A prospective, randomized trial of butyl cyanoacrylate injection versus band ligation in the management of bleeding gastric varices

Short-term efficacy and safety of endoscopic injection of low dose of sclerotherapy and cyanoacrylate injection for type GOV1 gastric varices combined with endoscopic variceal ligation for esophageal varices

BACKGROUND

To explore the short-term efficacy and safety of endoscopic low dose injection of sclerotherapy and cyanoacrylate for gastric varices (GVs) combined with endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) for esophageal varices (EVs) in cirrhosis with type GOV1 varices.

METHODS

A total of 521 patients with cirrhosis and GOV1 varices, who were divided into emergence endoscopy treatment layer and secondary prophylaxis for rebleeding layer, were selected. All patients underwent combined therapy or EVL alone (ligation therapy) for the treatment of type GOV1 varices. The baseline between the two groups with significant differences were used as covariates for 1:1 propensity score matching. The early rebleeding rate was compared and the risk factors for rebleeding were identified in each layer.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, a total of 122 patients were included in the emergence endoscopy treatment layer, and 234 patients were included in the secondary prophylaxis layer. The early rebleeding rates in the combined therapy group vs. ligation therapy group was 4.92% vs. 16.39% (P = 0.04) and 2.56% vs. 1.71% (P = 0.65) in the emergency endoscopy layer and in the secondary prophylaxis layer, respectively. The median length of hospital stay after endoscopy was 8 days vs. 9 days (P = 0.004) and 7 days vs. 6 days (P = 0.47), in each layer respectively. There was no significant difference in the adverse reactions of endoscopic treatment. EVL treatment (OR: 3.84; 95% CI: 1.05-13.96; P = 0.04) and discontinuation of NSBB (non-selective beta-blocker) use after discharge (OR: 3.58; 95% CI: 1.20-10.67; P = 0.02) were independent risk factors for early rebleeding after endoscopy in the emergency endoscopy layer.

CONCLUSION

Combined therapy is comparable with ligation therapy in the short-term efficacy and safety of in cirrhosis patients with secondary prophylaxis for rebleeding while it is superior to EVL alone in cirrhosis in the emergency endoscopy treatment as it could reduce the early rebleeding rate and shorten the length of hospital stay.

Construction and validation of a machine learning-based prediction model for short-term mortality in critically ill patients with liver cirrhosis

OBJECTIVE

Critically ill patients with liver cirrhosis generally have a poor prognosis due to complications such as multiple organ failure. This study aims to develop a machine learning-based prediction model to forecast short-term mortality in critically ill cirrhotic patients in the intensive care unit (ICU), thereby assisting clinical decision-making for intervention and treatment.

METHODS

Machine learning models were developed using clinical data from critically ill cirrhotic patients in the MIMIC database, with multicenter validation performed using data from the eICU database and Qinghai University Affiliated Hospital(QUAH). Various machine learning models, including a Stacking ensemble model, were employed, with the SHAP method used to enhance model interpretability.

RESULTS

The Stacking ensemble model demonstrated superior predictive performance through internal and external validation, with AUC and AP values surpassing those of individual algorithms. The AUC values were 0.845 in the internal validation set, 0.819 in the eICU external validation, and 0.761 in the QUAH validation set. Additionally, the SHAP method highlighted key prognostic variables such as INR, bilirubin, and urine output. The model was ultimately deployed as a web-based calculator for bedside decision-making.

CONCLUSION

The machine learning model effectively predicts short-term mortality risk in critically ill cirrhotic patients in the ICU, showing strong predictive performance and generalizability. The model's robust interpretability and its deployment as a web-based calculator suggest its potential as a valuable tool for assessing the prognosis of cirrhotic patients.

Transjugular Intrahepatic Portosystemic Shunt (TIPS) for Treatment of Bleeding from Cardiofundal and Ectopic Varices in Cirrhosis

Acute variceal bleeding in cirrhosis represents a critical clinical event that significantly impacts patient prognosis, with mortality rates increasing further after a second episode. This underscores the need for immediate intervention and optimal prophylaxis. The creation of a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) has been proven to be highly effective for managing esophageal variceal bleeding. However, the use of TIPS for managing cardiofundal gastric varices and ectopic varices remains debated due to their unique vascular anatomy and the limited data available. These varices, although less prevalent than esophageal varices, are complex and heterogeneous vascular shunts between the splanchnic venous system and the systemic veins. Indeed, while endoscopic therapy with tissue adhesives is widely endorsed for achieving hemostasis in active hemorrhage, there is no consensus regarding the optimal approach for secondary prophylaxis. Recent research emphasizes the efficacy of endovascular techniques over endoscopic treatments, such as TIPS and endovascular variceal embolization techniques. This review examines the use of TIPS in managing acute variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis, focusing specifically on cardiofundal gastric varices and ectopic varices, discussing optimal patient care based on the latest evidence, aiming to improve outcomes for this challenging subset of patients.

Antibiotic prophylaxis vs. on‑demand antibiotic treatment in endoscopic therapy for variceal hemorrhage: A meta‑analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aim of the present study was to conduct a meta-analysis for elucidating the effects of antibiotic prophylaxis on infection, rebleeding and mortality in patients who underwent endoscopic therapy for variceal hemorrhage. Articles on antibiotic prophylaxis and on-demand antibiotic administration following endoscopic therapy for acute variceal bleeding were searched on PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library between January 1959 and February 2024, to elucidate whether the use of prophylactic antibiotics was necessary. The quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool and RevMan software version 5.4.1 was used for meta-analysis of the data. The current meta-analysis included four RCTs and 322 patients with acute variceal bleeding who underwent endoscopic therapy. All included studies were of high quality according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias assessment tool. According to the results of the meta-analysis, the incidence of infection in the prophylactic antibiotic group was significantly lower than that in the on-demand group [odds ratio (OR), 0.31; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.13-0.74; P=0.009]. The prophylactic antibiotic group also exhibited a lower incidence of rebleeding compared with that of the on-demand group (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19-0.72; P=0.003). No significant differences were noted in the incidence of mortality between the two groups (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.45-1.92; P=0.83). In conclusion, the data indicated that antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended to be used in patients who have undergone endoscopic therapy for variceal hemorrhage.

A Noninferiority Trial Comparing 2 Days vs 5 Days of Terlipressin and Ceftriaxone in Terms of 5-Day Rebleeding for Patients With Acute Gastroesophageal Variceal Hemorrhage

INTRODUCTION

This trial was to shorten the duration of both vasoconstrictors and prophylactic antibiotics to only 2 days in the therapy of acute gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage.

METHODS

After successful endoscopic hemostasis of gastroesophageal variceal hemorrhage, eligible patients were randomized to receive terlipressin infusion 1 mg per 6 hours and ceftriaxone 1 g daily for 5 days (group A) or a similar regimen for 2 days (group B). Primary end points were very early rebleeding at 5 days, and secondary end points included 48-hour hemostasis, 42-day rebleeding, and hospitalization days.

RESULTS

Group A comprised 48 patients, and group B comprised 52 patients. Both groups were comparable in the severity of liver disease. Forty-eight-hour initial hemostasis was 95.8% in group A and 100% in group B ( P = 0.13). Very early rebleeding between 3 and 5 days occurred in 1 patient (2.1%) in group A and 2 patients (3.8%) in group B ( P = 0.60). The difference was 1.8% and the 95% confidence interval was -1.31% to 2.08%, which demonstrated noninferiority. Forty-two-day rebleeding occurred in 5 patients (10.4%) in group A and 4 patients (7.7%) in group B ( P = 0.63). The median hospitalization days were 8.5 ± 3.8 days in group A vs 5.6 ± 2.6 days in group B ( P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

After successful endoscopic hemostasis of acute variceal bleeding, combination of 2-day terlipressin infusion and ceftriaxone therapy was not inferior to the 5-day regimen in terms of very early rebleeding, with the advantage of shortening hospitalization stay.

