Optimal endoscopy timing in patients with acute variceal bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Guidelines for the Management of Esophagogastric Variceal Bleeding in Cirrhotic Portal Hypertension

To standardize the diagnosis, treatment, and management of esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EVB) in patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension, the Chinese Society of Hepatology, the Chinese Society of Gastroenterology, and the Chinese Society of Digestive Endoscopy of the Chinese Medical Association brought together relevant experts, reviewed the latest national and international progress in clinical research on EVB in cirrhotic portal hypertension, and followed evidence-based medicine to update the Guidelines on the Management of EVB in Cirrhotic Portal Hypertension. The guidelines provide recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and management of EVB in cirrhotic portal hypertension and with the aim to improve the level of clinical treatment of EVB in patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

The COVID-19 Infection Resulted Delayed Esophagogastroduodenoscopy in Patients Admitted with Variceal Bleeding: Hospital-Based Outcomes of a National Database

During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, most healthcare services, including inpatient and outpatient procedures, got delayed. We reviewed the effect of COVID-19 infection on the timing of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) in variceal bleeding patients and analyzed the complications of delayed EGD. Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) 2020, we identified patients admitted for variceal bleeding with COVID-19 infection. We performed a multivariable regression analysis and adjusted it for patient and hospital-related variables. The International Classification of Disease Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes were used for patient selection. We measured the effect of COVID-19 on the timing of EGD and further analyzed the effect of delayed EGD on hospital-based outcomes. A total of 49,675 patients diagnosed with variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding were analyzed, out of which 915 (1.84%) were COVID-19 positive. Variceal bleeding patients who were COVID-positive had a significantly lower rate of EGD performed within the first 24 h of admission (36.1% vs. 60.6% p = 0.001) compared to the patients who tested negative for COVID-19. The performance of EGD within 24 h of admission resulted in a decrease in all-cause mortality by 70% (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.30, 95% CI 0.12-0.76, p = 0.01) compared to EGD after 24 h. A significant decrease was noted in the odds of ICU admission rate (AOR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.97, p = 0.04) in patients who got EGD within the first 24 h of admission. No difference in odds of sepsis (AOR 0.44, 95% CI 0.15-1.30, p = 0.14) and vasopressor use (AOR 0.34, 95% CI 0.04-2.87, p = 0.32) was seen in COVID positive vs. COVID negative group. The hospital mean length of stay (2.14 days, 95% CI 4.35-0.06, p = 0.06), mean total charges ($51,936, 95% CI $106,688-$2816, p = 0.06), and total cost (11,489$, 95% CI 30,380$-7402$, p = 0.23) was similar in both COVID-positive and -negative groups. In our study, we found that the presence of COVID-19 infection in variceal bleeding patients resulted in a significant delay in EGD compared to COVID-negative patients. This delay in EGD resulted in increased all-cause mortality and intensive care unit admissions.

Guidelines for the Management of Adult Acute and Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure in the ICU: Neurology, Peri-Transplant Medicine, Infectious Disease, and Gastroenterology Considerations

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for adults with acute liver failure (ALF) or acute on chronic liver failure (ACLF) in the ICU.

DESIGN

The guideline panel comprised 27 members with expertise in aspects of care of the critically ill patient with liver failure or methodology. We adhered to the Society of Critical Care Medicine standard operating procedures manual and conflict-of-interest policy. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the panel, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development.

INTERVENTIONS

In part 2 of this guideline, the panel was divided into four subgroups: neurology, peri-transplant, infectious diseases, and gastrointestinal groups. We developed and selected Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcomes (PICO) questions according to importance to patients and practicing clinicians. For each PICO question, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis where applicable. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence to decision framework to facilitate recommendations formulation as strong or conditional. We followed strict criteria to formulate best practice statements.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We report 28 recommendations (from 31 PICO questions) on the management ALF and ACLF in the ICU. Overall, five were strong recommendations, 21 were conditional recommendations, two were best-practice statements, and we were unable to issue a recommendation for five questions due to insufficient evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Multidisciplinary, international experts formulated evidence-based recommendations for the management ALF and ACLF patients in the ICU, acknowledging that most recommendations were based on low quality and indirect evidence.

