The changing spectrum of treatment for variceal bleeding

Surgical portosystemic shunts versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt for variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

Variceal haemorrhage that is refractory or recurs after pharmacologic and endoscopic therapy requires a portal decompression shunt (either surgical shunts or radiologic shunt, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS)). TIPS has become the shunt of choice; however, is it the preferred option? This review assesses evidence for the comparisons of surgical portosystemic shunts versus TIPS for variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) for treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science. We also searched on-line trial registries, reference lists of relevant articles, and proceedings of relevant associations for trials that met the inclusion criteria for this review (date of search 8 March 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing surgical portosystemic shunts versus TIPS for the treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trials and extracted data using methodological standards expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias according to domains and risk of random errors with Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA). We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We found four randomised clinical trials including 496 adult participants diagnosed with variceal haemorrhage due to cirrhotic portal hypertension. The overall risk of bias in all the trials was judged at high risk. All the trials were conducted in the United States of America (USA). Two of the trials randomised participants to selective surgical shunts versus TIPS. The other two trials randomised participants to non-selective surgical shunts versus TIPS. The diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was by clinical and laboratory findings. We are uncertain whether there is a difference in all-cause mortality at 30 days between surgical portosystemic shunts compared with TIPS (risk ratio (RR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 1.99; participants = 496; studies = 4). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in encephalopathy between surgical shunts compared with TIPS (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.16; participants = 496; studies = 4). We found evidence suggesting an increase in the occurrence of the following harms in the TIPS group compared with surgical shunts: all-cause mortality at five years (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90; participants = 496; studies = 4); variceal rebleeding (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; participants = 496; studies = 4); reinterventions (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.28; participants = 496; studies = 4); and shunt occlusion (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.51; participants = 496; studies = 4). We could not perform an analysis of health-related quality of life but available evidence appear to suggest improved health-related quality of life in people who received surgical shunt compared with TIPS. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for all-cause mortality at 30 days and five years, irreversible shunt occlusion, and encephalopathy to very low because of high risk of bias (due to lack of blinding); inconsistency (due to heterogeneity); imprecision (due to small sample sizes of the individual trials and few events); and publication bias (few trials reporting outcomes). We downgraded the certainty of the evidence for variceal rebleeding and reintervention to very low because of high risk of bias (due to lack of blinding); imprecision (due to small sample sizes of the individual trials and few events); and publication bias (few trials reporting outcomes). The small sample sizes and few events did not allow us to produce meaningful trial sequential monitoring boundaries, suggesting plausible random errors in our estimates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found evidence suggesting that surgical portosystemic shunts may have benefit over TIPS for treatment of refractory or recurrent variceal haemorrhage in people with cirrhotic portal hypertension. Given the very low-certainty of the available evidence and risks of random errors in our analyses, we have very little confidence in our review findings.

Surgical portosystemic shunts versus devascularisation procedures for prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis

BACKGROUND

Hepatosplenic schistosomiasis is an important cause of variceal bleeding in low-income countries. Randomised clinical trials have evaluated the outcomes of two categories of surgical interventions, shunts and devascularisation procedures, for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis. The comparative overall benefits and harms of these two interventions are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisation procedures for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS, reference lists of articles, and proceedings of relevant associations for trials that met the inclusion criteria (date of search 11 January 2018).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisation procedures for the prevention of variceal rebleeding in people with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the trials and extracted data using methodological standards expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias according to domains and risk of random errors with GRADE and Trial Sequential Analysis. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We found two randomised clinical trials including 154 adult participants, aged between 18 years and 65 years, diagnosed with hepatosplenic schistosomiasis. One of the trials randomised participants to proximal splenorenal shunt versus distal splenorenal shunt versus oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy, and the other randomised participants to distal splenorenal shunt versus oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. In both trials the diagnosis of hepatosplenic schistosomiasis was made based on clinical and biochemical assessments. The trials were conducted in Brazil and Egypt. Both trials were at high risk of bias.We are uncertain as to whether surgical portosystemic shunts improved all-cause mortality compared with oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy due to imprecision in the trials (risk ratio (RR) 2.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 9.92; participants = 154; studies = 2). We are uncertain whether serious adverse events differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy (RR 2.26, 95% CI 0.44 to 11.70; participants = 154; studies = 2). None of the trials reported on health-related quality of life. We are uncertain whether variceal rebleeding differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.23; participants = 154; studies = 2). We found evidence suggesting an increase in encephalopathy in the shunts group versus the devascularisation with splenectomy group (RR 7.51, 95% CI 1.45 to 38.89; participants = 154; studies = 2). We are uncertain whether ascites and re-interventions differed between surgical portosystemic shunts and oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. We computed Trial Sequential Analysis for all outcomes, but the trial sequential monitoring boundaries could not be drawn because of insufficient sample size and events. We downgraded the overall certainty of the body of evidence for all outcomes to very low due to risk of bias and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the very low certainty of the available body of evidence and the low number of clinical trials, we could not determine an overall benefit or harm of surgical portosystemic shunts compared with oesophagogastric devascularisation with splenectomy. Future randomised clinical trials should be designed with sufficient statistical power to assess the benefits and harms of surgical portosystemic shunts versus oesophagogastric devascularisations with or without splenectomy and with or without oesophageal transection.

Self-Expanding Metal Stent (SEMS): an innovative rescue therapy for refractory acute variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is a life-threatening complication of liver cirrhosis or less commonly splenic vein thrombosis. Pharmacological and endoscopic interventions are cornerstones in the management of variceal bleeding but may fail in 10 - 15 % of patients. Rescue therapy with balloon tamponade (BT) or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) may be required to control refractory acute variceal bleeding effectively but with some limitations. The self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) is a covered, removable tool that can be deployed in the lower esophagus under endoscopic guidance as a rescue therapy to achieve hemostasis for refractory AVB.

AIMS

To evaluate the technical feasibility, efficacy, and safety of SEMS as a rescue therapy for AVB.

METHODS

In this review article, we have performed an extensive literature search summarizing case reports and case series describing SEMS as a rescue therapy for AVB. Indications, features, technique, deployment, success rate, limitations, and complications are discussed.

RESULTS

At present, 103 cases have been described in the literature. Studies have reported 97.08 % technical success rates in deployment of SEMS. Most of the stents were intact for 4 - 14 days with no major complications reported. Stent extraction had a success rate of 100 %. Successful hemostasis was achieved in 96 % of cases with only 3.12 % found to have rebleeding after placement of SEMS. Stent migration, which was the most common complication, was observed in 21 % of patients.

CONCLUSION

SEMS is a safe and effective alternative approach as a rescue therapy for refractory AVB.

Two surgical procedures for esophagogastric variceal bleeding in patients with portal hypertension

AIM: To determine the clinical value of a splenorenal shunt plus pericardial devascularization (PCVD) in portal hypertension (PHT) patients with variceal bleeding.

METHODS: From January 2008 to November 2012, 290 patients with cirrhotic portal hypertension were treated surgically in our department for the prevention of gastroesophageal variceal bleeding: 207 patients received a routine PCVD procedure (PCVD group), and 83 patients received a PCVD plus a splenorenal shunt procedure (combined group). Changes in hemodynamic parameters, rebleeding, encephalopathy, portal vein thrombosis, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS: The free portal pressure decreased to 21.43 ± 4.35 mmHg in the combined group compared with 24.61 ± 5.42 mmHg in the PCVD group (P < 0.05). The changes in hemodynamic parameters were more significant in the combined group (P < 0.05). The long-term rebleeding rate was 7.22% in the combined group, which was lower than that in the PCVD group (14.93%), (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: Devascularization plus splenorenal shunt is an effective and safe strategy to control esophagogastric variceal bleeding in PHT. It should be recommended as a first-line treatment for preventing bleeding in PHT patients when surgical interventions are considered.

Role of self-expandable metal stents in acute variceal bleeding

Acute variceal bleeding continues to be associated with significant mortality. Current standard of care combines hemodynamic stabilization, antibiotic prophylaxis, pharmacological agents, and endoscopic treatment. Rescue therapies using balloon tamponade or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt are implemented when first-line therapy fails. Rescue therapies have many limitations and are contraindicated in some cases. Placement of fully covered self-expandable metallic stent is a promising therapeutic technique that can be used to control bleeding in cases of refractory esophageal bleeding as an alternative to balloon tamponade. These stents can be left in place for as long as two weeks, allowing for improvement in liver function and institution of a more definitive treatment.

Portal-systemic encephalopathy in a randomized controlled trial of endoscopic sclerotherapy versus emergency portacaval shunt treatment of acutely bleeding esophageal varices in cirrhosis

BACKGROUND

In patients with cirrhosis and bleeding esophageal varices, there is a widespread belief that control of bleeding by portal-systemic shunts is compromised by a high incidence of shunt-related portal-systemic encephalopathy (PSE). This important issue was examined by a randomized controlled trial that compared emergency and long-term endoscopic sclerotherapy (EST) to emergency direct portacaval shunt (EPCS) in patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal hemorrhage.

METHODS

The study was a community-wide undertaking known as the San Diego Bleeding Esophageal Varices Study. A total of 211 unselected, consecutive patients with biopsy-proven cirrhosis and endoscopically proven, acutely bleeding esophageal varices that required at least 2 units of blood transfusion were randomized to EST (n = 106) or EPCS (n = 105). The diagnostic workup was completed in less than 6 hours and EST or EPCS was initiated within 8 hours of initial contact. Long-term EST was performed according to a deliberate schedule over months. Criteria for failure of EST or EPCS were clearly defined and crossover rescue treatment was applied, whenever possible, when failure of primary therapy was declared. PSE was quantitated by a "blinded" senior faculty gastroenterologist. Four variously weighted components of PSE were graded on a scale of 0 to 4: (1) mental state, (2) asterixis, (3) number connection test, and (4) arterial blood ammonia. PSE was classified as recurrent if 2 or more episodes were documented. All patients (100%) had follow-up for more than 9.4 years or until death.

RESULTS

Child's risk classes in the EST and EPCS groups, respectively, were 25% and 30% in class A, 43% and 47% in class B, and 26% and 29% in class C. Mean time from onset of bleeding to EST or EPCS was less than 24 hours, and from study entry to EST or EPCS was 3.1 to 4.4 hours, respectively. EST achieved permanent control of bleeding in only 20% of patients, while EPCS permanently controlled bleeding in every patient (P ≤ 0.001). Survival following EPCS was 3.5 to 5 times greater than that of EST at 5, 10, and 15 years (P ≤ 0.001). The incidence of recurrent PSE following EST (35%) was more than twice the incidence following EPCS (15%) (P ≤ 0.001). EST patients had a total of 179 episodes of PSE and 146 PSE-related hospital admissions, compared with EPCS patients who had 94 episodes of PSE and 87 hospital admissions (P ≤ 0.001). Recurrent upper gastrointestinal bleeding, which was rare in the EPCS group, was a major causative factor of PSE in the EST patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to EST, EPCS permanently controlled variceal bleeding, resulted in significantly greater long-term survival, and was followed by a relatively low (15%) incidence of PSE. These results were facilitated by rigorous, frequent, and lifelong follow-up that included regular counseling on dietary protein restriction and abstinence from alcohol, and by long-term patency of the portacaval shunt in 98% of patients. Furthermore, these results call into question the practice of avoiding portacaval shunt because of fear of PSE, and thereby foregoing the lifesaving advantage achieved by surgical control of bleeding. (clinicaltrials.gov NCT00690027).

Surgical Shunting versus Transjugular Intrahepatic Portasystemic Shunting for Bleeding Varices Resulting from Portal Hypertension and Cirrhosis: A Meta-Analysis

Surgical shunting was the mainstay in treating portal hypertension for years. Recently, trans-jugular intrahepatic portasystemic shunting (TIPS) has replaced surgical shunting, first as a “bridge” to transplantation and ultimately as first-line therapy for bleeding varices. This study was undertaken to examine evidence from trials comparing TIPS with surgical shunting to reassess the role of surgery in treating portal hypertension. The National Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health were searched for clinical trials comparing surgical shunting with TIPS. Meta-analysis using the fixed effects model was undertaken with end points of 30-day and 1- and 2-year survival and shunt failure (inability to complete shunt, irreversible shunt occlusion, major rehemorrhage, unanticipated liver transplantation, death). Three prospective randomized trials and one retrospective case-controlled study were identified. Analysis was limited to patients of Child Classes A or B. Significantly better 2-year survival (OR 2.5 [1.2-5.2]) and significantly less frequent shunt failure (OR 0.3 [0.1-0.9]) were seen in patients undergoing surgical shunting compared with TIPS. Meta-analysis promotes surgical shunting relative to TIPS because of improved survival and less frequent shunt failure. Surgical shunting should be accepted as first-line therapy for bleeding varices resulting from portal hypertension.

Therapeutic options for endoscopic haemostatic failures: the place of the surgeon and radiologist in gastrointestinal tract bleeding

The management of gastrointestinal tract bleeding has changed dramatically due to improvements of interventional endoscopy and radiology. The place of the radiologist has become very important, not only for diagnostic modalities but also for therapeutic embolisation to control the bleeding. The place of the surgeon is limited to the situation where both these less invasive techniques have failed to stop the bleeding. For arterial bleeding in the whole GI tract, angiography with subsequent embolisation is performed after failed endoscopy. For variceal bleeding the preferred treatment after endoscopic failure is transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic stent shunting (TIPS). Surgery is only needed in exceptional cases. Embolisation can be performed successfully without compromising the bowel vascularisation or inducing ischaemia, whereas surgery has a high rate of complications and mortality. For treatment of GI bleeding a multidisciplinary team including a gastroenterologist, radiologist and surgeon is mandatory.

Cost of preventing variceal rebleeding with transjugular intrahepatic portal systemic shunt and distal splenorenal shunt

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We examined the cost and cost effectiveness of distal splenorenal shunt (DSRS) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) in the prevention of variceal rebleeding.

METHODS

Patients participated in a randomized controlled trial comparing DSRS to TIPS. Quality of life (QOL) was measured using SF-36 preceding randomization and yearly thereafter. Cost utility analysis was performed using TreeAge DATA. Costs for both in- and out-patient events and interventions were obtained for each patient. Costs using coated stents were estimated using different rates of stenosis. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were determined at 1, 3 and 5 years.

RESULTS

The average yearly costs of managing patients after TIPS and DSRS over 5 years were similar, $16,363 and $13,492, respectively. Cost of TIPS for surviving patients exceeded the cost of DSRS at years 3 and 5 but not significantly. ICERs per life saved favored TIPS at year 5 ($61,000). If coated rather than bare stents were used the cost effectiveness of TIPS increased slightly.

CONCLUSIONS

TIPS is as effective as DSRS in preventing variceal rebleeding and may be more cost effective. TIPS, in all aspects, is equal to DSRS in the prevention of variceal rebleeding in patients who are medical failures.

Transabdominal gastro-esophageal devascularization and esophageal transection for bleeding esophageal varices after failed injection sclerotherapy: long-term follow-up report

BACKGROUND

Management of continued bleeding from esophageal varices despite adequate injection sclerotherapy remains one of the medical and surgical dilemmas. Transabdominal gastroesophageal devascularization and esophageal transection (TGDET) is considered an effective and safe procedure for such patients.

AIM

This study aimed at presenting continued evaluation of TGDET. Various problems influencing the early outcome are discussed, and long-term outcome is analyzed.

DESIGN

This was a prospective clinical descriptive study.

METHODS

Prospective data was collected on 142 consecutive patients managed by one group of surgeons over a 5 year-period and 15 years follow-up after failed injection sclerotherapy for variceal bleeding. Evaluation was made in terms of effectiveness in controlling the acute bleeding, postoperative morbidity and mortality, recurrent bleeding, encephalopathy, and long-term survival.

RESULTS

There were 133 men and 9 women. Mean age was 41.8 years. Etiology of portal hypertension was bilharziasis in 54.9% and posthepatitic in 14.8%. Child-Pugh grading on admission was A: 47.2%, B: 28.8%, and C: 14%. Hemorrhage was controlled in all cases. Clinical leak was observed in 5.6%, portal vein thrombosis in 6.3%, and staple line erosion in 2.1% of cases. No patient developed encephalopathy. In-hospital mortality was 12.7%. Complete eradication of varices was observed in 70.6% patients. Recurrent variceal bleeding was noticed in 6.9% of cases. Actuarial 15-year survival for Child-Pugh A patients was 44%, B was 22.5%, and none for C.

CONCLUSION

TGDET remains a safe and effective procedure after failure of sclerotherapy when other alternatives are either not indicated or not available.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic splenectomy and devascularization of the upper stomach in the management of gastric varices

BACKGROUND

Bleeding from esophagogastric varices is the major cause of death in patients with portal hypertension. Although esophageal varices can be treated with endoscopic procedures, the treatment for gastric varices is still controversial. The aim of this study was to describe a surgical technique and our preliminary results of hand-assisted laparoscopic Hassab's procedure.

METHODS

Between February 2002 and May 2005, we performed 7 cases of gastric varices with this type of operation. The patients included 4 men and 3 women who ranged in age from 23 to 74 years (underlying liver disease: 5 case of liver cirrhosis, 1 case of polycystic disease, 1 case of extrahepatic portal vein obstruction). After splenctomy was performed, we devascularized the vessels of the upper stomach and the esophagus 5 cm away from the esophago-cardia junction.

RESULTS

The operative time ranged from 132 to 290 minutes. Intraoperative blood loss was estimated to be from 50 ml to 475 ml. The weight of removed spleen ranged from 110 g to 800 g. During the follow-up period, all gastric varices disappeared and no bleeding from varicose veins was observed. All patients had hypersplenism with thrombocytopenia before surgery (mean: 11.1+/-7.4x10(4)/ml), which was improved postoperatively (mean: 30.8+/-19.0x10(4)/ml). This data were statistically significant (P=0.033). One patient died of aspiration pneumonia related to postoperative pyloric stricture.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is no agreement concerning the best treatment of gastric varices, the hand-assisted laparoscopic Hassab's operation is a safe, moderately invasive method, and its outcome appears to be equal to that of other open procedures.

Distal splenorenal shunt versus transjugular intrahepatic portal systematic shunt for variceal bleeding: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Variceal bleeding refractory to medical treatment with beta-blockers and endoscopic therapy can be managed by variceal decompression with either surgical shunts or transjugular intrahepatic portal systemic shunts (TIPS). This prospective randomized trial tested the hypothesis that patients receiving distal splenorenal shunts (DSRS) would have significantly lower rebleeding and encephalopathy rates than TIPS in management of refractory variceal bleeding.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial at 5 centers was conducted. One hundred forty patients with Child-Pugh class A and B cirrhosis and refractory variceal bleeding were randomized to DSRS or TIPS. Protocol and event follow-up for 2-8 years (mean, 46 +/- 26 months) for primary end points of variceal bleeding and encephalopathy and secondary end points of death, ascites, thrombosis and stenosis, liver function, need for transplant, quality of life, and cost were evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in rebleeding (DSRS, 5.5%; TIPS, 10.5%; P = .29) or first encephalopathy event (DSRS, 50%; TIPS, 50%). Survival at 2 and 5 years (DSRS, 81% and 62%; TIPS, 88% and 61%, respectively) were not significantly different (P = .87). Thrombosis, stenosis, and reintervention rates (DSRS, 11%; TIPS, 82%) were significantly (P < .001) higher in the TIPS group. Ascites, need for transplant, quality of life, and costs were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

DSRS and TIPS are similarly efficacious in the control of refractory variceal bleeding in Child-Pugh class A and B patients. Reintervention is significantly greater for TIPS compared with DSRS. Because both procedures have equivalent outcomes, the choice is dependent on available expertise and ability to monitor the shunt and reintervene when needed.

Preoperative preparation of patients with advanced liver disease

OBJECTIVE

To review the characteristic features of patients with advanced liver disease that may lead to increased perioperative morbidity and mortality rates.

DESIGN

Literature review.

RESULTS

Patients with end-stage liver disease are at high risk of major complications and death following surgery. The most common complications are secondary to acute liver failure and include severe coagulopathy, encephalopathy, adult respiratory distress syndrome, acute renal failure, and sepsis. The degree of malnutrition, control of ascites, level of encephalopathy, prothrombin time, concentration of serum albumin, and concentration of serum bilirubin predict the risk of complications and death following surgery. Other determinants of adverse outcome include emergency surgery, advanced age, and cardiovascular disease. Portal hypertension is a prominent feature of advanced liver disease, and it predisposes the patient to variceal hemorrhage, hepatorenal syndrome, hepatopulmonary syndrome, and uncontrolled ascites. Portal hypertension can be ameliorated by percutaneous or surgical portasystemic shunting procedures. If well-defined contraindications are not present, patients with advanced liver disease should be evaluated for orthotopic liver transplantation from a cadaver donor or possible living-related liver transplantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal preparation, which addresses the common features of advanced liver disease, may decrease the risk of complications or death following surgery. Preparation should include correcting coagulopathy, minimizing preexisting encephalopathy, preventing sepsis, and optimizing renal function.

Upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage--surgical aspects

During the last decades, significant advantages have been achieved with the use of emergency endoscopy and respective hemostatic interventions. Rebleeding, however, remains a significant clinical problem, and currently re-endoscopy or surgical intervention offers advantages and disadvantages. With the discovery of Helicobacter pylori as a main causative factor behind peptic ulcer disease, a more conservative surgical approach is mandated even in situations with significant rebleeding. In case of large gastric ulcer, however, resection is a wise strategy depending on the risk of malignancy. Liver transplantation has immensely improved the prognoses for variceal bleeding in end-stage liver disease in carefully selected patients.

Current indication of a modified Sugiura procedure in the management of variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The role of gastroesophageal devascularization (Sugiura-rype procedures) for the treatment of variceal bleeding remains controversial. Although Japanese series reported favorable longterm results, the technique has nor been widely accepted in the Western Hemisphere because of a high postoperative morbidity and mortality. The reasons for the different outcomes are unclear. In a multidisciplinary team approach we developed a therapeutic algorithm for patients with recurrent variceal bleeding.

STUDY DESIGN

The Sugiura procedure was offered only to patients with well-preserved liver function (Child A or Child B cirrhosis without chronic ascites) who were not candidates for distal splenorenal shunt, transhepatic porto-systemic shunt, or liver transplantation.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients with recurrent variceal bleeding underwent a modified Sugiura procedure between September 1994 and September 1997. All but one patient (operative mortality 7%) are alive after a median followup of 4 years. Recurrent variceal bleeding developed in one patient; esophageal strictures, which were successfully treated by endoscopic dilatation, developed in three patients; and one patient experienced mild encephalopathy. Major complications were noted only in patients with impaired liver function (Child B cirrhosis) or when the modified Sugiura was performed in an emergency setting. The presence of cirrhosis or the cause of portal hypertension had no significant impact on the complication rate.

CONCLUSIONS

This series was performed during the last decade when all modern therapeutic options for variceal bleeding were available. Our results indicate that the modified Sugiura procedure is an effective rescue therapy in patients who are not candidates for selective shunts, transhepatic porto-systemic shunt, or transplantation. Emergency settings and decreased liver function are associated with an increased morbidity.

Review: surgical shunts and encephalopathy

Historically, surgical shunts have played an important role in the treatment of patients with portal hypertension associated with ascites and/or variceal esophageal bleeding. Today, in the era of liver transplantation most patients with end-stage liver disease and concomitant portal hypertension and associated problems are best treated by liver grafting. The successful introduction of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunting (TIPS), performed by radiologists and gastroenterologists, provides a very effective alternative to surgical shunt procedures. One advantage of TIPS is that this procedure does not interfere with subsequent liver grafting. Today, surgical shunts have clearly lost ground to the less invasive TIPS procedure. Surgical shunts still maintain a role: as a salvage procedure in selected cases and in emergency situations. Surgical shunts are associated with a high rate of encephalopathy. In most cases selective surgical shunts should be preferred to nonselective surgical shunts. The role of partial surgical shunts versus selective surgical shunts remains to be determined. Hepatic encephalopathy is a common complication of all shunt procedures and is dependent on the shunt volume. Liver grafting is able to reverse encephalopathy because of a shunting procedure. In our institution, we prefer TIPS over surgical shunts as a bridging procedure before liver transplantation.

Association of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt with embolization in the treatment of bleeding duodenal varix refractory to sclerotherapy

BACKGROUND

Bleeding from duodenal varices are often severe (mortality as high as 40%), and more difficult to sclerose than esophageal varices. We report a patient with a bleeding duodenal varix, refractory to sclerotherapy, successfully treated by the association of portosystemic shunt placement and varix embolization, via the same transjugular intrahepatic route.

METHODS

A 40-year-old Black male underwent emergency TIPS and duodenal varix embolization after failure of endoscopic sclerotherapy. The portosystemic pressure gradient droped from 16 to 9 mm Hg following TIPS. At 5 months from TIPS, the patient is well, with a patent shunt at Doppler ultrasound.

CONCLUSION

The present report of successful control of duodenal varix, actively bleeding and refractory to sclerotherapy, by means of combined TIPS and embolization, supports the role of TIPS and suggests that its association to embolization can be valuably considered in the difficult setting of portal hypertension with bleeding duodenal varices.