Endoscopic Glue Injection Versus Endoscopic Human Thrombin Injection for Bleeding Gastric Varices-A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Acute gastric variceal bleeding (AGVB) is a potentially fatal consequence of portal hypertension, accounting for 10% to 30% of all variceal bleeding. Although endoscopic cyanoacrylate glue injection is a common treatment for acute hemostasis, it has been linked to significant side effects. In the treatment of AGVB, there is limited evidence of the efficacy and relative safety of endoscopic human thrombin injection over glue injection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 52 AGVB patients were randomized to receive either thrombin injection (25 patients) or glue injection (27 patients). The primary outcome was the incidence of any glue or thrombin injection-related post-therapy complications. Initial hemostasis, rebleeding, and mortality were all secondary end goals.

RESULTS

Both groups had comparable baseline data. Hemostasis of active bleeding at endoscopy was 100.0% (10/10) in the thrombin group and 87.5% (7/8) in the glue group ( P =0.44). Treatment failure after 5 days occurred in 2 patients (6.1%) in the glue group compared with none in the thrombin group ( P =0.165). Between 6 and 42 days after index bleeding, rebleeding occurred in 4 patients in the thrombin group compared with 6 patients in the glue group ( P =0.728). In the thrombin group, none of the patients had post-treatment ulcers on gastric varices compared with 14.81% (4/27) that occurred in the glue group ( P =0.045), a statistically significant observation. Overall, complications occurred in 4 (20%) and 11 (40.7%) patients in the thrombin and glue groups, respectively ( P =0.105). Two patients in the glue group died.

CONCLUSION

To achieve successful AGVB hemostasis, endoscopic thrombin injection has been proven efficacious. However, glue injection may be linked to a higher rate of rebleeding and post-therapy gastric variceal ulceration compared with thrombin.

A Novel Nomogram for Predicting Early Rebleeding After Endoscopic Treatment of Esophagogastric Variceal Hemorrhage

BACKGROUND

Early rebleeding is a significant complication of endoscopic treatment for esophagogastric variceal hemorrhage (EGVH). However, a reliable predictive model is currently lacking.

AIMS

To identify risk factors for rebleeding within 6 weeks and establish a nomogram for predicting early rebleeding after endoscopic treatment of EVGH.

METHODS

Demographic information, comorbidities, preoperative evaluation, endoscopic features, and laboratory tests were collected from 119 patients who were first endoscopic treatment for EGVH. Independent risk factors for early rebleeding were determined through least absolute shrinkage and selection operator logistic regression. The discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of the nomogram were assessed and compared with the model for end-stage liver disease (MELD), Child-Pugh, and albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) scores using receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration plots, and decision curve analyses (DCA).

RESULTS

Early rebleeding occurred in 39 patients (32.8%) within 6 weeks after endoscopic treatment. Independent early rebleeding factors included gastric variceal hemorrhage (GVH), concomitant hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), international normalized ratio (INR), and creatinine. The nomogram demonstrated exceptional calibration and discrimination capability. The area under the curve for the nomogram was 0.758 (95% CI 0.668-0.848), and it was validated at 0.71 through cross-validation and bootstrapping validation. The DCA and ROC curves demonstrated that the nomogram outperformed the MELD, Child-Pugh, and ALBI scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with existing prediction scores, the nomogram demonstrated superior discrimination, calibration, and clinical applicability for predicting rebleeding in patients with EGVH after endoscopic treatment. Therefore, it may assist clinicians in the early implementation of aggressive treatment and follow-up.

Review article: Upper gastrointestinal bleeding - review of current evidence and implications for management

BACKGROUND

Acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common emergency requiring hospital-based care. Advances in care across pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases have led to improvements in clinical outcomes.

AIMS

To provide a detailed, evidence-based update on major aspects of care across pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases.

METHODS

We performed a structured bibliographic database search for each topic. If a recent high-quality meta-analysis was not available, we performed a meta-analysis with random effects methods and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Pre-endoscopic management of UGIB includes risk stratification, a restrictive red blood cell transfusion policy unless the patient has cardiovascular disease, and pharmacologic therapy with erythromycin and a proton pump inhibitor. Patients with cirrhosis should be treated with prophylactic antibiotics and vasoactive medications. Tranexamic acid should not be used. Endoscopic management of UGIB depends on the aetiology. For peptic ulcer disease (PUD) with high-risk stigmata, endoscopic therapy, including over-the-scope clips (OTSCs) and TC-325 powder spray, should be performed. For variceal bleeding, treatment should be customised by severity and anatomic location. Post-endoscopic management includes early enteral feeding for all UGIB patients. For high-risk PUD, PPI should be continued for 72 h, and rebleeding should initially be evaluated with a repeat endoscopy. For variceal bleeding, high-risk patients or those with further bleeding, a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt can be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of acute UGIB should include treatment plans for pre-endoscopic, endoscopic and post-endoscopic phases of care, and customise treatment decisions based on aetiology and severity of bleeding.

The Role of Endoscopy for Primary and Secondary Prophylaxis of Variceal Bleeding

Cirrhosis is associated with a high morbidity and mortality. One of the most serious and unpredictable complication of cirrhosis, with a high mortality rate, is bleeding from esophagogastric varices. Endoscopic screening of varices followed by primary prophylactic treatment with beta blockers or band ligation in the presence of large esophageal varices will reduce the variceal bleeding rates and thereby reduce mortality risks in those with advanced cirrhosis. There is a paucity of data on primary prophylaxis of gastric varices but secondary prophylaxis includes glue injection, balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration, or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting with coil embolization.

Effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for acute esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with band ligation: A large observational study

BACKGROUND

Esophageal variceal bleeding is a severe complication associated with liver cirrhosis and typically necessitates endoscopic hemostasis. The current standard treatment is endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL), and Western guidelines recommend antibiotic prophylaxis following hemostasis. However, given the improvements in prognosis for variceal bleeding due to advancements in the management of bleeding and treatments of liver cirrhosis and the global concerns regarding the emergence of multidrug-resistant bacteria, there is a need to reassess the use of routine antibiotic prophylaxis after hemostasis.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in patients treated for EVL.

METHODS

We conducted a 13-year observational study using the Tokushukai medical database across 46 hospitals. Patients were divided into the prophylaxis group (received antibiotics on admission or the next day) and the non-prophylaxis group (did not receive antibiotics within one day of admission). The primary outcome was composed of 6-wk mortality, 4-wk rebleeding, and 4-wk spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP). The secondary outcomes were each individual result and in-hospital mortality. A logistic regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used. A subgroup analysis was conducted based on the Child-Pugh classification to determine its influence on the primary outcome measures, while sensitivity analyses for antibiotic type and duration were also performed.

RESULTS

Among 980 patients, 790 were included (prophylaxis: 232, non-prophylaxis: 558). Most patients were males under the age of 65 years with a median Child-Pugh score of 8. The composite primary outcomes occurred in 11.2% of patients in the prophylaxis group and 9.5% in the non-prophylaxis group. No significant differences in outcomes were observed between the groups (adjusted odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-1.99; P = 0.74). Individual outcomes such as 6-wk mortality, 4-wk rebleeding, 4-wk onset of SBP, and in-hospital mortality were not significantly different between the groups. The primary outcome did not differ between the Child-Pugh subgroups. Similar results were observed in the sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

No significant benefit to antibiotic prophylaxis for esophageal variceal bleeding treated with EVL was detected in this study. Global reassessment of routine antibiotic prophylaxis is imperative.

CURRENT PHARMACOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT IN UPPER GASTROINTESTINAL BLEEDING

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common reason for presentation to the hospital. Appropriate resuscitation followed by endoscopic assessment and endotherapy for high-risk lesions (active bleeding or non-bleeding with visible vessels) forms the cornerstone of management. Pharmacological therapies are utilised at each stage of management in both variceal and non-variceal bleeding. Proton pump inhibitors and prokinetic agents can be administered pre-endoscopically with vasoactive medication and antibiotics utilised in suspected variceal bleeding. Epinephrine may be used as a temporising measure to improve visualisation during endoscopy but should not applied as a single agent. Topical endoscopic therapies have also shown promise in achieving haemostasis. Following endoscopy, a high dose of proton pump inhibitor should be given to patients who require endotherapy and vasoactive medications, and antibiotics continued in confirmed variceal bleeds. The timing of resumption of antithrombotic medication is dependent on the agent utilised and underlying thrombotic risk.

Principles of minimize bleeding and the transfusion of blood and its components in operated patients - surgical aspects

One of the target of perioperative tratment in surgery is decreasing intraoperative bleeding, which increases the number of perioperative procedures, mortality and treatment costs, and also causes the risk of transfusion of blood and its components. Trying to minimize the blood loss(mainly during the operation) as well as the need to transfuse blood and its components (broadly understood perioperative period) should be standard treatment for a patient undergoing a procedure. In the case of this method, the following steps should be taken: 1) in the preoperative period: identyfication of risk groups as quickly as possible, detecting and treating anemia, applying prehabilitation, modyfying anticoagulant treatment, considering donating one's own blood in some patients and in selected cases erythropoietin preparations; 2) in the perioperative period: aim for normothermia, normovolemia and normoglycemia, use of surgical methods that reduce bleeding, such as minimally invasive surgery, high-energy coagulation, local hemostatics, prevention of surgical site infection, proper transfusion of blood and its components if it occurs; 3) in the postoperative period: monitor the condition of patients, primarily for the detection of bleeding, rapid reoperation if required, suplementation (oral administration preferred) nutrition with microelements (iron) and vitamins, updating its general condition. All these activities, comprehensively and in surgical cooperation with the anesthesiologist, should reduce the blood loss and transfusion of blood and its components.

Risk factors associated with failure of endoscopic combined treatment to prevent varices rebleeding in patients with liver cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to investigate risk factors associated with gastroesophageal variceal rebleeding after endoscopic combined treatment.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients who had liver cirrhosis and underwent endoscopic treatment to prevent variceal rebleeding were retrospectively recruited. Hepatic venous pressure gradient (HVPG) measurement and CT examination of portal vein system were performed before endoscopic treatment. Endoscopic obturation for gastric varices and ligation for esophageal varices were performed simultaneously at the first treatment.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-five patients were enrolled, and after the first endoscopic treatment, recurrent hemorrhage occurred in 39 patients (23.6%) during 1-year follow-up. Compared to the non-rebleeding group, HVPG was significantly higher (18 mmHg vs.14 mmHg, P = 0.024) and more patients had HVPG exceeding 18 mmHg (51.3% vs.31.0%, P = 0.021) in the rebleeding group. No significant difference was found in other clinical and laboratory data between two groups (P > 0.05 for all). By a logistic regression analysis, high HVPG was the only risk factor associated with failure of endoscopic combined therapy (OR = 1.071, 95%CI, 1.005-1.141, P = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

The poor efficacy of endoscopic treatment to prevent variceal rebleeding was associated with high HVPG. Therefore, other therapeutic options should be considered for the rebleeding patients with high HVPG.

Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided coil embolization combined with endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection versus balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration for gastric varices with high-risk ectopic embolism: A multicenter and retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Gastric varices (GV) with spontaneous portosystemic shunt (SPSS) are associated with ectopic embolism in endoscopic cyanoacrylate. This study targeted to assess the efficacy and safety of EUS-guided coil embolization combined with endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection versus balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) for GV with high-risk ectopic embolism.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed six tertiary hospitals' 104 patients with GV at high-risk ectopic embolism (the narrowest diameter of SPSS was greater than or equal to 5 mm and the maximum diameter usually >8 mm) who underwent EUS-guided coil embolization combined with endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection or BRTO from January 2014 to December 2020. The outcomes included rebleeding, survival, and complications.

RESULTS

The EUS group and BRTO group contained 59 and 45 patients, respectively. The technical success rate between the two groups was similar (96.6% vs. 95.6%, P = 1.000). During the follow-up, both groups' 5-day rebleeding rate and 6-week mortality rate were 0%. One-year all-cause rebleeding rate (20.0% vs. 18.9%, P = 0.900) and 1-year mortality rate (2.0% vs. 0%, P = 1.000) in the EUS group were similar to the BRTO group. One patient experienced ectopic embolism in the EUS group, while the BRTO group did not. Both groups had similar mean days (16.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 12.0-19.0] vs. 16.5 [IQR, 11.8-26.0], P = 0.165) and cost of hospitalization (¥ 45950.6 [IQR, 39330.2-55768.2] vs. ¥ 51205.8 [IQR, 31628.8-74251.5], P = 0.680). Multivariate analysis showed that the narrowest diameter of the shunt (odds ratio [OR] = 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.062-3.258; P = 0.03) and content of hemoglobin (OR = 0.941; 95% CI: 0.892-0.992; P = 0.025) were the prognostic factors for survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of EUS-guided coil embolization combined with endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for GV with high-risk ectopic embolism are comparable to BRTO.

Update on the management of upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding is a common emergency presentation requiring prompt resuscitation and management. Peptic ulcers are the most common cause of the condition. Thorough initial management with a structured approach is vital with appropriate intravenous fluid resuscitation and use of a restrictive transfusion threshold of 7-8 g/dL. Pre-endoscopic scoring tools enable identification of patients at high risk and at very low risk who might benefit from specific management. Endoscopy should be carried out within 24 h of presentation for patients admitted to hospital, although optimal timing for patients at a higher risk within this period is less clear. Endoscopic treatment of high risk lesions and use of subsequent high dose proton pump inhibitors is a cornerstone of non-variceal bleeding management. Variceal haemorrhage results in higher mortality than non-variceal haemorrhage and, if suspected, antibiotics and vasopressors should be administered urgently, before endoscopy. Oesophageal variceal bleeding requires endoscopic band ligation, whereas bleeding from gastric varices requires thrombin or tissue glue injection. Recurrent bleeding is managed by repeat endoscopic treatment. If uncontrolled bleeding occurs, interventional radiological embolisation or surgery is required for non-variceal bleeding or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement for variceal bleeding.

Vagus Nerve-Preserving Laparoscopic Splenectomy and Azygoportal Disconnection with Versus Without Intraoperative Endoscopic Variceal Ligation: a Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Esophagogastric variceal bleeding is the most common lethal factor for patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension. We firstly developed a laparoscopic splenectomy and azygoportal disconnection (LSD) with intraoperative endoscopic variceal ligation (LSDL) technique. In this study, we aimed to evaluate whether LSDL is feasible and safe and whether LSDL can effectively prevent esophagogastric variceal re-bleeding (EVR), as compared with single LSD.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled single-center study, 88 patients with cirrhosis who had esophagogastric variceal bleeding and hypersplenism were randomly assigned to receive either LSD (n = 44) or LSDL (n = 44) between January 2020 and December 2021. The primary outcome was EVR.

RESULTS

No patients withdrew from the study. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, incidence of blood transfusion, time to first flatus and off-bed activity, or postoperative hospital stay between the two groups. Compared with that in the LSD group, operation time was significantly longer in the LSDL group (138.5 ± 19.4 min vs. 150.3 ± 19.0 min, P < 0.05); however, LSDL was associated with a significantly decreased EVR rate at 1-year follow-up (8/44 vs. 1/44, P < 0.05). Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression revealed that LSDL was a significant independent protective factor against EVR in comparison with LSD (relative risk: 0.105, 95% confidence interval 0.012-0.877; P = 0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

Our newly developed LSDL procedure is not only technically feasible and safe; it also contributed to lowering the EVR risk more so than single LSD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

We registered our research at https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ . The name of research registered is "Laparoscopic Splenectomy and Azygoportal Disconnection with Intraoperative Endoscopic Variceal Ligation." The trial registration identifier at clinicaltrials.gov is NCT04244487.

Update on the management of gastric varices

Gastro-oesophageal varices are the major clinical manifestations of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Although less frequent than oesophageal varices (EV), bleeding from gastric varices (GV) is generally more severe and associated with higher mortality and a greater risk to rebleed. According to Sarin's classification, GVs are categorized into four types based on their location within the stomach and relationship with EV. Currently, treatment options for the management of GV include beta-blockers, endoscopic band ligation, endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection, EUS-guided coil/cyanoacrylate injection, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts and balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration. The best treatment strategy of GV remains controversial because of the heterogeneity of GV, lack of high-quality data and suboptimal trial design of the studies available. The proper treatment algorithm may require adequate endoscopic and imaging evaluation by a multidisciplinary team with multiple treatment options available. This review describes the hemodynamic features of GV, pharmacological, endoscopic and interventional radiological treatment options for GV.

Prophylactic cyanoacrylate injection for gastric extension of esophageal varices: a randomized controlled trial

Aim of the study

Gastric variceal bleeding is more severe and fatal than esophageal bleeding. Injection of cyanoacrylate into bleeding gastric varices is recommended, but prophylactic injection is debatable. Aim of this study is to evaluate prophylactic cyanoacrylate injection into gastric extension of esophageal varices type 2 (GOV2).

Material and methods

This randomized controlled trial included 75 patients (3 groups) with risky or bleeding esophageal varices and non-bleeding GOV2. Group A received a cyanoacrylate GOV2 injection, esophageal variceal band ligation (EBL), and β-blocker (BB); group B received EBL and BB; and group C received EBL. Follow-up for ≥ 24 weeks to check for bleeding or death was performed.

Results

Baseline variables were comparable among the 3 groups. During follow-up (median, 37.5 weeks), increasing gastric extension and or bleeding risk signs were significantly lower in group A (0%) than B (12%) and C (32%) (p < 0.001). Bleeding occurred more in groups B (24%) and C (24%) than in A (8%) (p = 0.2). Gastric extension size was an independent predictor of bleeding (p = 0.03). Portal hypertensive gastropathy (PHG) decreased in groups A (24%) and B (24%) more than in C (8%) (p = 0.5). Mortality rates were 0.0% in group A, 8% in B, and 4% in C (p = 0.2).

Conclusions

Prophylactic cyanoacrylate injection into GOV2 before EBL significantly decreased the varix size and risk signs for bleeding with a statistically insignificant tendency to decrease the bleeding rate. A large gastric extension was an independent predictor of bleeding. Adding β-blockers can potentially decrease PHG and bleeding risk. An independent study with a larger sample size is recommended to confirm the rate of bleeding and test the mortality difference.

Long-term outcomes of patients with cirrhosis presenting with bleeding gastric varices

Aim

To establish a therapeutic strategy for cirrhosis patients with gastric variceal bleeding.

Methods

The outcomes of 137 patients with bleeding gastric varices were evaluated.

Results

The bleeding source was gastroesophageal varices (GOV) in 86 patients, and gastric fundal varices (FV) in 51 patients. The Child-Turcotte-Pugh classes were A, B, and C in 26, 79, and 32 patients, respectively; 34 patients (24.8%) had hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), of which 11 also had complicating portal venous tumor thrombosis (PVTT). Patients with GOV were treated by endoscopic variceal ligation or endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (EIS) with ethanolamine oleate, while those with FV were treated by EIS with cyanoacrylate; 29 patients with FV also underwent additional balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO). Hemostasis was successfully achieved in 136 patients (99.3%), and the cumulative 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year rebleeding rates were 18.1%, 30.8%, and 30.8%, respectively, in the patients with GOV, and 2.2%, 12.5% and 12.5%, respectively, in the patients with FV. The overall 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates were 79.7%, 71.5% and 64.4%, respectively, in the patients with GOV, and 91.0%, 76.9% and 59.5%, respectively, in the patients with FV. Multivariable analysis identified PVTT and alcoholic cirrhosis as a significant risk factor associated with rebleeding, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score and PVTT as significant factors associated with survival.

Conclusions

Endoscopic therapies with or without BRTO appeared to be useful therapeutic strategies to prevent rebleeding in patients with gastric variceal bleeding, and favorable outcomes were obtained, except in patients with underlying HCC associated with PVTT and/or severe liver damage.

Advanced bioactive nanomaterials for biomedical applications

Bioactive materials are a kind of materials with unique bioactivities, which can change the cellular behaviors and elicit biological responses from living tissues. Bioactive materials came into the spotlight in the late 1960s when the researchers found that the materials such as bioglass could react with surrounding bone tissue for bone regeneration. In the following decades, advances in nanotechnology brought the new development opportunities to bioactive nanomaterials. Bioactive nanomaterials are not a simple miniaturization of macroscopic materials. They exhibit unique bioactivities due to their nanoscale size effect, high specific surface area, and precise nanostructure, which can significantly influence the interactions with biological systems. Nowadays, bioactive nanomaterials have represented an important and exciting area of research. Current and future applications ensure that bioactive nanomaterials have a high academic and clinical importance. This review summaries the recent advances in the field of bioactive nanomaterials, and evaluate the influence factors of bioactivities. Then, a range of bioactive nanomaterials and their potential biomedical applications are discussed. Furthermore, the limitations, challenges, and future opportunities of bioactive nanomaterials are also discussed.

Clip-Assisted Endoscopic Cyanoacrylate Injection: A Novel Technique for Acute Gastroesophageal Variceal Bleeding

Background and Aim: Endoscopic injection sclerotherapy is effective for the treatment of gastric variceal bleeding, but may cause fatal ectopic embolism. Spontaneous portosystemic shunts are one of the risk factors for ectopic embolism. This present study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of clip-assisted endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection for the treatment of acute gastroesophageal variceal bleeding. Methods: The medical records of patients with gastroesophageal varices (GOVs) who underwent clip-assisted cyanoacrylate injection at the Ningbo First Hospital from March 2017 to August 2020 were reviewed. The outcomes were immediate hemostasis rate, early rebleeding rate, late rebleeding rate, and procedure-related complications. The gastrorenal and splenorenal shunts were evaluated by the computed tomography angiography. Results: A total of 9 patients with GOVs (GOV1 and GOV2) were analyzed, and 4 of the patients had spontaneous portosystemic shunts. The average number of clips used in each patient was 2.11 ± 1.96, and an average of 5.11 ± 1.76 mL of cyanoacrylate was injected into each patient. All patients completed immediate hemostasis. Two patients experienced rebleeding, including 1 case of early rebleeding and 1 case of late rebleeding (both due to cyanoacrylate extrusion) during a median follow-up of 367 days (interquartile range 270-855 days). Five patients underwent follow-up endoscopy; eradicated gastric varices (GVs) were revealed in 1 patient, and shrunken GVs were found in 4 patients. No serious complications, including ectopic embolism, were observed. Conclusion: The present study showed the efficacy and safety of clip-assisted endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection in acute GOV bleeding, but these results require verification by randomized controlled studies with larger sample numbers.