The influences of timing of urgent endoscopy in patients with acute variceal bleeding: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

There has always been a debate on the optimal timing of endoscopy in patients with acute variceal bleeding (AVB).

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the relation between the timing of endoscopy and the short-term outcomes of patients with AVB.

METHODS

Patients with AVB who underwent endoscopy within 24 h after admission at our tertiary care center from 2014 to 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. The primary outcomes were the 6-week mortality and re-bleeding. The secondary outcomes included the total number of blood units transfused, the length of hospital stay, and the need for salvage therapy. We used Cox proportional hazards model to analyze the predictors of 6-week mortality in all patients as well as in those who were at high risk of further bleeding or death.

RESULTS

A total of 312 patients were enrolled. Among them, 170 patients (54.49%) underwent urgent endoscopy (< 6 h), and 142 patients (45.51%) underwent early endoscopy (6-24 h). There were no significant differences between the urgent-endoscopy group and the early-endoscopy group, regarding the 6-week mortality (16.47% vs. 10.56%; P value = 0.132) and 6-week re-bleeding rate (11.2% vs. 16.2%; P value = 0.196). In multivariate analysis, time to endoscopy was independent of 6-week mortality (P value = 0.170), but the time between the beginning of bleeding and endoscopy (within 12 h) was significantly associated with low 6-week mortality (OR: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.06-0.46; P value = 0.001). Time to endoscopy was still not associated with 6-week mortality in patients at high risk for further bleeding or death (Glasgow-Blatchford score ≥ 12, n = 138, P value = 0.902).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopy performed within 6 h of admission, rather than within 6 to 24 h, did not improve six-week clinical outcomes in patients in stable condition with AVB and even those who were at high risk of further bleeding and death.

Analysis of the timing of endoscopic treatment for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in cirrhosis

Background

Existing guidelines recommend endoscopic treatment within 12 h or 12–24 h for patients with esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EGVB) in cirrhosis. In addition, research findings on the optimal time for endoscopy are inconsistent.

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the timing of endoscopy and clinical outcomes in cirrhotic patients with EGVB and to analyze the risk factors for the composite outcomes after endoscopic treatment.

Methods

From January 2019 to June 2020, 456 patients with cirrhotic EGVB who underwent endoscopy were matched by a 1:1 propensity score. Finally, 266 patients were divided into two groups, including 133 patients within 12 h (urgent endoscopy group) of admission and after 12 h (non-urgent endoscopy group). Baseline data and clinical outcomes were compared. Logistic regression model analysis was used to determine risk factors for 30 days rebleeding and mortality.

Results

In 266 patients, the overall 30 days rebleeding rate and mortality were 10.9% (n = 29) and 3.4% (n = 9), respectively. Patients who underwent endoscopic treatment within 12 h had significantly higher 30 days rebleeding outcomes than those who underwent treatment beyond 12 h (15 vs. 6.8%, p = 0.003). However, 30 days mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups (3 vs. 3.8%, p = 0.736). Logistic regression analysis showed that age and shock on admission were independent risk factors for the composite outcome of 30 days rebleeding and mortality in patients with EGVB.

Conclusion

The 30 days rebleeding rate in patients with cirrhotic EGVB treated with urgent endoscopy was significantly higher than that in patients treated with non-urgent endoscopy, but there was no significant difference in 30 days mortality.

Risk factors for emergency endoscopic variceal ligation treatment failure of acute variceal bleeding

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk factors for emergency endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) failure in acute variceal bleeding (AVB).

METHODS

Data from 161 cirrhosis patients with oesophageal variceal bleeding who underwent emergency EVL treatment at the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University from January 2018 to May 2021 were retrospectively analysed. Enrolled patients were divided into a successful treatment group and a failed treatment group. The variables studied were demographic, clinical, imaging, laboratory, and endoscopic data from the enrolled patients.

