Endoscopic ultrasonographic signs of portal hypertension in cirrhosis

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Hepatology

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been an indispensable and widely used diagnostic tool in several medical fields, including gastroenterology, cardiology, and urology, due to its diverse therapeutic and diagnostic applications. Many studies show that it is effective and safe in patients with liver conditions where conventional endoscopy or cross-sectional imaging are inefficient or when surgical interventions pose high risks. In this article, we present a review of the current literature for the different diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in liver diseases and their complications and discuss the potential future application of artificial intelligence analysis of EUS.

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.

The role of endoscopic ultrasound for portal hypertension in liver cirrhosis

Chronic liver disease is still a major problem because disease progression will ultimately lead to liver cirrhosis. Portal hypertension is the hallmark in advanced liver disease management. By establishing portal vein access, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been utilized in various clinical applications. In comparison to standard upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, EUS-Doppler has been shown to be a better modality for detecting esophageal and gastric varices along with peri-esophageal collateral veins, para-esophageal collateral veins, and perforating veins, and may be used to objectively predict the recurrence of bleeding. EUS-guided portal vein catheterization has also been proposed to overcome the limitations of trans-jugular approaches. The combination of EUS-elastography and azygos vein evaluation can also enhance the diagnostic accuracy of each modality. Another well-known implementation of EUS-guided procedures is in the management of ascites; particularly in paracentesis and ascitic fluid analysis. In addition, the most common clinical application of EUS in the treatment of portal hypertension is through vascular therapy or creation of intrahepatic portosystemic shunts. Major drawbacks of EUS mainly revolve around technical difficulties, the high cost of the procedure, as well as the requirement of more studies in humans to evaluate EUS-guided advanced therapeutic modalities in portal hypertension.

The Role of Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound in Liver Diseases: What Have We Learnt?

Chronic liver disease (CLD) is still a major problem, where the disease progression will lead to liver cirrhosis (LC) or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Portal hypertension (PH) management and loco-regional therapy for HCC have become the cornerstones in advanced liver disease management. Recently, there are studies looking at the potential role of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in liver diseases. EUS may be useful in vascular changes of the digestive wall evaluation, performing dynamic assessment of hemodynamic changes, predicting variceal bleeding and rebleeding risk, and assessing the pharmacological effects. In PH management, EUS-guided vascular therapy-which revolves around glue injection, endovascular coil placement/embolization, and combination of both-has shown promising results. As a diagnostic modality for liver cancer, the implementation of EUS in liver diseases is currently not only limited to liver biopsy (EUS-LB) but also in shear-wave elastography (SWE) and portal pressure gradient measurement, as well as portal vein sampling. The application of EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) and tumor injection can also overcome the limitations shown by both modalities without EUS. Nevertheless, establishing EUS as a firm diagnostic and therapeutic modality is still challenging since the performance of interventional EUS requires high expertise and adequate facilities.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Esophageal Varices

Esophageal varices are caused by the development of collateral circulation in the esophagus as a result of portal hypertension. It is important to administer appropriate preventive treatment because bleeding varices can be fatal. Esophageal varices have complex and diverse hemodynamics, and there are various variations for each case. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can estimate the hemodynamics of each case. Therefore, observation by EUS in esophageal varices provides useful information, such as safe and effective treatment selection, prediction of recurrence, and appropriate follow-up after treatment. Although treatment for the esophagogastric varices can be performed without EUS imaging, understanding the local hemodynamics of the varices using EUS prior to treatment will lead to more safe and effective treatment. EUS observation is an indispensable tool for thorough variceal care.

Esophageal collateral veins in predicting esophageal variceal recurrence and rebleeding after endoscopic treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Endoscopic treatment is recommended for the management of esophageal varices. However, variceal recurrence or rebleeding is common after endoscopic variceal eradication. Our study aimed to systematically evaluate the prevalence of esophageal collateral veins (ECVs) and the association of ECVs with recurrence of esophageal varices or rebleeding from esophageal varices after endoscopic treatment.

Methods

We searched the relevant literature through the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Prevalence of paraesophageal veins (para-EVs), periesophageal veins (peri-EVs), and perforating veins (PVs) were pooled. Risk ratio (RR) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for cohort studies and case-control studies, respectively. A random-effects model was employed. Heterogeneity among studies was calculated.

Results

Among the 532 retrieved papers, 28 were included. The pooled prevalence of para-EVs, peri-EVs, and PVs in patients with esophageal varices was 73%, 88%, and 54%, respectively. The pooled prevalence of para-EVs and PVs in patients with recurrence of esophageal varices was 87% and 62%, respectively. The risk for recurrence of esophageal varices was significantly increased in patients with PVs (OR = 9.79, 95% CI: 1.95-49.22, P = 0.006 for eight case-control studies), but not in those with para-EVs (OR = 4.26, 95% CI: 0.38-38.35, P = 0.24 for four case-control studies; RR = 1.81, 95% CI: 0.83-3.97, P = 0.14 for three cohort studies). Patients with para-EVs had a significantly higher incidence of rebleeding from esophageal varices (RR = 13.00, 95% CI: 2.43-69.56, P = 0.003 for two cohort studies). Statistically significant heterogeneity was notable across the meta-analyses.

Conclusions

ECVs are common in patients with esophageal varices. Identification of ECVs could be helpful for predicting the recurrence of esophageal varices or rebleeding from esophageal varices after endoscopic treatment.

Endoscopic ultrasound in chronic liver disease

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic modality with a number of established as well as evolving uses in patients with chronic liver disease. Compared to other diagnostic tools such as cross-sectional imaging or conventional endoscopy, EUS has been shown to increase diagnostic sensitivity and therapeutic success for many clinical scenarios and applications with a low rate of adverse events. In this review, we discuss and focus on the current and growing role of EUS in the evaluation and/or treatment of hepatobiliary masses, hepatic parenchymal disease, portal hypertension, esophageal and other varices, and indeterminate biliary strictures.

The role of EUS in diagnosis and treatment of liver disorders

Background and aim  Transabdominal ultrasound (US), computed tomographic scanning (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are established diagnostic tools for liver diseases. Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography is used to perform hepatic interventional procedures including biopsy, biliary drainage procedures, and radiofrequency ablation. Despite their widespread use, these techniques have limitations. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), a tool that has proven useful for evaluating the mediastinum, esophagus, stomach, pancreas, and biliary tract, has an expanding role in the field of hepatology complementing the traditional investigational modalities. This review aimed to assess the current scientific evidence regarding diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS for hepatic diseases.

Endoscopic ultrasonography predicts early esophageal variceal bleeding in liver cirrhosis: A case report

RATIONALE

Bleeding esophageal and gastric varices constitute a serious complication in liver cirrhosis. Previous studies have shown that endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) can be used to predict early esophageal variceal bleeding in liver cirrhosis.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We report a case of a 46-year-old man with hepatitis B liver cirrhosis (CTP score, 5; Child-Pugh class, A) who was admitted to our hospital due to a decreased appetite lasting 1 week.

DIAGNOSIS

He was initially diagnosed with decompensated hepatitis B cirrhosis; an abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan indicated a diagnosis of liver cirrhosis and portal hypertension (PHT).

INTERVENTIONS

Common endoscopic examination showed no evidence of gastroesophageal varices; EUS revealed distinct varices of the esophageal and gastric veins. Six months after discharge, the patient was rehospitalized because of upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Endoscopic ligation was implemented as well as esophageal varices loop ligature (EVL).

OUTCOMES

Six months later, EUS showed obvious collateral and perforator veins.

LESSONS

We should strongly recommend that patients with liver cirrhosis undergo EUS in addition to a routine endoscopic examination. EUS can play an important role in evaluating the risk for bleeding in PHT and can be used to assess the efficacy of EVL.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Vascular Therapy: The Present and the Future

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) offers access to many intra-abdominal vessels that until now have only been accessible to the surgeon and interventional radiologist. In addition to assisting with diagnostics, this unique access offers the potential for therapeutic intervention for a host of indications. To date, this has had the most clinical impact in the treatment of gastroesophageal varices, with EUS-guided coil and glue application growing in use worldwide. Although randomised controlled trial data is lacking, we discuss the growing body of literature behind EUS-guided therapy in the management of varices. EUS has also been used in specialized centres to assist in non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding. The treatment of bleeding from Dieulafoy lesions, tumours and pancreatic pseudoaneurysms has all been described. The potential applications of EUS have also extended to the placement of portal vein stents and porto-systemic shunts in animal models. As medicine continues to move to increasingly less invasive interventions, EUS-guided therapies offer substantial promise for the safe and effective delivery of targeted treatment for a widening array of vascular disorders.

Utility of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis and management of esophagogastric varices

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has significantly improved our understanding of the complex vascular structural changes in patients with portal hypertension. At present, EUS is a useful diagnostic tool for the evaluation of esophagogastric varices (EGVs) and guidance of endoscopic therapy. Several studies have employed this new technique for the diagnosis and management of esophageal and gastric varices, respectively. In the present review, we have summarized the current status of EUS for the diagnosis and management of EGVs and clarified the clinical feasibility of this procedure. New indications for EUS can be developed in the future after adequate validation.

EUS-guided coil versus cyanoacrylate therapy for the treatment of gastric varices: a multicenter study (with videos)

BACKGROUND

Therapy of gastric varices (GV) is still challenging. Cyanoacrylate (CYA) injection is the recommended treatment for bleeding GV, but has a known adverse event rate, which could be reduced if EUS is used for guidance. Otherwise, EUS-guided coil application (ECA) may be an alternative.

OBJECTIVES

To compare CYA and ECA embolization of feeding GV for feasibility, safety, and applicability.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database.

SETTING

Multicenter study, tertiary referral centers.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Thirty consecutive patients with localized GV who received either CYA injection or ECA were included with follow-up for 6 months after treatment.

RESULTS

There were 11 patients in the coil group and 19 patients in the CYA group. The GV obliteration rate was 94.7% CYA versus 90.9% ECA; mean number of endoscopy sessions was 1.4 ± 0.1 (range 1-3). Adverse events occurred in 12 of 30 patients (40%) (CYA, 11/19 [57.9%]; ECA, 1/11 [9.1%]; P < .01); only 3 were symptomatic, and an additional 9 (CYA group) had glue embolism on a CT scan but was asymptomatic. No further adverse events occurred during follow-up. Six patients (20%) died unrelated to the procedures or bleeding.

LIMITATIONS

Nonrandomized; EUS expertise necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided therapy for GV by using CYA or ECA is effective in localized GV. ECA required fewer endoscopies and tended to have fewer adverse events compared with CYA injection. Larger comparative studies are needed to prove these data.

Balloon-occluded Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration (BRTO): Follow-Up and Postprocedural Imaging

The majority of patients undergoing balloon retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) are decompensated cirrhotic for either bleeding gastric varices (GV) or hepatic encephalopathy. These patients will require close follow-up and assessments pre- and post-BRTO including clinical, laboratory, endoscopic, and imaging evaluations. It is essential that clinicians are aware of the potential benefits and complications that may result from BRTO. These complications may include fever, chest or epigastric pain, hemoglobinuria, transient hypertension, nausea or vomiting, and many more. These complications usually resolve within the first 10 days. Laboratory abnormalities are transient and uncommon. Radiologic and endoscopic follow-up are required including computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), routine upper endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), which are detailed in this review. Patients undergoing BRTO are usually complicated and will require a team approach. This team should include the hepatologist, endoscopist, and interventional radiologist. Understanding and open dialogue are essential in the management of post-BRTO patients. The authors review the possible benefits, potential complications, and the evaluation tools needed to improve outcomes.

Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) for Esophageal and Gastric Varices: How Can it Improve the Outcomes and Reduce Complications of Glue Injection

A large part of portal venous system and the paragastric and para-esophageal collateral circulation is within the reach of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). The EUS is more sensitive than gastroscopy for the detection of gastric varices (GV), and can accurately distinguish GV from thickened gastric folds. Gastric varices are depicted by serpiginous, anechoic, Doppler-positive mural channels, with larger collateral channels visible outside the gastric wall. The EUS has also been used to monitor the completeness of GV obturation after glue injection. There are limited data that this strategy may be clinically beneficial to prevent GV re-bleed. The EUS has been used to deliver glue injections under real-time monitoring into the vascular channels, with or without steel coils as scaffolding for the glue. The potential advantages of this technique include a straight scope position, lack of hindrance from pooled blood in gastric fundus, smaller glue volume requirements, and precise intra-vascular placement of glue with avoidance of intramural injections, and reduced embolic complications.

Endoscopic management of portal hypertension

Cirrhosis is the leading cause of portal hypertension worldwide, with the development of bleeding gastroesophageal varices being one of the most life-threatening consequences. Endoscopy plays an indispensible role in the diagnosis, staging, and prophylactic or active management of varices. With the expected future refinements in endoscopic technology, capsule endoscopy may one day replace traditional gastroscopy as a diagnostic modality, whereas endoscopic ultrasound may more precisely guide interventional therapy for gastric varices.

[Recent advances in diagnosis of portal hypertension]

Complications of portal hypertension are major concerns in liver cirrhosis and significant morbidity and mortality mainly because of variceal bleeding, ascites, bacterial infections, hepatic encephalopathy, and hepatorenal syndrome. Various modalities in the diagnosis of portal hypertension are reviewed. The measurement of hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is a simple, invasive, reproducible method and regarded as the gold standard for the diagnosis and staging of portal hypertension. Other tests such as transient elastography, per-endoscopic variceal pressure measurement, endoscopic ultrasonography, and Doppler ultrasonography may be complementary and promising.

Current staging and diagnosis of gastroesophageal varices

Portal hypertension is defined as an increase in hepatic sinusoidal pressure to 6 mm Hg or higher. Cirrhosis is the most common cause of portal hypertension in the western world and results from increased resistance to blood flow at the hepatic sinusoidal level.

Endoscopic ultrasonography for the evaluation of portal hypertension

Since the 1980s, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been useful in the evaluation of portal hypertension, either for the diagnostic aspects or for the evaluation of therapy and risk of bleeding. More recently, it has been described as a method for guiding interventions such as variceal injection, portal vein catheterization, or even for creating an intrahepatic portosystemic shunt in the animal laboratory. The new generation of radial electronic echoendoscopes is equipped with color Doppler capability, allowing for measurement of any hemodynamic parameter of the portal circulation. This article summarizes the current knowledge on the role of EUS for the evaluation of portal hypertension.

Endoscopic ultrasonography and portal hypertension: where are we in 2009?

Endoscopic ultrasonography is currently a sensitive diagnostic and therapeutic tool with established indications, but its role in the management of portal hypertension is not well defined. This article briefly reviews indications, technologic improvements, diagnostic and interventional applications of endoscopic ultrasonography in portal hypertension.

Systematic review: endoscopic and imaging-based techniques in the assessment of portal haemodynamics and the risk of variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Invasive measurement of the hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) is regarded as the gold standard for risk stratification and the evaluation of pharmaceutical agents in patients with portal hypertension.

AIM

To review the techniques for endoscopic and imaging-based assessment of portal haemodynamics, with particular emphasis on trials where the results were compared with HVPG or direct portal pressure measurement.

METHODS

Systematic search of the MEDLINE electronic database with keywords: portal hypertension, variceal bleeding, variceal pressure, endoscopic ultrasound, Doppler ultrasonography, magnetic resonance angiography, CT angiography, hepatic venous pressure gradient.

RESULTS

Computed tomography angiography and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have been both employed for the diagnosis of complications of portal hypertension and for the evaluation of the efficacy of endoscopic therapy. Colour Doppler ultrasonography and magnetic resonance angiography has given discrepant results. Endoscopic variceal pressure measurements either alone or combined with simultaneous EUS, correlate well with HVPG and risk of variceal bleeding and have a low interobserver variability.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic and imaging-based measurements of portal haemodynamics provide an alternate means for the assessment of complications of portal hypertension. Further studies are required to validate their use in risk stratification and the evaluation of drug therapies in patients with portal hypertension.

EUS-guided injection of cyanoacrylate in perforating feeding veins in gastric varices: results in 5 cases

BACKGROUND

Bleeding from gastric varices can be challenging because of its high mortality and recurrent bleeding rates. Endoscopic therapy with tissue adhesives can control acute hemorrhage, but recurrent bleeding could appear if obliteration is not achieved, and endoscopic vision could be troublesome in the case of massive hemorrhage. The glue injected could be responsible for embolic phenomena and local complications. EUS has proved useful in minimizing the risk of recurrent bleeding from gastric varices, accurately showing if they are obturated or not. The presence of perforating veins detected by EUS has been reported as a risk factor for recurrent bleeding from esophageal varices.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy of EUS-guided cyanoacrylate injection in gastric varices at the entrance of the perforating veins to obtain variceal obturation.

DESIGN

Open-basis case series study.

SETTING

Tertiary care, academic medical center, Seville, Spain.

PATIENTS

Five consecutive patients with gastric varices were enrolled from May 2005 through May 2006.

INTERVENTIONS

We injected cyanoacrylate-lipiodol in gastric varices with 22-gauge needles by EUS guidance.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

To analyze the obliteration of gastric varices, the recurrent bleeding rate, and safety of EUS-guided cyanoacrylate-lipiodol injection.

RESULTS

EUS-guided injection of the perforating veins by using cyanoacrylate-lipiodol was successful in eradicating gastric varices in the 5 patients treated, without recurrent bleeding or other complications during the study follow-up.

LIMITATION

This is a single-center nonrandomized study.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided injection of cyanoacrylate at the level of the perforating veins in the treatment of gastric varices seems to be a safe, efficient, and accurate approach. Further controlled studies are warranted.

CURRENT CLINICAL APPLICATIONS OF ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been developed since the early 1980s. Its clinical role in the diagnosis of gastrointestinal wall lesions and staging of gastrointestinal and lung cancer has evolved over the last two decades. Initially, it was either used as an imaging tool for gastrointestinal wall lesions or for staging of gastrointestinal tumours. However, in combination with fine-needle aspiration under real-time scanning, EUS is now being used in tissue sampling for diagnosis. In addition, EUS may be used therapeutically in coeliac plexus neurolysis or pseudocyst drainage. This review concentrates on the current applications of EUS.

Endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and management of portal hypertension. Where are we next?

Endoscopic ultrasonography has recently emerged as an accurate, non-invasive and reproducible alternative means of providing data for patients with portal hypertension. It is well established that endoscopic ultrasonography is more sensitive than endoscopy in the diagnosis of gastric varices. Dilated venous abnormalities outside the gastrooesophageal lumen, which cannot be diagnosed by endoscopy, are readily visible with endoscopic ultrasonography or miniature probes. Endoscopic ultrasonography is also useful to predict the risk of variceal recurrence and thus the risk of rebleeding after endotherapy which cannot be reliably predicted using endoscopy alone. The introduction of echo endoscopes equipped with Doppler facilities has allowed the sonographic visualisation of the vessels and the evaluation of vascular blood flow along with possible morphologic and haemodynamic changes after endoscopic or pharmacological therapy. However, despite its theoretical advantages, relative evidence suggests that in the clinical setting of portal hypertension, endoscopic ultrasonography remains an investigational tool with limited clinical applications.

Research progress of vasculopathy in portal hypertension

Portal hypertension, one of the vascular diseases, not only has lesions in liver, but also changes in vascular structures and functions of extrahepatic portal system, systemic system and pulmonary circulation. The pathological changes of vasculopathy in portal hypertension include remodeling of arterialized visceral veins, intimal injury of visceral veins and destruction of contractile structure in visceral arterial wall. The mechanisms of vasculopathy in portal hypertension may be attributed to the changes of hemodynamics in portal system, immune response, gene modulation, vasoactive substances, and intrahepatic blood flow resistance. Portal hypertension can cause visceral hyperdynamic circulation, and the development and progression of visceral vasculopathy, while visceral vasculopathy can promote the development and progression of portal hypertension and visceral hyperdynamic circulation in turn. The aforementioned three factors interact in the pathogenesis of hepatic cirrhosis-induced portal hypertension and are involved in hemorrhage due to varicose vein rupture.

Detection of submucosal gastric fundal varices with multi-detector row CT angiography

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The diagnosis of submucosal fundal varices is challenging. Currently, endoscopy and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are considered most useful for this purpose. The aim of this study was to evaluate if multi-detector row CT (MDCT) angiography contributes to the diagnosis of submucosal fundal varices.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty two patients with endoscopically suspected fundal varices were prospectively included in the study. All patients underwent EUS and MDCT angiography. Levels of agreement between EUS and MDCT angiography for the detection of submucosal and perigastric fundal varices were evaluated by three blinded independent readers. In addition, variceal size and location, as well as afferent and efferent vessels of the submucosal varices, were determined.

RESULTS

Good or excellent image quality of MDCT angiography was obtained in 21/22 patients (95%). Based on EUS, submucosal varices were detected in 16 of 22 patients (73%) and perigastric varices in 22/22 patients (100%). Using MDCT angiography, the presence of submucosal varices was confirmed in all of these 16 patients by all three readers. Perigastric varices were also confirmed in all 22 patients by all three readers. In addition, all three readers noted the presence of a submucosal varix in an additional patient which was not detected on initial EUS. MDCT angiography showed an excellent interobserver reliability with regard to variceal diameter (kappa=0.90) and variceal location (kappa=0.94). Based on MDCT angiography, afferent and efferent vessels of submucosal varices included the left gastric vein in 11 (65%), the posterior/short gastric veins in 15 (88%), gastrorenal shunts in 10 (59%), the left inferior phrenic vein in six (35%), and the left pericardiophrenic vein in six (35%) of 17 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

MDCT angiography is equivalent to EUS in terms of detection and characterisation of fundal varices, in particular with regard to the distinction between submucosal and perigastric fundal varices.

Risk of esophageal variceal bleeding based on endoscopic ultrasound evaluation of the sum of esophageal variceal cross-sectional surface area

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the risk of future variceal bleeding, based on the endoscopic ultrasound measurement of the sum of the cross-sectional surface area (CSA) of all of the esophageal varices in the distal esophagus.

METHODS

Twenty-eight patients with portal hypertension and esophageal varices, but no prior history of variceal bleeding, were evaluated using endoscopic ultrasound (20-MHz ultrasound probe, Microvasive, Boston, MA; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). The entire esophagus was imaged, and an image was selected at a point where the varices appeared the largest. This image was digitized, and the sum of the CSA of all of the varices was measured (Image Pro Plus, Silver Springs, MD) by an investigator blinded to the patients' clinical status. The follow-up time for each patient was calculated (time to first bleed, time to liver transplantation, time to death, or time to the end of study). The Cox Proportional Hazards Model was used to determine if there was a significant difference between the sums of the CSA in the patients who bled compared with those who did not bleed. An OR was calculated to determine the risk of future variceal bleeding based on the sum of the CSA as measured in cm(2)/month. Positive and negative predictive values were calculated for future variceal bleeding.

RESULTS

Six of 28 patients (21%) experienced esophageal variceal bleeding on follow-up. The mean CSA +/- SEM of the sum of the esophageal varices in these patients was 0.77 cm(2) +/- 0.31 cm(2) (range 0.07-2.09 cm(2)). The mean time to bleeding was 15.5 months +/- 4.95 months (range 1-29 months). Twenty-two of 28 patients (79%) did not experience variceal bleeding. The mean CSA +/- SEM of the sum of the varices in these patients was 0.36 cm(2) +/- 0.08 cm(2) (range 0.02-1.19 cm(2)). The mean time to follow-up was 35.7 months +/- 6.69 months (range 1.2-103.2 months). The sum of the CSA between the patients who bleed and those who did not bleed was significantly different at the p < 0.018 level. The OR for the risk of variceal bleeding for each one cm(2) difference in the sum of the CSA per month was 6.34. Using a cutoff of 0.45 cm(2), the sensitivity and specificity for future variceal bleeding was 83% and 75%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant difference (p < 0.018) in the sum of the esophageal variceal CSA between those patients who will experience future variceal bleeding and those who will not. There is a 76-fold increase per year in the risk of future variceal bleeding for each one cm(2) increase in variceal CSA. Using a cutoff value for the CSA of 0.45 cm(2), the sensitivity and specificity for future variceal bleeding above and below this point is 83% and 75%, respectively.

Assessment of portal hypertension in humans

Patients suspected of having portal hypertension (either by clinical history, physical examination, or previous diagnosis) should undergo ultrasonography and upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Ultrasonography, preferably using the duplex technique, can disclose the patency of the portal venous system, the presence of signs of portal hypertension (splenomegaly, portocollateral vessels, repermeabilization of the umbilical vein, and so forth) and provide additional information about liver, biliary, or pancreatic diseases that may be the cause of portal hypertension. Endoscopy can assess the presence and size of gastroesophageal varices, the appearance of the variceal wall, and the presence and severity of portal hypertensive gastropathy. Patients showing a patent portal vein should have hepatic vein catheterization to evaluate the presence of presinusoidal, sinusoidal, or postsinusoidal portal hypertension. Patients in whom presinusoidal portal hypertension is suspected (those having esophageal varices with an HVPG below 10 mm Hg) should have liver biopsy and percutaneous transhepatic measurement of portal pressure. In sinusoidal portal hypertension, the results of endoscopy and HVPG measurement are decisive for the therapeutic management of the patients. The authors' results indicate that, before starting prophylactic therapy with beta-blockers, all patients should undergo at least an hepatic vein catheterization to assess HVPG; it would be preferable to have a variceal pressure measurement also. These measurements must be repeated 3 to 4 weeks after the final dose of therapy has been reached to assess the risk of variceal bleeding or rebleeding.

EUS in cirrhotic patients with and without prior variceal hemorrhage in comparison with noncirrhotic control subjects

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was used to evaluate cirrhotic patients with and without prior variceal hemorrhage. The findings were compared with those of EUS in noncirrhotic control subjects to determine EUS features indicative of cirrhosis and of a risk for variceal hemorrhage.

METHODS

Patients with cirrhosis undergoing indicated endoscopic screening for varices or surveillance after endoscopic therapy for variceal hemorrhage were studied and compared with healthy noncirrhotic control patients undergoing EUS for benign conditions.

RESULTS

Sixty-six cirrhotic patients (31 with prior hemorrhage) and 32 control patients were studied. Nonhemorrhage cirrhotic patients had more severe liver disease by Child's class (p = 0.02) and less beta-adrenergic blocker usage (p < 0.0001). Paraesophageal varices were detected in 97% of cirrhotic patients and 3% of control patients (p < 0.001) and were a more sensitive predictor of cirrhosis than varices at endoscopy (74%, p < 0.0001). Azygos vein and thoracic duct diameters, and gastric mucosa and submucosa thickness were greater for cirrhotic than control patients (p < 0.001). More hemorrhage patients had large (5 mm or greater) paraesophageal varices (odds ratio 3.1: 95% CI [1.1, 8.3]; p < 0.05) and paragastric varices (odds ratio 3.7: 95% CI [1.3, 10.2]; p = 0.01). Paraesophageal varix size correlated with ascites (p = 0.03) and, for nonhemorrhage patients, with Child's class (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Paraesophageal and paragastric varices correlate with the presence and severity of liver disease and portal hypertension. These data support the hypothesis that large paraesophageal and paragastric varices (5 mm or greater) may be risk factors for variceal hemorrhage, an observation that merits further prospective study. Cirrhosis causes dilation of the azygos vein and thoracic duct and thickening of gastric mucosa and submucosa.

EUS-guided injection of cyanoacrylate for bleeding gastric varices

BACKGROUND

Bleeding gastric varices is a highly fatal condition. Recurrent bleeding after hemostasis achieved by endoscopic methods is common, and obliteration of gastric varices is difficult to assess. Our aim was to investigate the use of endosonography (EUS) in monitoring cyanoacrylate injection to obliterate gastric varices.

METHODS

Patients who presented with bleeding gastric varices were treated with bolus injection(s) of cyanoacrylate (0.5 mL cyanoacrylate mixed with 0.7 mL Lipiodol) until bleeding was controlled; 47 patients received "on-demand" injection only in response to recurrent bleeding (on-demand group). Another group of 54 patients underwent biweekly EUS followed by repeated injection of cyanoacrylate (repeated-injection group) until all gastric varices were obliterated. The primary outcome was recurrent bleeding-free interval and survival rate.

RESULTS

The two groups of patients were comparable demographically. Although the rates of early (</=48 hour) bleeding recurrence were similar with repeated or on-demand injection (7.4% versus 12.8%, p = 0.5), late recurrence of bleeding (>48 hour) was significantly reduced in the repeated-injection group (18.5% versus 44.7%, p = 0.0053, odds ratio 0.28 (95% CI [0.12, 0. 69]). Cumulative probability of recurrent bleeding-free interval was higher in the repeated-injection than the on-demand group (log-rank test, p = 0.0053). There was a numeric trend toward improved survival in the repeated-injection group.

CONCLUSION

Gastric varices obliteration with cyanoacrylate under EUS monitoring reduces recurrent bleeding and may improve survival.

Three-dimensional esophageal varix model quantification of variceal volume by high-resolution endoluminal US

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of three-dimensional volume measurements by high-resolution endoluminal ultrasound in an esophageal varix model.

METHODS

An esophageal varix model was made by filling three esophageal dilatation catheters with various volumes of water. A 20 MHz ultrasonography transducer was then pulled along the length of the catheters at a constant rate (1.25 mm/sec) while videotaping the procedure. Cross-sectional surface area measurements of each catheter were taken every second and the cross-sectional surface area was multiplied by the length of each catheter, as determined by high-resolution endoluminal ultrasound, to determine the volume in each catheter. Interobserver variability was calculated, and three-dimensional reconstruction was performed.

RESULTS

The measured volumes corresponded closely with the actual volumes with an error ranging from 0% to 15.4%. The correlation between actual and measured volumes was r = 0.988. The interobserver variability ranged from r = 0.951 to r = 0.994. Actual esophageal varices were then imaged in a similar fashion to determine the feasibility of this method in patients with esophageal varices.

CONCLUSIONS

High-resolution endoluminal ultrasound is an accurate and reproducible method of measuring volumes in an esophageal varix model and can be used in a clinical setting to determine variceal volume. Volume studies are now underway in human subjects.

Obliteration of esophageal varices using EUS-guided sclerotherapy with color Doppler

BACKGROUND

The current standard treatment of bleeding esophageal varices is band ligation. Although endoscopic sclerotherapy has largely been supplanted by band ligation, there are still clinical situations in which injection methods are useful. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) may allow for a more complete evaluation of esophageal varices and perforating veins and may allow for more effective delivery of sclerosant. Our aim was to evaluate the use of color Doppler EUS-guided sclerotherapy for the obliteration of esophageal varices.

METHODS

Five patients with esophageal varices (Child's A = 1, B = 2, C = 2) underwent dynamic EUS-guided sclerotherapy with color flow Doppler. EUS sclerotherapy was performed using Varijet (2.5 mm catheter) injector needles and sodium morrhuate directed at the perforating vessels until flow was completely impeded (2 to 4 mL per injection site). Data collected included (1) sessions to obliteration, (2) episodes of recurrent bleeding, (3) complications, and (4) mortality.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing EUS-sclerotherapy required 2.2 sessions to achieve obliteration of varices. No patient had a recurrence of bleeding and no deaths occurred. One patient developed an esophageal stricture that responded to balloon dilation.

CONCLUSIONS

Dynamic EUS-guided sclerotherapy with color flow Doppler may be safely and effectively used for the treatment of esophageal varices. It allows for effective delivery of sclerosant with favorable outcomes. Prospective, multicenter, randomized trials are warranted.

Tumorous gastric varices: radiographic findings in 10 patients

PURPOSE

To determine the appearance of tumorous gastric varices on double-contrast barium studies and whether these varices have characteristic radiographic features.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of radiology files revealed 86 patients with gastric varices diagnosed during double-contrast upper gastrointestinal tract examinations. Of these 86 patients, 12 (14%) had a conglomerate mass of varices, or tumorous varices. Five of the 12 patients had proved gastric varices and five were presumed to have varices on the basis of additional diagnostic test results, clinical follow-up findings, or both. Radiographs from these 10 patients were reviewed retrospectively to determine the size, location, and morphologic features of these lesions.

RESULTS

Tumorous varices had a mean size of 6.8 cm (range, 3-11 cm). They involved the posteromedial border of the gastric fundus in eight patients, the central cardiac region in one, and the anterolateral-inferior fundal border in one. Viewed in profile, the varices appeared as smooth submucosal masses with undulating contours and discrete borders. Viewed en face, the varices manifested as a conglomerate of thickened, tortuous folds that faded peripherally into the adjacent mucosa.

CONCLUSION

Tumorous gastric varices manifest as remarkably similar findings on double-contrast barium studies, usually appearing en face as a conglomerate of thickened, lobulated folds and in profile as smooth, undulating, submucosal masses on the posteromedial border of the gastric fundus. It is important to be aware of the characteristic features of tumorous gastric varices on double-contrast studies so that they are not mistaken for neoplastic lesions in the stomach.

Use of color Doppler EUS in assessing azygos blood flow for patients with portal hypertension

BACKGROUND

Azygos blood flow is an index of blood flow through gastroesophageal collateral vessels and varices in portal hypertension. Conventional measurement of azygos blood flow involves catheterization of the azygos vein. We studied the feasibility of assessing azygos blood flow with color Doppler endosonography and of monitoring the effects of vasoactive agents on azygos blood flow.

METHODS

Patients with portal hypertension were examined by means of linear array color Doppler endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Patients who had taken propranolol or nitrates in the 4 weeks before the day of measurement of azygos blood flow were excluded. After identification of the azygos vein and recording of baseline readings of mean arterial blood pressure, pulse rate, and azygos blood flow, patients were selected in a random manner to receive a bolus injection of 2 mg terlipressin, 250 microg somatostatin, or saline solution (control). Azygos blood flow was measured 1, 5, and 10 minutes after injection (AzBF-1, AzBF-5, AzBF-10).

RESULTS

Six patients were recruited in each treatment group. Basal azygos blood flow showed a positive association with the Child-Pugh grade of cirrhosis (p < 0.005). After bolus injection of terlipressin and somatostatin, there was a marked decrease in AzBF-1 (24% and 37%), AzBF-5 (42% and 19%), and AzBF-10 (40% both) compared with baseline. The control group showed no significant change in azygos blood flow.

CONCLUSIONS

Color Doppler EUS is useful in assessing azygos blood flow in portal hypertension and in monitoring the effects of vasoactive agents.

Evaluation of patients with portal hypertension

Patients with suspected portal hypertension must first be evaluated by physical examination, upper digestive endoscopy and ultrasonography with Doppler. Moreover, the evaluation of patients with portal hypertension depends on the cause of portal hypertension, the presence of complications and the specific treatment considered. Haemodynamic assessment with measurement of the hepatic venous pressure gradient is useful in confirming the origin of portal hypertension. This technique is the 'gold-standard' for evaluating haemodynamic treatments. Splanchnic and systemic circulation must also be measured. Quantitative evaluation of the splanchnic territory by Doppler sonography and other non-invasive investigations, may be performed. Further clinical studies are, however, needed to determine their interest in portal hypertension.