Factors associated with bleeding after endoscopic variceal ligation in children

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is a widely accepted treatment for esophagogastric varices in patients with portal hypertension (PHT). It is used for urgent treatment and prophylactic treatment of esophagogastric varices in pediatric as well as adult patients. However, major life-threatening adverse events such as early rebleeding can occur. Although early rebleeding after EVL among children and adolescents has been reported, the risk factors remain obscure. This study evaluated the risk factors for early rebleeding after EVL in children and adolescents.

METHODS

The subjects were children and adolescents (<18 years) with PHT who underwent EVL for esophagogastric varices. Early rebleeding was defined as hematemesis, active bleeding, or blood retention in the stomach, confirmed by esophagogastroduodenoscopy from 2 h to 5 days after EVL.

RESULTS

A total of 50 EVL sessions on 22 patients were eligible for this study. There were four episodes of early rebleeding. No other major adverse event has occurred. Multivariate analysis showed that EVL implemented at cardiac varices just below the esophagogastric junction (EGJ), within 5 mm from the EGJ, is the independent factor for a higher risk of early rebleeding: odds ratio 18.2 (95% confidence interval: 1.40-237.0), P = 0.02.

CONCLUSIONS

Children and adolescents who undergo EVL for cardiac varices just below the EGJ have a higher risk of early rebleeding than those who do not.

Endoscopic Cyanoacrylate Injection Versus Balloon-Occluded Retrograde Transvenous Obliteration for Prevention of Gastric Variceal Bleeding: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal treatment for gastric varices (GVs) is a topic that remains open for study. This study compared the efficacy and safety of endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection and balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) to prevent rebleeding in patients with cirrhosis and GVs after primary hemostasis.

APPROACH AND RESULTS

Patients with cirrhosis and history of bleeding from gastroesophageal varices type 2 or isolated gastric varices type 1 were randomized to cyanoacrylate injection (n = 32) or BRTO treatment (n = 32). Primary outcomes were gastric variceal rebleeding or all-cause rebleeding. Patient characteristics were well balanced between two groups. Mean follow-up time was 27.1 ± 12.0 months in a cyanoacrylate injection group and 27.6 ± 14.3 months in a BRTO group. Probability of gastric variceal rebleeding was higher in the cyanoacrylate injection group than in the BRTO group (P = 0.024). Probability of remaining free of all-cause rebleeding at 1 and 2 years for cyanoacrylate injection versus BRTO was 77% versus 96.3% and 65.2% versus 92.6% (P = 0.004). Survival rates, frequency of complications, and worsening of esophageal varices were similar in both groups. BRTO resulted in fewer hospitalizations, inpatient stays, and lower medical costs.

CONCLUSIONS

BRTO is more effective than cyanoacrylate injection in preventing rebleeding from GVs, with similar frequencies of complications and mortalities.

Safety and efficacy of endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection in the management of gastric varices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Bleeding from gastric varices is a catastrophic event and poses difficulty in management. The efficacy and safety of cyanoacrylate injection remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection in the management of gastric varices.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus databases, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews through November 2020 and manually reviewed the literature. Trial-specific risk ratios (RRs) were estimated and pooled using random-effect model meta-analysis.

RESULTS

We included seven randomized controlled trials (six for secondary prophylaxis and one for primary prophylaxis) at low risk of bias in which 126 deaths were reported among 583 patients with gastric varices. All studies reported the use of N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate glue. Cyanoacrylate use was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (RR, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-0.98; I2 = 41%) and rebleeding rate after hemostasis (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35-0.68, I2 = 0%) compared with any other treatment approach not involving cyanoacrylate. When cyanoacrylate was compared with each individual treatment approach (propranolol only, band ligation, sclerotherapy with alcohol or ethanolamine), data comprised sparse limited comparative conclusions. The use of cyanoacrylate injection was not associated with an increase in serious adverse events. The quality of evidence is moderate, graded down due to the small number of events and wide CIs.

CONCLUSION

The use of endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection therapy for gastric varices may be associated with lower all-cause mortality and better hemostasis compared with other therapies.

Unpacking the challenge of gastric varices: A review on indication, timing and modality of therapy

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding from oesophageal or gastric varices is an important medical condition in patients with portal hypertension. Despite the emergence of a number of novel endoscopic and radiologic therapies for oesophagogastric varices, controversy exists regarding the indication, timing and modality of therapy. The aim of this review is to provide a concise and practical evidence-based overview of these issues.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Management of Bleeding Gastric Varices: Expert Review

Management of bleeding gastric varices (GV) presents a unique challenge for patients with portal hypertension. Despite over thirty years of diagnostic and treatment advances standardized practices for bleeding GV are lacking and unsupported by adequate evidence. There are no definitive natural history studies to help with risk assessment or prospective clinical trials to guide clinical decision making. Available literature on the natural history and management of gastric varices consists of case series, restricted cohort studies, and a few small randomized trials, all of which have significant selection biases. This review summarizes the available data and recommendations based on expert opinion on how best to diagnose and manage bleeding from gastric varices. Table 1 summarizes our recommendations.

Effectiveness and safety of endoscopic treatment for duodenal variceal bleeding: a systematic review

Duodenal varix is a rare condition that involves massive bleeding, diagnostic difficulties, and a high rate of rebleeding and mortality. The purpose of this study was to systematically review endoscopic treatment for duodenal variceal bleeding to evaluate its effectiveness and safety. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to 21 November 2019. Ninety-two studies containing 156 patients were finally included, and individual data from 101 patients (mean age: 52.67 ± 13.82 years, male: 64.4%) were collected and further analyzed. We used an analysis of variance and χ2 or Fisher's exact tests to analyze individual data from 101 patients. The cause of duodenal variceal bleeding was cirrhosis-related intrahepatic portal hypertension (IPH) in 76.2% of patients. The overall rates of initial hemostasis and treatment success of endoscopic treatment for duodenal variceal bleeding were 89.1 and 81.2%, respectively. The median duration of follow-up was 4.5 (1.0, 12.0) months. The overall rates of rebleeding and mortality were 8.9 and 13.9%, respectively. Among a variety of endoscopic treatments available, only the initial hemostasis rate was significantly different between the endoscopic injection sclerotherapy and endoscopic tissue adhesive (ETA) groups (72.7 vs. 94.7%, P = 0.023); differences in treatment success, rebleeding, mortality, and adverse events were not statistically significant among the four groups. Endoscopic intervention is a feasible, well tolerated, and effective modality for the treatment of duodenal variceal bleeding. Among the variety of endoscopic treatments available, ETA with cyanoacrylate may be preferable for duodenal variceal bleeding.

Primary prophylaxis of gastric variceal bleeding: endoscopic obturation, radiologic intervention, or observation?

BACKGROUND

No single effective method has yet been established for the primary prophylaxis of bleeding from gastric varices (GV).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed liver cirrhosis patients with GV who had undergone either endoscopic variceal obturation (EVO) or balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) as prophylactic treatments, comparing them with those who were observed without any procedural intervention. The endpoints were GV bleeding rate and complete eradication rate.

RESULTS

72 patients in EVO, 41 patients in BRTO, and 97 patients in the clinical observation groups were enrolled. No difference was observed in baseline characteristics. As the primary endpoint, 14 (19.4%) patients in the EVO group and 3 (7.3%) in the BRTO group bled from GV after prophylactic treatment, and 34 (35.1%) patients bled in the observation group during the median follow-up of 35 months (p = 0.001). Patients who received EVO or BRTO developed less bleeding from GV than those who received observation only, with no difference between EVO and BRTO (EVO vs. observation, p = 0.038; BRTO vs. observation, p = 0.001; EVO vs. BRTO, p = 0.089). As secondary endpoints, GV disappeared completely in 33 patients (45.8%) in the EVO group and 31 patients (75.6%) in the BRTO group (p = 0.003). By multivariate analysis, complete eradication of GV was the sole determinant for predicting GV bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

EVO and BRTO are effective and safe primary prophylactic treatments for preventing bleeding from GV. In particular, BRTO is better than EVO in complete eradication of GV.

Thrombin Is an Effective and Safe Therapy in the Management of Bleeding Gastric Varices. A Real-World Experience

Variceal haemorrhage is a severe complication of liver disease with high mortality. Human recombinant thrombin has gained popularity in the management of variceal haemorrhage. We report on the use of thrombin for gastric and ectopic varices at a regional tertiary care centre. This was a retrospective observational study. Patients with portal hypertension who received endoscopic injection of recombinant thrombin were identified and data collected on haemostasis and rebleeding rates, complications and mortality. Patients were grouped by indication for thrombin injection: gastric/oesophageal/ectopic varices and endoscopic band ligation (EBL)-induced ulceration. 155 patients (96M/59F, mean age 58.3 years) received endoscopic thrombin injection. Mean volume of thrombin injected at index endoscopy was 9.5 ml/2375IU. Initial haemostasis was achieved in 144 patients (92.9%). Rebleeding occurred in a total of 53 patients (36.8%) divided as follows: early rebleeding (<5 days from index endoscopy)-26 patients (18%); rebleeding within 30 days-42 patients (29.1%); delayed rebleeding (> 30 days)-11 patients (7.6%). There was statistically significant difference in rate of initial haemostasis between Child-Pugh A/B patients vs Child-Pugh C (p = 0.046). There was no significant difference in rebleeding rates between different indication groups (p = 0.78), by presence of cirrhosis or by Child-Pugh Score. All-cause mortality at 6 weeks was 18.7%; 1-year mortality 37.4% (median follow-up 48 months). There was no significant difference in mortality between groups (p = 0.37). No significant adverse events or complications were reported. Thrombin is effective and safe for gastric varices and other portal-hypertension-related bleeding including oesophageal varices, ulcers secondary to EBL and ectopic varices.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided coil deployment with sclerotherapy for gastric varices

We present a case of gastric varices (GV) in the fundus treated by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided coil deployment with sclerotherapy. A 46-year-old man with a previous history of fatty liver and obesity presented to the emergency department with abdominal pain. Contrast computed tomography (CT) showed chronic liver disease, splenomegaly, and GV. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) showed GV in the fundus. Follow-up EGD 6 months later revealed an increase in GV diameter to over 20 mm. Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration appeared difficult due to the small caliber of the gastrorenal shunt observed on contrast CT. We performed EUS-guided coil deployment with sclerotherapy. The coil was deployed using a 19-gauge needle under EUS and fluoroscopic guidance. Next, 5% ethanolamine oleate with contrast medium was injected into GV using a 22-gauge needle. GV was reduced without complications, and no GV growth or hemorrhage was observed during 8 months of follow-up.

The Importance of Sonographic Imaging With Alcoholic Liver Disease: A Case Study

Alcoholic liver disease (ALD), a precursor to alcohol-induced cirrhosis, is a disease caused by excessive ingestion of alcoholic substances that directly affects liver functions. Abnormal liver function can cause the liver to damage other organs within the abdomen. This case study examines the physiological nature of alcohol-induced cirrhosis and its pathogenesis, external and internal clinical presentations, and treatment options. Treatments for alcohol-induced cirrhosis include liver transplant for permanent correction as well as varied options to manage symptoms. This case study analyzes alcoholic liver disease within one male patient whose condition highlights the importance of sonography in routinely monitoring patients with ALD.

Treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding in 2020: New techniques and outcomes

The clinical outcome of upper gastrointestinal bleeding has improved due to advances in endoscopic therapy and standardized peri-endoscopy care. Apart from validating clinical scores, artificial intelligence-assisted machine learning models may play an important role in risk stratification. While standard endoscopic treatments remain irreplaceable, novel endoscopic modalities have changed the landscape of management. Over-the-scope clips have high success rates as rescue or even first-line treatments in difficult-to-treat cases. Hemostatic powder is safe and easy to use, which can be useful as temporary control with its high immediate hemostatic ability. After endoscopic hemostasis, Doppler endoscopic probe can offer an objective measure to guide the treatment endpoint. In refractory bleeding, angiographic embolization should be considered before salvage surgery. In variceal hemorrhage, banding ligation and glue injection are first-line treatment options. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided therapy is gaining popularity due to its capability of precise localization for treatment targets. A self-expandable metal stent may be considered as an alternative option to balloon tamponade in refractory bleeding. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting should be reserved as salvage therapy. In this article, we aim to provide an evidence-based comprehensive review of the major advancements in endoscopic hemostatic techniques and clinical outcomes.

Evaluation of Treatment Response after Endoscopic Variceal Obturation with Abdominal Computed Tomography

Backgrounds/Aims

Rebleeding of gastric varices (GVs) after endoscopic variceal obturation (EVO) can be fatal. This study was performed to evaluate the usefulness of computed tomography (CT) for the prediction of rebleeding after EVO GV bleeding.

Methods

Patients who were treated with EVO for GV bleeding and underwent CT before and after EVO were included. CT images of the portal phase showing pretreatment GVs and feeding vessels, and nonenhanced images showing posttreatment cyanoacrylate impaction were reviewed.

Results

Fifty-three patients were included. Their mean age was 60.6±11.6 years, and 40 patients (75.5%) were men. Alcoholic liver disease was the most frequent underlying liver disease (45.3%). Complete impaction of cyanoacrylate in GVs and feeding vessels were achieved in 40 (75.5%) and 24 (45.3%) of patients, respectively. During the follow-up, GV rebleeding occurred in nine patients, and the cumulative incidences of GV rebleeding at 3, 6, and 12 months were 11.8%, 18.9%, and 18.9%, respectively. The GV rebleeding rate did not differ significantly according to the complete cyanoacrylate impaction in the GV, while it differed significantly according to complete cyanoacrylate impaction in the feeding vessels. The cumulative incidences of GV rebleeding at 3, 6, and 12 months were 22.3%, 35.2%, and 35.2%, respectively, in patients with incomplete impaction in feeding vessels, and there was no rebleeding during the follow-up period in patients with complete impaction in the feeding vessels (p=0.002).

Conclusions

Abdominal CT is useful in the evaluation of the treatment response after EVO for GV bleeding. Incomplete cyanoacrylate impaction in feeding vessels is a risk factor for GV rebleeding.

Beyond the scope and the glue: update on evaluation and management of gastric varices

Gastric varices are encountered less frequently than esophageal varices. Nonetheless, gastric variceal bleeding is more severe and associated with worse outcomes. Conventionally, gastric varices have been described based on the location and extent and endoscopic treatments offered based on these descriptions. With improved understanding of portal hypertension and the dynamic physiology of collateral circulation, gastric variceal classification has been refined to include inflow and outflow based hemodynamic pathways. These have led to an improvement in the management of gastric variceal disease through newer modalities of treatment such as endoscopic ultrasound-guided glue-coiling combination therapy and the emergence of highly effective endovascular treatments such as shunt and variceal complex embolization with or without transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement in patients who are deemed 'difficult' to manage the traditional way. Furthermore, the decisions regarding TIPS and additional endovascular procedures in patients with gastric variceal bleeding have changed after the emergence of 'portal hypertension theories' of proximity, throughput, and recruitment. The hemodynamic classification, grounded on novel theories and its cognizance, can help in identifying patients at baseline, in whom conventional treatment could fail. In this exhaustive review, we discuss the conventional and hemodynamic diagnosis of gastric varices concerning new classifications; explore and illustrate new 'portal hypertension theories' of gastric variceal disease and corresponding management and shed light on current evidence-based treatments through a 'new' algorithmic approach, established on hemodynamic physiology of gastric varices.

Proximal Splenorenal Shunt Surgery for Bleeding Gastric Varices in Non-Cirrhotic Portal Hypertension

Background The optimal management of gastric variceal bleeding in patients with non-cirrhotic portal hypertension (NCPH) is debatable due to the lack of data from large randomized controlled trials. Here we present our experience on proximal splenorenal shunt (PSRS) surgery in NCPH patients with bleeding gastric varices. Methods Over a five-year period, a total of 25 PSRS surgeries were performed and data was collected prospectively. Nineteen extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) and six non-cirrhotic portal fibrosis (NCPF) patients with bleeding fundic or isolated gastric varices and normal liver function were included. The collected data was analyzed retrospectively. Results Of the 25 patients who underwent PSRS five were lost to follow-up. Twenty patients (80%) were followed up for a median of 3.4 (1-5) years. Gastric variceal regression was noted in all 20 patients with the disappearance of varices in eight patients. On follow-up, shunt thrombosis was noted in four (20%) patients of whom, two had rebleeding between six months and three years after shunt surgery. Conclusion PSRS was effective in controlling gastric variceal hemorrhage in 92% (23 of 25) of patients with preserved liver function.

Use of n-Butyl 2 Cyanoacrylate without Lipiodol, Using a Modified Protocol in Gastric Variceal Bleed Management: Retrospective Analysis of 2299 Patients

Aim To assess the feasibility and amount of cyanoacrylate glue that can be injected safely per session, complications, and long-term results in GOV1, GOV2 and IGV1 varices, using a modified method.

Method All patients from October 2008 to December 2019 presenting to us with variceal bleeding were included. We injected 0.5 mL of cyanoacrylate glue followed by 1.5 mL to 3 mL distilled water in all GOV 1, GOV 2 and IGV varices. Number of glues used were not restricted. Esophageal variceal ligation (EVL) was done for esophageal varices. Follow-up was done at 4 weeks and 3 to 6 months and analyzed.

Results 2299 patients received therapy. Male:female, 69%:31%. Causes of varices–cirrhosis (84.9%) and extrahepatic portal vein obstruction (EHPVO) (15.1%). Causes of cirrhosis–alcohol (38.4%), nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) (29%), hepatitis B (19.9%), hepatitis C (10.1%), Wilson’s disease (1.8%), and autoimmune diseases (0.9%). As much as 41.1% had blood in stomach and 10.2% had active spurt on index endoscopy. As much as 14.5% required endotracheal intubation (active bleed [53.1%], encephalopathy [40.5%], respiratory distress [6.6%]). As much as 30.9% had GOV1 + GOV2, 1.5% had GOV2 + IGV1, 21.3% had GOV1 + IGV1 and 16.4% had GOV1 + GOV2 + IGV1. Hemostasis could be achieved in 99.2% on index endoscopy. A total of 18 (0.8%) patients had uncontrolled bleed of whom 10 (55.6%) had hepatocellular carcinoma. Ongoing bleed was treated with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPSS) (61.1%) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided coiling (38.8%). Amount of glue required for gastric variceal obturation was 3.6 on index endoscopy, 1.6 on follow-up at 4 to 6 weeks, and 1.2 at 3 months follow up. Glue extrusion with ulcers were seen in 6.4% at 4 to 6 weeks and 4.3% at 3 months. Rebleed occurred in 2.1% and 0.7% patients before 4 weeks and 3 months follow-up, respectively. As much as 1.3% and 1.2% patients were lost to follow-up before 4 weeks and 3 months follow-up sessions, respectively. Complications include pulmonary aspiration in 0.9% and bleeding from ulcers 2.8%. No evidence of pulmonary embolism was seen. In two endoscopic procedures, glue splashing into operator’s eyes occurred. Incidents of needle getting stuck in the varix occurred in three patients.

Conclusions Our modified protocol for glue in gastric varices is safe and feasible, as it has less rebleed, no pulmonary embolism and less ulcers with glue extrusion as compared with available literature.

Clinical significance of isolated gastric varices in liver cirrhotic patients: A single-referral-centre retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Gastric varices (GVs) occur in 10-30% of liver cirrhotic patients, with a mortality rate of up to 45%. Rupture of isolated GVs (IGVs) is less prevalent but often results in more severe hemorrhage and a higher risk of mortality than rupture of esophageal varices (EVs). However, there is no clear consensus yet about the optimal management for incidentally discovered IGVs.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the clinical significance of IGVs in liver cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort endoscopy database study within a 2-year period (2016-2017). All study subjects were liver cirrhotic patients with OVs or GVs. The exclusion criteria were noncirrhotic portal hypertension, presence of malignancy, absence of varices, and incomplete data. Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS 23.

RESULTS

A total of 153 patients were included in this study. IGVs were found in 13 (8.49%) patients, whereas OVs were found in 112 (73.20%) patients and gastro-OVs were found in 28 (18.30%) patients. Child-Pugh class C (CP C) score was the strongest independent risk factor for variceal bleeding in bivariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR]: 10.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.15-25.12, P = 0.001) and multivariate analysis (HR: 12.49, 95% CI: 4.95-31.54, P 0.001); however, the presence of IGVs was not an independent risk factor. CP C score was also the only significant risk factor associated with 1-year mortality in liver cirrhotic patients on multivariate analysis (HR: 26.77, 95% CI: 6.01-119.34, P 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The presence of IGVs has no clinical significance in the occurrence of 1-year rebleeding and in patient survival.

Combined Laparoscopic Splenectomy and Esophagogastric Devascularization versus Open Splenectomy and Esophagogastric Devascularization for Portal Hypertension due to Liver Cirrhosis

This study was conducted to compare the feasibility, safety and effectiveness of the combined-laparoscopic splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization (C-LSED) with open splenectomy and esophagogastric devascularization surgery (OSED) in patients with portal hypertension due to liver cirrhosis. From February 2014 to June 2018, 68 patients with portal hypertension were diagnosed as having serious gastroesophageal varices and/or hypersplenism in our center. Thirty patients underwent C-LSED and 38 patients received OSED. Results and outcomes were compared retrospectively. No patients of C-LSED group required an intraoperative conversion to open surgery. Significantly shorter operating time, less blood loss, lower transfusion rates, shorter postoperative hospital stay, lower rates of complications were found in C-LSED group than in C-LSED group (P<0.05). No death and rebleeding were documented in both groups during the follow-up periods of one year. Postoperative endoscopy revealed that varices in the patients of both groups were alleviated significantly from severe to mild, and in a part of cases, the varices disappeared. The final results suggest that the C-LSED technique is superior to open procedure, due to slightly invasive, simplified operative procedure, significantly shorter operating time, less intraoperative bleeding and lower post-operative complication rates. And C-LSED offers comparable long-term effects to open surgery.

Management Options for Gastric Variceal Hemorrhage

Importance

Varices are one of the main clinical manifestations of cirrhosis and portal hypertension. Gastric varices are less common than esophageal varices but are often associated with poorer prognosis, mainly because of their higher propensity to bleed.

Observations

Currently, treatments used to control and manage gastric variceal bleeding include β-blockers, endoscopic injection sclerotherapy, endoscopic variceal ligation, endoscopic variceal obturation, shunt surgery, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts, balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO), and modified BRTO. In the past few decades, Western (United States and Europe) interventional radiologists have preferred transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts that aim to decompress the liver and reduce portal pressure. Conversely, Eastern radiologists (Japan and South Korea) have preferred BRTO that directly targets the gastric varices. Over the past 20 years, BRTO has evolved and procedure-related risks have decreased. Owing to its safety and efficiency in treating gastric varices, BRTO is now starting to gain popularity among Western interventional radiologists. In this review, we present a comprehensive literature review of current and emerging management options, including BRTO and modified BRTO, for the treatment of gastric varices in the setting of cirrhosis and portal hypertension.

Conclusions and Relevance

Balloon-occluded retrograde transvenous obliteration has emerged as a safe and effective alternative treatment option for gastric variceal hemorrhage. A proper training, evidence-based consensus and guideline, thorough preprocedural and postprocedural evaluation, and a multidisciplinary team approach with BRTO and modified BRTO are strongly recommended to ensure best patient care.

Recent Advances in Hemostasis at the Nanoscale

Rapid and effective hemostatic materials have received wide attention not only in the battlefield but also in hospitals and clinics. Traditional hemostasis relies on materials with little designability which has many limitations. Nanohemostasis has been proposed since the use of peptides in hemostasis. Nanomaterials exhibit excellent adhesion, versatility, and designability compared to traditional materials, laying a good foundation for future hemostatic materials. This review first summarizes current hemostatic methods and materials, and then introduces several cutting-edge designs and applications of nanohemostatic materials such as polypeptide assembly, electrospinning of cyanoacrylate, and nanochitosan. Particularly, their advantages and working mechanisms are introduced. Finally, the challenges and prospects of nanohemostasis are discussed.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INVASIVE PROCEDURES IN PATIENTS WITH DISEASES OF THE LIVER AND BILIARY TRACT: REPORT OF A JOINT MEETING OF THE BRAZILIAN SOCIETY OF HEPATOLOGY (SBH), BRAZILIAN SOCIETY OF DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY (SOBED) AND BRAZILIAN SOCIETY OF INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY (SOBRICE)

Liver and biliary tract diseases are common causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Invasive procedures are usually performed in those patients with hepatobiliary diseases for both diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. Defining proper indications and restraints of commonly used techniques is crucial for proper patient selection, maximizing positive results and limiting complications. In 2018, the Brazilian Society of Hepato-logy (SBH) in cooperation with the Brazilian Society of Interventional Radiology and Endovascular surgery (SOBRICE) and the Brazilian Society of Digestive Endoscopy (SOBED) sponsored a joint single-topic meeting on invasive procedures in patients with hepatobiliary diseases. This paper summarizes the proceedings of the aforementioned meeting. It is intended to guide clinicians, gastroenterologists, hepatologists, radiologists, and endoscopists for the proper use of invasive procedures for management of patients with hepatobiliary diseases.

Efficacy of Therapeutic Endoscopy for Gastrointestinal Lesion (GI): A network meta-analysis

Objective:

Endoscopic therapy can reduce the risks of rebleeding, continued bleeding, need for surgery, and mortality. The objective of this systematic review was to compare the different modalities of endoscopic therapy for GI bleeding.

Methods:

Studies were identified by searching electronic databases MEDLINE. We selected all available clinical studies published after 2000 that assessed efficacy and/or safety of different endoscopic hemostatic techniques in treating GI bleeding. The outcomes evaluated included initial hemostasis, rebleeding rate, and 30-day all-cause mortality. Network meta-analyses were performed to summarize the treatment effects.

Results:

Total 20 studies involving 1845 patients were evaluated. Ten different treatment categories including mechanic, ablative, injection, and combined therapy were compared in our analysis in terms of their efficacy in stopping bleeding and complications. Band ligation [rate: 0.757; 95% Credible Interval (0.565, 0.887)] and injection therapy [rate: 0.891; 95% CI (0.791, 0.944)] had inferior efficacy in attaining initial hemostasis compared to others. Combined therapy of band ligation and HPC and hemoclip may represent the best options for preventing rebleeding and mortality respectively. No significant difference was found among other treatments in terms of complications.

Conclusions:

We recommend the application of hemoclips in treating GI bleeding due to its high hemostasis efficacy and low risk of 30-day mortality.

Hepatorenal Syndrome

Hepatorenal syndrome is a severe complication of end-stage cirrhosis characterized by increased splanchnic blood flow, hyperdynamic state, a state of decreased central volume, activation of vasoconstrictor systems, and extreme kidney vasoconstriction leading to decreased GFR. The contribution of systemic inflammation, a key feature of cirrhosis, in the development of hepatorenal syndrome has been highlighted in recent years. The mechanisms by which systemic inflammation precipitates kidney circulatory changes during hepatorenal syndrome need to be clarified. Early diagnosis is central in the management and recent changes in the definition of hepatorenal syndrome help identify patients at an earlier stage. Vasoconstrictive agents (terlipressin in particular) and albumin are the first-line treatment option. Several controlled studies proved that terlipressin is effective at reversing hepatorenal syndrome and may improve short-term survival. Not all patients are responders, and even in responders, early mortality rates are very high in the absence of liver transplantation. Liver transplantation is the only curative treatment of hepatorenal syndrome. In the long term, patients transplanted with hepatorenal syndrome tend to have lower GFR compared with patients without hepatorenal syndrome. Differentiating hepatorenal syndrome from acute tubular necrosis (ATN) is often a challenging yet important step because vasoconstrictors are not justified for the treatment of ATN. Hepatorenal syndrome and ATN may be considered as a continuum rather than distinct entities. Emerging biomarkers may help differentiate these two conditions and provide prognostic information on kidney recovery after liver transplantation, and potentially affect the decision for simultaneous liver-kidney transplantation.

Management of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a common medical emergency, with a reported mortality of 2-10%. Patients identified as being at very low risk of either needing an intervention or death can be managed as outpatients. For all other patients, intravenous fluids as needed for resuscitation and red cell transfusion at a hemoglobin threshold of 70-80 g/L are recommended. After resuscitation is initiated, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the prokinetic agent erythromycin may be administered, with antibiotics and vasoactive drugs recommended in patients who have cirrhosis. Endoscopy should be undertaken within 24 hours, with earlier endoscopy considered after resuscitation in patients at high risk, such as those with hemodynamic instability. Endoscopic treatment is used for variceal bleeding (for example, ligation for esophageal varices and tissue glue for gastric varices) and for high risk non-variceal bleeding (for example, injection, thermal probes, or clips for lesions with active bleeding or non-bleeding visible vessel). Patients who require endoscopic therapy for ulcer bleeding should receive high dose proton pump inhibitors after endoscopy, whereas those who have variceal bleeding should continue taking antibiotics and vasoactive drugs. Recurrent ulcer bleeding is treated with repeat endoscopic therapy, with subsequent bleeding managed by interventional radiology or surgery. Recurrent variceal bleeding is generally treated with transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. In patients who require antithrombotic agents, outcomes appear to be better when these drugs are reintroduced early.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure: Objective admission and support criteria in the intensive care unit

Cirrhosis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality throughout the world. Significant complications include variceal bleeding, hepatic encephalopathy, hepatorenal syndrome, and infection. When these complications are severe, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) is often required for organ support and management. Intensive care therapy can also serve as a bridge to liver transplantation. Along with decompensation of cirrhosis, the concept of acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF) has emerged. This involves an acute precipitating event, such as the development of infection in a patient with cirrhosis, which leads to acute deterioration of hepatic function and extrahepatic organ failure. Extrahepatic complications often include renal, cardiovascular, and respiratory failures. Patients with significant extrahepatic and hepatic failures need ICU admission for organ support. Again, in patients who are deemed suitable liver transplant candidates, intensive care management may allow bridging to liver transplantation. However, patients with a Chronic Liver Failure Consortium ACLF score greater than 70 at 48 to 72 hours post-ICU admission do not seem to benefit from ongoing intensive support and a palliative approach may be more appropriate.