateral circulations during direct endoscopic observation. Recently, various studies have been published about endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided management of GV, mainly including diagnosis, treatment, and prognostic analysis. This article reviews published articles and guidelines to present the development process and current management of EUS-guided GV procedures.

Diagnostic and interventional EUS in hepatology: An updated review

EUS has become an increasingly used diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the armamentarium of endoscopists. With ever-expanding indications, EUS is being used in patients with liver disease, for both diagnosis and therapy. EUS is playing an important role in providing additional important information to that provided by cross-sectional imaging modalities such as computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Domains of therapy that were largely restricted to interventional radiologists have become accessible to endosonologists. From liver biopsy and sampling of liver lesions to ablative therapy for liver lesions and vascular interventions for varices, there is increased use of EUS in patients with liver disease. In this review, we discuss the various diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in patients with various liver diseases.

Managing gastric varices

Gastric varices (GV) are a type of ectopic varix, which is a natural portosystemic shunt occurring in response to an increase in intrahepatic vascular resistance, mostly commonly from portal hypertension. GV are present in up to 20% of patients with portal hypertension. Although oesophageal varices are more common than GV, and oesophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) happens more often than gastric variceal bleeding (GVB), GVB tends to be more severe, to have higher associated hospital costs, length of stay, higher rebleeding rates and have higher mortality. Mortality rates associated with variceal bleeding range from 6% in EVB to 20%-55% in GVB. Risk factors for GV haemorrhage include location, size, severity of liver failure, presence of variceal red spots, and presence of HCC (hepatocellular carcinoma). This manuscript will review endoscopic and non-endoscopic treatment of GV.

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To update on recent advances in interventional endoscopic ultrasound (INVEUS) techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

The introduction of linear echoendoscopes with larger instrument channels and the combined development of new tools and devices have enabled various new applications of minimally invasive endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transluminal interventions of the pancreas, biliary system and peri-gastrointestinal structures. In this review, EUS-guided interventions are discussed and evaluated: drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, access and drainage of bile ducts, gallbladder and pancreatic duct, treatment of gastrointestinal haemorrhage, coeliac plexus block and coeliac plexus neurolysis, fiducial placement, solid and cystic tumour ablation, drug delivery and brachytherapy, gastroenterostomy, angiotherapy and other EUS-guided applications. The EUS-guided interventions are classified based on the available evidence as established or experimental, standardized or nonstandardized procedures in common or rare diseases with well or little known complications and their established or nonestablished treatment.

SUMMARY

Some EUS-guided interventions have sparse published evidence with only single-centre studies, case series or individual case reports, others like drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections have become widely accepted practice. INVEUS has been accepted as an alternative to several surgical approaches, EUS-guided techniques result in faster recovery times, shorter hospital stay and lower costs.

Multimodal Ultrasound Model Based on the Left Gastric Vein in B-Viral Cirrhosis: Noninvasive Prediction of Esophageal Varices

OBJECTIVES:

To establish and verify a simple noninvasive model based on the left gastric vein (LGV) to predict the grade of esophageal varices (EV) and high-risk EV (HEV), to facilitate clinical follow-up and timely treatment.

METHODS:

We enrolled 320 patients with B-viral cirrhosis. All patients underwent endoscopy, laboratory tests, liver and spleen stiffness (SS), and ultrasonography. HEV were analyzed using the χ² test/t test and logistic regression in the univariate and multivariate analyses, respectively. EV grades were analyzed using the variance/rank-sum test and logistic regression. A prediction model was derived from the multivariate predictors.

RESULTS:

In the training set, multivariate analysis showed that the independent factors of different EV grades were SS, LGV diameter, and platelet count (PLT). We developed the LGV diameter-SS to PLT ratio index (LSPI) and LGV diameter/PLT models without SS. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of the LSPI for diagnosis of small EV, medium EV, large EV, and HEV was 0.897, 0.899, 0.853, and 0.954, respectively, and that of the LGV/PLT was 0.882, 0.890, 0.837, and 0.942, respectively. For the diagnosis of HEV, the negative predictive value was 94.07% when LSPI < 19.8 and the positive predictive value was 91.49% when LSPI > 23.0. The negative predictive value was 95.92% when LGV/PLT < 5.15, and the positive predictive value was 86.27% when LGV/PLT > 7.40. The predicted values showed similar accuracy in the validation set.

DISCUSSION:

Under appropriate conditions, the LSPI was an accurate method to detect the grade of EV and HEV. Alternatively, the LGV/PLT may also be useful in diagnosing the varices when condition limited.