RESULTS

Of the enrolled patients, 19 patients experienced emergency EVL failure. Of these patients, nine underwent emergency endoscopic treatment again, six patients were treated with a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube for haemostasis and endoscopic treatment, four patients received drug therapy. The presence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in the failure group was higher than that in the success group (p < .05). Active bleeding on endoscopy was associated with emergency EVL failure for patients with Child-Pugh class C (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Child-Pugh class C with active bleeding on endoscopy or the presence of PVT could increase the risk of emergency EVL failure. The patient's condition should be fully evaluated before emergency endoscopic treatment to reduce the risk of failure.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that patients with compensated advanced chronic liver disease (ACLD; due to viruses, alcohol, and/or nonobese [BMI < 30 kg/m²] nonalcoholic steatohepatitis) and clinically significant portal hypertension (hepatic venous pressure gradient [HVPG] > 10 mmHg and/or liver stiffness by transient elastography > 25 kPa) should receive, if no contraindications, nonselective beta blocker (NSBB) therapy (preferably carvedilol) to prevent the development of variceal bleeding.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2: ESGE recommends that in those patients unable to receive NSBB therapy with a screening upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy that demonstrates high risk esophageal varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) is the endoscopic prophylactic treatment of choice. EBL should be repeated every 2-4 weeks until variceal eradication is achieved. Thereafter, surveillance EGD should be performed every 3-6 months in the first year following eradication.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3: ESGE recommends, in hemodynamically stable patients with acute upper GI hemorrhage (UGIH) and no history of cardiovascular disease, a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy, with a hemoglobin threshold of ≤ 70 g/L prompting RBC transfusion. A post-transfusion target hemoglobin of 70-90 g/L is desired.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 4 : ESGE recommends that patients with ACLD presenting with suspected acute variceal bleeding be risk stratified according to the Child-Pugh score and MELD score, and by documentation of active/inactive bleeding at the time of upper GI endoscopy.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 5 : ESGE recommends the vasoactive agents terlipressin, octreotide, or somatostatin be initiated at the time of presentation in patients with suspected acute variceal bleeding and be continued for a duration of up to 5 days.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 6 : ESGE recommends antibiotic prophylaxis using ceftriaxone 1 g/day for up to 7 days for all patients with ACLD presenting with acute variceal hemorrhage, or in accordance with local antibiotic resistance and patient allergies.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 7 : ESGE recommends, in the absence of contraindications, intravenous erythromycin 250 mg be given 30-120 minutes prior to upper GI endoscopy in patients with suspected acute variceal hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8 : ESGE recommends that, in patients with suspected variceal hemorrhage, endoscopic evaluation should take place within 12 hours from the time of patient presentation provided the patient has been hemodynamically resuscitated.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 9 : ESGE recommends EBL for the treatment of acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage (EVH).Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 10 : ESGE recommends that, in patients at high risk for recurrent esophageal variceal bleeding following successful endoscopic hemostasis (Child-Pugh C  ≤ 13 or Child-Pugh B > 7 with active EVH at the time of endoscopy despite vasoactive agents, or HVPG > 20 mmHg), pre-emptive transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) within 72 hours (preferably within 24 hours) must be considered.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 11 : ESGE recommends that, for persistent esophageal variceal bleeding despite vasoactive pharmacological and endoscopic hemostasis therapy, urgent rescue TIPS should be considered (where available).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 12 : ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for acute gastric (cardiofundal) variceal (GOV2, IGV1) hemorrhage.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 13: ESGE recommends endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or EBL in patients with GOV1-specific bleeding.Strong recommendations, moderate quality evidence. 14: ESGE suggests urgent rescue TIPS or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for gastric variceal bleeding when there is a failure of endoscopic hemostasis or early recurrent bleeding.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 15: ESGE recommends that patients who have undergone EBL for acute EVH should be scheduled for follow-up EBLs at 1- to 4-weekly intervals to eradicate esophageal varices (secondary prophylaxis).Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 16: ESGE recommends the use of NSBBs (propranolol or carvedilol) in combination with endoscopic therapy for secondary prophylaxis in EVH in patients with ACLD.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence.

Timing of endoscopic intervention in patients with cirrhosis with acute variceal haemorrhage (TEACH trial): protocol for a randomised clinical trial (RCT)

INTRODUCTION

Acute variceal haemorrhage (AVH) in patients with cirrhosis remains a topic of great interest. Although several guidelines recommend endoscopy within 24 hours after AVH, there is no consensus on the most appropriate time to perform this intervention. The purpose of this study is to identify whether urgent endoscopy (within 6 hours after gastroenterological consultation) is superior to non-urgent endoscopy (between 6 hours and 24 hours after gastroenterological consultation) in reducing the rebleeding rate of these patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single-centred, prospective, randomised clinical trial. Between March 2021 and December 2023, an estimated 400 patients will be randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive endoscopic intervention either within 6 hours or between 6 and 24 hours after gastroenterological consultation. Randomisation will be conducted by permuted block randomisation, with stratification by age, systolic blood pressure and pulse rate. The primary efficacy endpoint is rebleeding within 42 days after control of AVH. The secondary efficacy endpoints mainly include all-cause mortality within 42 days after randomisation, persistent bleeding, length of hospitalisation, etc. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Ethical Committees of Jinling Hospital (authorised ethics no. DZQH-KYLL-21-01). This trial will provide valuable insights into the timing of endoscopic intervention for AVH in patients with cirrhosis. Furthermore, the trial results and conclusions could provide high-quality evidence to guide clinical research and treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04786743.

Timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a territory-wide cohort study

OBJECTIVE

While it is recommended that patients presenting with acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (AUGIB) should receive endoscopic intervention within 24 hours, the optimal timing is still uncertain. We aimed to assess whether endoscopy timing postadmission would affect outcomes.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective, territory-wide, cohort study with healthcare data from all public hospitals in Hong Kong. Adult patients (age ≥18) that presented with AUGIB between 2013 and 2019 and received therapeutic endoscopy within 48 hours (n=6474) were recruited. Patients were classified based on endoscopic timing postadmission: urgent (t≤6), early (6<t≤24) and late (24<t≤48). Baseline characteristics were balanced with inverse probability of treatment weighting. 30-day all-cause mortality, repeated therapeutic endoscopy rate, intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate and other endpoints were compared.

RESULTS

Results showed that urgent timing (n=1008) had worse outcomes compared with early endoscopy (n=3865), with higher 30-day all-cause mortality (p<0.001), repeat endoscopy rates (p<0.001) and ICU admission rates (p<0.001). Late endoscopy (n=1601) was associated with worse outcomes, with higher 30-day mortality (p=0.003), in-hospital mortality (p=0.022) and 30-day transfusion rates (p=0.018).

CONCLUSION

Compared with urgent and late endoscopy among patients who have received therapeutic endoscopies, early endoscopy was associated with superior outcomes especially among patients with non-variceal bleeding. This supports the notion that non-variceal AUGIB patients should receive endoscopy within 24 hours, but also emphasises the importance of prior resuscitation and pharmacotherapy.

Practice patterns in endoscopic treatment for gastric varices: A Chinese survey

OBJECTIVES

Gastric varices (GV), a common complication of liver cirrhosis, often cause serious consequences. However, the management of GV remains debated. In this study we aimed to explore the practice patterns of Chinese practitioners in GV treatment and discuss whether these patterns conform to the guidelines in China and around the world.

METHODS

Between October 2020 and January 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to doctors from different regions in China via WeChat. Data on the practice patterns for endoscopic treatment with and without a multidisciplinary discussion team (MDT) clinic for GV were analyzed.

RESULTS

Questionnaires were collected from 241 practitioners from 29 provinces in China. Before endoscopic treatment, 100 (41.5%) of the practitioners arranged computed tomography angiography (CTA) examination. In endoscopic tissue adhesive (ETA) treatment, 183 (75.9%) of the practitioners chose ETA combined with lauromacrogol. Approximately one-fourth of all practitioners did not prescribe drugs to reduce portal pressure. Only 75 (31.1%) of physicians preferred using early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for patients at a high risk of treatment failure for GV. Compared to those without MDT clinics, practitioners with MDT clinics more often chose early TIPS for high-risk patients (39.0% vs 18.9%, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment for GV differ across China. Practitioners with MDT clinics can better use assistant strategies such as CTA to evaluate the risk and efficacy. Further clinical studies are needed, and more guidelines and consensuses are warranted to standardize clinical practice for GV.

Critical Update on the Diagnosis and Management of COVID-19 in Advanced Cirrhosis and Liver Transplant Recipients

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted health care worldwide, with specific patient populations, such as those with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and chronic lung disease, at higher risk of infection and others at higher risk of disease progression. Patients with decompensated cirrhosis fall into the latter category and are a unique group that require specific treatment and management decisions because they can develop acute-on-chronic liver failure. In liver transplant recipients, the atypical immunity profile due to immunosuppression protects against downstream inflammatory responses triggered by COVID-19. This exhaustive review discusses the outcomes associated with COVID-19 in patients with advanced cirrhosis and in liver transplant recipients. We focus on the immunopathogenesis of COVID-19, its correlation with the pathogenesis of advanced liver disease, and the effect of immunosuppression in liver transplant recipients to provide insight into the outcomes of this unique patient population.

Outcomes of early versus delayed endoscopy in cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding: a systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopy is the mainstay treatment option for acute variceal bleeding (AVB) in liver cirrhosis. However, the optimal timing of endoscopy in such patients remains unclear.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched. We compared the mortality, incidence of rebleeding, length of stay, endoscopic hemostasis, need for salvage and units of transfusion between cirrhotic patients with AVB who underwent early and delayed endoscopy. Meta-analyses were performed by using a random-effect model. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subgroup analysis was performed in studies where early endoscopy was defined as <12 h.

RESULTS

Nine retrospective studies involving 2824 patients were included. The early endoscopy group had a significantly lower overall mortality than the delayed endoscopy group in overall analysis (OR = 0.56, 95% CI, 0.33-0.95, P = 0.03), but the difference between them was NS in subgroup analysis (OR = 0.72, 95% CI, 0.38-1.38, P = 0.33). In-hospital (OR = 0.77, 95% CI, 0.26-2.32, P = 0.65) and 6-week (OR = 0.78, 95% CI, 0.42-1.47, P = 0.45) mortality were not significantly different between them. Overall rebleeding was not significantly different between early and delayed endoscopy groups in both overall (OR = 0.88, 95% CI, 0.51-1.51, P = 0.63) and subgroup (OR = 1.04, 95% CI, 0.55-1.95, P = 0.90) analyses. In-hospital (OR = 1.41, 95% CI, 0.67-2.96, P = 0.37) and 6-week (OR = 0.93, 95% CI, 0.40-2.17, P = 0.86) rebleeding remained not significantly different between them. Additionally, the length of stay, endoscopic hemostasis, need for salvage and units of transfusion were not significantly different between them.

CONCLUSIONS

Early endoscopy may improve the survival of cirrhotic patients with AVB, but has no remarkable benefit on the prevention of rebleeding. These findings should be further validated by high-quality studies.

Optimal timing of endoscopy for acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is the most common indication for urgent endoscopy, but the correct timing of endoscopy in these patients is still debated. Our systematic review with meta-analysis was aimed at investigating the potential clinical benefit of very early endoscopy for UGIB patients. We performed an electronic literature search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library up to 23rd May 2020 and considered only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing management of UGIB patients by very early vs early endoscopy. Only five RCTs were considered eligible for quantitative analysis, with a total population of 926 cases (468 in the very early endoscopy arm and 458 in the early). The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant benefit for very early endoscopy compared to early endoscopy in terms of risk of rebleeding, mortality, ICU admission, blood transfusion, surgery and length of hospital stay. However, our results showed a significantly higher need for haemostatic treatment when very early endoscopy was performed (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.06-1.42, p < 0.01) in comparison to early endoscopy.

Does timing of endoscopy affect outcomes in patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The timing of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) remains controversial. Early EGD (E-EGD) (within 24 h of presentation) has been compared to late EGD (L-EGD) (after 24 h) in numerous studies with conflicting results. The previous systematic review included three randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, the cutoff time for performing EGD was arbitrary. We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies comparing the outcomes of E-EGD and L-EGD group.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was undertaken to include both RCTs and cohort studies. Primary outcomes including overall mortality and secondary outcomes (recurrent bleeding, need for transfusion, and length of stay) were compared. Risk ratios and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 13 observational studies (with over 1.8 million patients) were included in the final analysis. No significant difference in overall mortality (risk ratio: 0.97; CI, 0.74-1.27), recurrent bleeding (risk ratio: 1.12; CI, 0.62-2.00), and length of stay (SMD: -0.07, CI, -0.31 to 0.18) was observed for E-EGD group compared to L-EGD group. The possibility of endoscopic intervention was higher in E-EGD group (risk ratio: 1.70, CI, 1.28-2.27). Consistent results were obtained for subgroup analysis of studies with 100% nonvariceal bleed (NVB) patient (risk ratio: 1.12; CI, 0.84-1.50).

CONCLUSION

Given the outcomes and limitations, our meta-analysis did not demonstrate clear benefit of performing EGD within 24 h of presentation for UGIB (particularly NVB).

Updated strategies in the management of acute variceal haemorrhage

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the most recent studies regarding the management of acute esophageal variceal haemorrhage.

RECENT FINDINGS

New randomized control trials and meta-analyses confirmed the role of early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the management of acute variceal haemorrhage in Child-Pugh C (10-13) and B patients with active bleeding. A recent randomized controlled trial focused on the duration of vasoactive therapy showed no difference between 2 and 5 days of octreotide. A randomized trial showed decreased use of blood products for the correction of coagulopathy using a thromboelastography-guided approach (vs. conventional parameters) as well as decreased bleeding rates when compared with standard of care. A meta-analysis found that for rescue of variceal bleeding, self-expanding metallic stents were more efficacious and safer than balloon tamponade. In addition, studies showed that Child-Pugh C patients and those with hepatic vein pressure gradient more than 20 were at the highest risk of treatment failure, while model for end-stage liver disease was highly predictive of in-hospital mortality.

SUMMARY

In patients with severe coagulopathy and uncontrolled bleeding, TEG-based transfusion strategies are recommended. Antibiotics should be used for all cirrhotic patients presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding, but should be tailored in accordance to local resistance patterns. Early TIPS for high-risk patients has been shown to have a significant survival benefit. Certain aspects of the management of variceal bleeding remain poorly studied such as the role of early TIPS in Child-B patients as well as strategies for rescue therapy in patients who are not TIPS candidates, and require further investigation.

Endoscopic management of acute oesophageal variceal bleeding within 12 hours of admission is superior to 12-24 hours

Background: Acute oesophageal variceal haemorrhage (AOVH) is a medical emergency. The American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases recommends endoscopy management as soon as possible and not more than 12 hours after presentation. The United Kingdom guidelines recommended endoscopy for unstable patients with severe acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding immediately after resuscitation and within 24 hours of admission. We aimed to evaluate the outcome of endoscopic management of AOVH in less than 12 hours compared to 12-24 hours post admission.Methods: 297 patients with AOVH were divided into groups depending on the timing of the endoscopic management: 180 within 12 h of admission and 117 patients at 12-24 hours of admission. Routine clinical and laboratory data were collected.Results: Compared to patients with endoscopic management at 12-24 hours (mean 16 hours), patients with endoscopic management within 12 hours (mean 8.3 hours) of admission had fewer hospital stay days (P = 0.001), significant reduction of ammonia levels (P < 0.0001) and significant improvement in associated hepatic encephalopathy grade 25 (p = 0.048). There were no major clinical events in the 12-hour group, but 8 events in the 12-24 hour group (p < 0.01).Conclusion: Endoscopic management of acute variceal bleeding within 12 hours of admission is superior to endoscopic management at 12-24 hours of admission regarding reduction of hospital stay, ammonia levels, correction of hepatic encephalopathy, re-bleeding and mortality rate, hence, reducing the cost of treatment benefiting patient satisfaction and improving hospital bed availability.