Insights into the role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided vascular therapy

Gastroesophageal variceal bleeding is a life-threatening complication in patients with liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension. The endoscopic injection of cyanoacrylate is considered as the first-line alternative for gastric varices treatment; however, the incidence of adverse events supports the endoscopic ultrasound–guided approach. Endoscopic ultrasound–guided interventions are a safe and feasible technique for the injection of sclerosants, cyanoacrylate, thrombin, and the deployment of coils into targeted vessels. This review article aims to offer an overview of the role of endoscopic ultrasound–guided vascular therapy and present the available data regarding endoscopic ultrasound–guided management of gastrointestinal bleeding and other vascular therapies. The available data have shown the superiority of endoscopic ultrasound–guided endovascular therapy over the endoscopic technique, which supports the implementation of endoscopic ultrasound–guided therapy in therapeutical algorithms and guidelines. Regarding whether injecting cyanoacrylate, the deployment of coils, or combined therapy, we recommend the endoscopic ultrasound–guided combined therapy in patients with gastric varices due to the high eradication rate with lower rebleeding and reintervention rates. Multicenter worldwide studies are required to confirm the actual clinical applicability of endoscopic ultrasound–guided endovascular therapy and establish treatment algorithms. Endoscopic ultrasound offered a safe and effective alternative in the management of variceal and nonvariceal gastrointestinal bleeding, with the implementation of new diagnostic and treatment options for various gastrointestinal conditions, representing a new territory for research and development.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided injection of coils and cyanoacrylate glue for the treatment of gastric fundal varices with abnormal shunts: a series of case reports

Gastric varices are found in approximately 20% of patients with portal hypertension. Endoscopic procedures involving the injection of cyanoacrylate (CYA) have proven to be the therapies of choice for primary treatment of gastric varices and have resulted in higher hemostasis rates and lower recurrent bleeding rates compared with band ligation and sclerotherapy. Nevertheless, serious adverse events associated with CYA injection, including glue embolization, have been reported in numerous articles and have occasionally led to fatal adverse events. Gastric fundal varices with abnormal shunts are higher-risk than those without abnormal shunts, and their treatment is more challenging. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided puncture is an important technique in the field of digestive endoscopy. EUS has advantages that include improved therapeutic targeting, enhanced variceal detection, the ability to confirm varix obliteration with Doppler examination, and the ability to perform accurate observations of gastric varices that are not affected by blood in the stomach. The coils currently used for intravascular embolization can be precisely delivered into a varix through fine-needle puncture under EUS guidance, and this technique has provided a new approach for varix obliteration. We herein describe two patients with severe gastric fundal varices who were treated with EUS-guided coil injection and CYA embolization.

Patient Response to Endoscopic Therapy for Gastroesophageal Varices Based on Endoscopic Ultrasound Findings

Background/Aims

Gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage is a common complication of portal hypertension. Endoscopic therapy is currently recommended for preventing gastroesophageal variceal rebleed. However, the rate of variceal rebleed and its associated mortality remain concerning. This study is aimed at differentiating patient response to endoscopic therapy based on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) findings.

Methods

One-hundred seventy patients previously treated with repeat endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis were enrolled and classified into two groups based on treatment response. Prior to consolidation therapy, all patients received an EUS examination to observe for extraluminal phenomena. All available follow-up endoscopic examination records were retrieved to validate study results.

Results

Of the 170 subjects, 106 were poor responders, while 64 were good responders. The presence of para-gastric, gastric perforating, and esophageal perforating veins was associated with poor patient response (p<0.001). The odds ratio for para-gastric veins was 5.374. Follow-up endoscopic findings for poor responders with incomplete variceal obliteration was closely correlated with the presence of para-gastric veins (p=0.002).

Conclusions

The presence of para-gastric veins is a characteristic of poor response to endoscopic therapy for treating gastroesophageal varices. Early identification of this subgroup necessitates a change in course of treatment to improve overall patient outcome.

Complications of Chronic Pancreatitis

Chronic pancreatitis is a disease that leads to irreversible changes in the pancreatic morphology and function. The loss of function can lead to diabetes mellitus and exocrine pancreatic insufficiency. The inflammation and fibrosis can also lead to other complications including a chronic abdominal pain syndrome, metabolic bone disease, and pancretic cancer. This article reviews our current understanding of the mechanisms and management of these complications of chronic pancreatitis.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions in special situations

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was introduced in 1982 and has since become a popular advanced procedure for diagnosis and therapeutic intervention. Initially, EUS was most commonly used for the diagnosis of pancreatobiliary diseases and tissue acquisition. EUS was first used for guided cholangiography in 1996, followed by EUS-guided biliary drainage in 2001. Advancements in equipment and endoscopic accessories have led to an expansion of EUS-guided procedures, which now include EUS-guided drainage of intra-abdominal abscesses or collections, intra-vascular treatment of refractory variceal and nonvariceal bleeding, transmural pancreatic drainage, common bile duct stone clearance, enteral feeding tube placement and entero-enteric anastomosis. Patients with surgically altered upper gastrointestinal anatomies have greatly benefited from EUS also. This systematic review describes and discusses EUS procedures performed in uncommon diseases and conditions, as well as applications on more vulnerable patients such as young children and pregnant women. In these cases, routine approaches do not always apply, and thus may require the use of innovative and unconventional techniques. Increased knowledge of such special applications will help increase the success rates of these procedures and provide a foundation for additional advances and utilizations of the technique.

Hemostatic powder spray: a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. The management of gastrointestinal bleeding is often challenging, depending on its location and severity. To date, widely accepted hemostatic treatment options include injection of epinephrine and tissue adhesives such as cyanoacrylate, ablative therapy with contact modalities such as thermal coagulation with heater probe and bipolar hemostatic forceps, noncontact modalities such as photodynamic therapy and argon plasma coagulation, and mechanical hemostasis with band ligation, endoscopic hemoclips, and over-the-scope clips. These approaches, albeit effective in achieving hemostasis, are associated with a 5-10% rebleeding risk. New simple, effective, universal, and safe methods are needed to address some of the challenges posed by the current endoscopic hemostatic techniques. The use of a novel hemostatic powder spray appears to be effective and safe in controlling upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Although initial reports of hemostatic powder spray as an innovative approach to manage gastrointestinal bleeding are promising, further studies are needed to support and confirm its efficacy and safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, clinical efficacy, and safety of hemostatic powder spray (Hemospray, Cook Medical, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA) as a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding. In this review article, we performed an extensive literature search summarizing case reports and case series of Hemospray for the management of gastrointestinal bleeding. Indications, features, technique, deployment, success rate, complications, and limitations are discussed. The combined technical and clinical success rate of Hemospray was 88.5% (207/234) among the human subjects and 81.8% (9/11) among the porcine models studied. Rebleeding occurred within 72 hours post-treatment in 38 patients (38/234; 16.2%) and in three porcine models (3/11; 27.3%). No procedure-related adverse events were associated with the use of Hemospray. Hemospray appears to be a safe and effective approach in the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.

Hemostatic powder spray: a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding

Gastrointestinal bleeding is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. The management of gastrointestinal bleeding is often challenging, depending on its location and severity. To date, widely accepted hemostatic treatment options include injection of epinephrine and tissue adhesives such as cyanoacrylate, ablative therapy with contact modalities such as thermal coagulation with heater probe and bipolar hemostatic forceps, noncontact modalities such as photodynamic therapy and argon plasma coagulation, and mechanical hemostasis with band ligation, endoscopic hemoclips, and over-the-scope clips. These approaches, albeit effective in achieving hemostasis, are associated with a 5-10% rebleeding risk. New simple, effective, universal, and safe methods are needed to address some of the challenges posed by the current endoscopic hemostatic techniques. The use of a novel hemostatic powder spray appears to be effective and safe in controlling upper and lower gastrointestinal bleeding. Although initial reports of hemostatic powder spray as an innovative approach to manage gastrointestinal bleeding are promising, further studies are needed to support and confirm its efficacy and safety. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical feasibility, clinical efficacy, and safety of hemostatic powder spray (Hemospray, Cook Medical, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA) as a new method for managing gastrointestinal bleeding. In this review article, we performed an extensive literature search summarizing case reports and case series of Hemospray for the management of gastrointestinal bleeding. Indications, features, technique, deployment, success rate, complications, and limitations are discussed. The combined technical and clinical success rate of Hemospray was 88.5% (207/234) among the human subjects and 81.8% (9/11) among the porcine models studied. Rebleeding occurred within 72 hours post-treatment in 38 patients (38/234; 16.2%) and in three porcine models (3/11; 27.3%). No procedure-related adverse events were associated with the use of Hemospray. Hemospray appears to be a safe and effective approach in the management of gastrointestinal bleeding.

Potential application of interventional endoscopic ultrasonography for the treatment of esophageal and gastric varices

Interventional endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been developed mainly for the treatment of pancreaticobiliary disorders (e.g. cyst drainage for pancreatic pseudocysts, biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction, and celiac plexus neurolysis). Recently, the application of interventional EUS has been expanded to a new field, the treatment of gastrointestinal varices. There have been several studies examining this new technique for the treatment of esophageal and gastric varices. In the present review, we have summarized the current status of interventional EUS for the treatment of esophageal and gastric varices (e.g. EUS-guided coil deployment for gastric varices) and clarified the clinical feasibility of this procedure.

Achieving hemostasis and the risks associated with therapy

Acute gastrointestinal bleeding is a common cause for hospitalization. Endoscopic hemostasis plays a central role in the management of lesions with active bleeding or high-risk stigmata for rebleeding. The efficacy and safety of endoscopic hemostasis rely on the identification of lesions suitable for endoscopic therapy, selection of the appropriate hemostatic devices, attention to technique, and prompt recognition and management of procedure-related adverse events. In this article, practical applications of hemostatic devices and pitfalls related to endoscopic hemostasis are discussed.

Emerging endoscopic therapies for nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Several new devices and innovative adaptations of existing modalities have emerged as primary, adjunctive, or rescue therapy in endoscopic hemostasis of gastrointestinal hemorrhage. These techniques include over-the-scope clip devices, hemostatic sprays, cryotherapy, radiofrequency ablation, endoscopic suturing, and endoscopic ultrasound-guided angiotherapy. This review highlights the technical aspects and clinical applications of these devices in the context of nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding.