Endoscopic-ultrasound-guided coil and cyanoacrylate embolization for gastric varices and the roles of endoscopic Doppler and endosonographic varicealography in vascular targeting

EUS-guided coil injection therapy in the management of gastric varices: the first U.S. multicenter experience (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Despite the significant morbidity associated with gastric variceal bleeding, there is a paucity of high-quality data regarding optimal management. EUS-guided coil injection therapy (EUS-COIL) has recently emerged as a promising endoscopic modality for the treatment of gastric varices (GV), particularly compared with traditional direct endoscopic glue injection. Although there are data on the feasibility and safety of EUS-COIL in the management of GV, these have been limited to select centers with particular expertise. The aim of this study was to report the first U.S. multicenter experience of EUS-COIL for the management of GV.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis included patients with bleeding GV or GV at risk of bleeding who underwent EUS-COIL at 10 U.S. tertiary care centers between 2018 and 2022. Baseline patient and procedure-related information was obtained. EUS-COIL entailed the injection of .018 inch or .035 inch hemostatic coils using a 22-gauge or 19-gauge FNA needle. Primary outcomes were technical success (defined as successful deployment of coil into varix under EUS guidance with diminution of Doppler flow), clinical success (defined as cessation of bleeding if present and/or absence of bleeding at 30 days' postintervention), and intraprocedural and postprocedural adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients were included (mean age 60.4 ± 12.8 years; 41.5% female). The most common etiology of GV was cirrhosis (71.7%), with alcohol being the most common cause (43.4%). Overall, 71.7% presented with acute GV bleeding requiring intensive care unit stay and/or blood transfusion. The most common GV encountered were isolated GV type 1 (60.4%). A mean of 3.8 ± 3 coils were injected with a total mean length of 44.7 ± 46.1 cm. Adjunctive glue or absorbable gelatin sponge was injected in 82% of patients. Technical success and clinical success were 100% and 88.7%, respectively. Intraprocedural adverse events (pulmonary embolism and GV bleeding from FNA needle access) occurred in 2 patients (1.8%), and postprocedural adverse events occurred in 5 (4.7%), of which 3 were mild. Recurrent bleeding was observed in 15 patients (14.1%) at a mean of 32 days. Eighty percent of patients with recurrent bleeding were successfully re-treated with repeat EUS-COIL. No significant differences were observed in outcomes between high-volume (>15 cases) and low-volume (<7 cases) centers.

CONCLUSIONS

This U.S. multicenter experience on EUS-COIL for GV confirms high technical and clinical success with low adverse events. No significant differences were seen between high- and low-volume centers. Repeat EUS-COIL seems to be an effective rescue option for patients with recurrent bleeding GV. Further prospective studies should compare this modality versus other interventions commonly used for GV.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Status and Future Frontiers

Interventional endoscopic ultrasound has fueled remarkable advancements in the field of therapeutic procedures, revolutionizing minimally invasive interventions for a diverse range of conditions. This review highlights the latest breakthroughs and advancements in therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound, showcasing its potential to transform patient care.

Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Indications and Future Perspectives

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided vascular interventions: An expanding paradigm

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has expanded its arena from a mere diagnostic modality to an essential therapeutic tool in managing gastrointestinal (GI) diseases. The proximity of the GI tract to the vascular structures in the mediastinum and the abdomen has facilitated the growth of EUS in the field of vascular interventions. EUS provides important clinical and anatomical information related to the vessels' size, appearance and location. Its excellent spatial resolution, use of colour doppler with or without contrast enhancement and ability to provide images “real-time” helps in precision while intervening vascular structures. Additionally, structures such as venous collaterals or varices can be dealt with optimally using EUS. EUS-guided vascular therapy with coil and glue combination has revolutionized the management of portal hypertension. It also helps to avoid radiation exposure in addition to being minimally invasive. These advantages have led EUS to become an upcoming modality to complement traditional interventional radiology in the field of vascular interventions. EUS-guided portal vein (PV) access and therapy is a new kid on the block. EUS-guided portal pressure gradient measurement, injecting chemotherapy in PV and intrahepatic portosystemic shunt has expanded the horizons of endo-hepatology. Lastly, EUS has also forayed into cardiac interventions allowing pericardial fluid aspiration and tumour biopsy with experimental data on access to valvular apparatus. Herein, we provide a comprehensive review of the expanding paradigm of EUS-guided vascular interventions in GI bleeding, portal vein access and its related therapeutic interventions, cardiac access, and therapy. A synopsis of all the technical details involving each procedure and the available data has been tabulated, and the future trends in this area have been highlighted.

EUS-Guided Vascular Interventions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has numerous advanced applications as a diagnostic and therapeutic modality in contemporary medicine. Through intraluminal placement, EUS offers a real-time Doppler-guided endoscopic visualization and access to intra-abdominal vasculature, which were previously inaccessible using historical methods. We aim to provide a comprehensive review of key studies on both current and future EUS-guided vascular applications. This review details EUS-based vascular diagnostic techniques of portal pressure measurements in the prognostication of liver disease and portal venous sampling for obtaining circulating tumor cells in the diagnosis of cancer. From an interventional perspective, we describe effective EUS-guided treatments via coiling and cyanoacrylate injections of gastric varices and visceral artery pseudoaneurysms. Specific attention is given to clinical studies on efficacy and procedural techniques described by investigators for each EUS-based application. We explore novel and future emerging EUS-based interventions, such as liver tumor ablation and intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided diagnosis and treatment of gastric varices

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

Endo-hepatology: The changing paradigm of endoscopic ultrasound in cirrhosis

Content available: Author Interview and Audio Recording.

Variceal Bleeding: Beyond Banding

Despite advances in the management of complications of portal hypertension, variceal bleeding continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. While endoscopic variceal band ligation remains first line therapy for treating bleeding and high-risk non-bleeding esophageal varices, alternate therapies have been explored, particularly in cases of refractory bleeding. The therapies being explored include stent placement, hemostatic powder use, over-the-scope clips and others. For gastric variceal bleeding, endoscopic ultrasound-guided therapies have recently emerged as promising interventions for hemostasis. The aim of this article is to highlight these alternative therapies and their potential role in the management of gastric and esophageal variceal bleeding.

Endoscopic Treatment of Gastric and Ectopic Varices

Gastric variceal bleeding has a high mortality. Endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection is the standard therapy; however, rebleeding and unexpected adverse events, such as injection sites ulcers and distal glue embolisms, are pitfalls of this therapy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided endovascular therapies offer a safer and more practical alternative for the treatment of gastric varices. EUS-guided combined therapy with coiling and cyanoacrylate injection is the most promising alternative with high obliteration rates and fewer adverse events reported. The authors reviewed the latest available data for all endoscopic therapies proposed for the management of gastric varices in patients with chronic liver disease.

Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) as rescue therapy for endoscopic glue migration and bleeding gastric varices

Gastric variceal (GV) bleeding is an important and fatal complication for cirrhotic patients which has historically been controlled with sclerosants and band ligation. Cyanoacrylate glue therapy has emerged as a more favorable option with bleeding control of up to 90% and low complication rates; however, several reports show possible ectopic systemic glue migration, most commonly into the portomesenteric system and leading to portal hypertension. To decompress portal pressures and mitigate future complications, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) placement may be a viable rescue therapy. We present two cases of TIPS placement for an 18-year-old and 51-year-old male in the setting of endoscopic glue migration into the portomesenteric system that demonstrate feasibility and success in temporizing acute variceal bleeding. Both cases demonstrated decompressing portovenous pressures but may result in need for re-intervention.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Coil Embolization With Absorbable Gelatin Sponge Appears Superior to Traditional Cyanoacrylate Injection for the Treatment of Gastric Varices

Gastric variceal (GV) bleeding is a feared complication of cirrhosis. Traditional endoscopic treatment with cyanoacrylate (CYA) injection can be challenging. Alternatively, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided delivery of hemostatic coils has shown high therapeutic success without the complications profile of CYA alone. Our aim was to compare the clinical outcomes of EUS-guided coil embolization with endoscopic CYA injection for the treatment of GV.

Cost-effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided coils plus cyanoacrylate injection compared to endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection in the management of gastric varices

BACKGROUND

Cyanoacrylate (CYA) injection can be performed using a standard upper endoscopy technique or under endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guidance alone or in combination with coils. There is little information available on the economic impact of these treatment methods.

AIM

To compare the cost-effectiveness of treating gastric varices by CYA injection via upper endoscopy vs coils plus CYA guided by EUS.

METHODS

This was an observational, descriptive, and retrospective study. Patients were allocated into two groups: A CYA group and coils plus CYA group. The baseline characteristics were compared, and a cost analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 36 patients were included (19 in the CYA group and 17 in the coils + CYA group). All patients in the CYA group had acute bleeding. They underwent a higher mean number of procedures (1.47 vs 1, P = 0.025), and the mean volume of glue used was 2.15 vs 1.65 mL, P = 0.133. The coils + CYA group showed a higher technical success rate (100% vs 84.2%), with a complication rate similar to the CYA group. The majority of CYA patients required hospitalization, and although the mean total per procedure cost was lower (United States $ 1350.29 vs United States $ 2978), the mean total treatment cost was significantly different (United States $ 11060.89 for CYA vs United States $ 3007.13 for coils + CYA, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

The use of EUS-guided coils plus cyanoacrylate is more cost-effective than cyanoacrylate injection when the total costs are evaluated. Larger, randomized trials are needed to validate the cost-effectiveness of the EUS-guided approach to treat gastric varices.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided hepatic interventions

Intervention for liver disease has predominantly been performed through the percutaneous approach. However, as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) applications have expanded, there have emerged various EUS-guided interventions for liver disease, a space we call "Endo-Hepatology". EUS-guided liver biopsy can be considered the "forerunner" of Endo-Hepatology and has become a clinical option for patients requiring histologic diagnosis and staging of their liver disease. EUS also enables direct access to the portal vein. Subsequently, many procedures are being explored, such as angiography, measurement of the portosystemic pressure gradient, portal vein sampling to detect cancer cell or DNA, and EUS-guided transhepatic intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation. Since the transducer is close to the liver, especially the left and caudate lobes, EUS can be used as a rescue when the percutaneous approach is not favorable and EUS-guided treatments of liver tumor, cyst and abscess have been reported. This review summarizes the available studies of EUS-guided intervention in the liver.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Angiotherapy for Gastric Varices—A Small Retrospective Study

Introduction Conventional n-butyl-cyanoacrylate (CYA) recommended for secondary prophylaxis of gastric varices (GV) is associated with significant rebleeding and glue embolism. Limited data are available on more successful and less risky endoscopic ultrasound-guided coils and CYA (EUS-Coils-CYA) injection in GV.

Methods We present a retrospective case series of 12 patients with GV bleeding managed successfully with EUS-Coils-CYA injection leading to variceal eradication in 11 patients.

Results From January 2018 to June 2019, 12 cases of GV, which were either bleeding or bled recently, were included. Complete obliteration was achieved in 91.6% of patients with 100% technical success. Mean number of deployed coils and volume of injected CYA glue were 1.16 and 1.58 mL, respectively.

Conclusions EUS-guided angiotherapy is an effective and safe intervention for managing GV bleeding with high technical success rate.

Risk of rebleeding from gastroesophageal varices after initial treatment with cyanoacrylate; a systematic review and pooled analysis

Background

Cyanoacrylate alone or in combination with other interventions, can be used to achieve variable rates of success in preventing rebleeding. Our study aims to assess the pooled risk of gastric and esophageal varices rebleeding after an initial treatment with cyanoacrylate alone and/or in combination with other treatments, by a systematic review of the literature and pooled analysis.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane library were searched for studies that reported the risk of rebleeding during the follow-up period after treatment of gastric or esophageal varices with either cyanoacrylate alone or in combination with other treatments. Standard error, upper and lower confidence intervals at 95% confidence interval for the risk were obtained using STATA Version 15 which was also used to generate forest plots for pooled analysis. The random or fixed effect model was applied depending on the heterogeneity (I²).

Results

A total of 39 studies were found to report treatment of either gastric or esophageal varices with either cyanoacrylate alone or in combination with other treatments. When gastric varices are treated with cyanoacrylate alone, the risk of rebleeding during the follow-up period is 0.15(Confidence Interval: 0.11–0.18). When combined with lipiodol; polidocanol or sclerotherapy the rebleeding risks are 0.13 (CI:0.03–0.22), 0.10(CI:0.02–0.19), and 0.10(CI:0.05–0.18), respectively. When combined with percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization; percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization; endoscopic ultrasound guided coils; or with ethanolamine, the rebleeding risk are 0.10(CI:0.03–0.17), 0.10(CI:0.03–0.17), 0.07(CI:0.03–0.11) and 0.08(CI:0.02–0.14), respectively.

When esophageal varices are treated with cyanoacrylate alone, the risk of rebleeding is 0.29(CI:0.11–0.47). When combined with percutaneous transhepatic variceal embolization; sclerotherapy; or band ligation, the risks of rebleeding are 0.16(CI:0.10–0.22), 0.12(CI:0.04–0.20) and 0.10(CI:0.04–0.24), respectively. When combined with a transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt; or ethanolamine, the risks of rebleeding are 0.06(CI: − 0.01-0.12) and 0.02 (CI: − 0.02-0.05), respectively.

Conclusion

In treating both gastric and esophageal varices, cyanoacrylate produces better results in terms of lower risk of rebleeding when combined with other treatments than when used alone. The combination of cyanoacrylate with ethanolamine or with endoscopic ultrasound guided coils produces the lowest risk of rebleeding in esophageal and gastric varices, respectively. We call upon randomized trials to test these hypotheses.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided treatment of gastric varices with coil embolization and absorbable hemostatic gelatin sponge: a novel alternative to cyanoacrylate

Background and study aims  Bleeding from gastric varices (GV) carries high morbidity and mortality. Current endoscopic therapies are premised on cyanoacrylate injection which is technically challenging and carries risk of embolization. We present a case series of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided coil injection in combination with hemostatic absorbable gelatin sponge (AGS) for treatment of bleeding gastric varices. Patients and methods  This was a retrospective review of EUS-guided coil injection for bleeding GV since November 2017. After EUS-guided needle puncture, hemostatic coils were serially injected until significant reduction of Doppler flow. Under fluoroscopic guidance, test contrast was injected to confirm absence of run-off, at which time AGS, converted into a liquid slurry, was injected as hemostatic reinforcement. Results  Ten consecutive patients underwent EUS-guided coil embolization reinforced by AGS. Technical success, defined as uncomplicated injection of coils and sponge was achieved in 100 % (10/10). Mean follow-up was 6 months 73-397 days; No patients rebled or required reintervention on GV. The complication rate was 10 % (1/10; severe abdominal pain without radiographic findings); otherwise, there were no cases of systemic embolization. Nine of 10 patients (90 %) had follow-up EUS (mean 80 days); 100 % (9/9) revealed near-obliteration of GV. Conclusion  EUS-guided coil embolization in combination with hemostatic AGS is a novel method for management of bleeding GV with high clinical and technical success rates, low risk for complications and favorable safety profile when compared to cyanoacrylate. This technique theoretically minimizes embolic complications and need for re-intervention. Further studies are required to compare this modality.

Combination therapy versus monotherapy for EUS-guided management of gastric varices: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cyanoacrylate (CYA), coil embolization, and/or combination thereof are available EUS-guided therapies for the treatment of gastric varices (GV). The primary aim of this study was to perform a structured systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of EUS-guided interventions for the treatment of GV. Individualized search strategies were developed for PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases, from inception through November 2018 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. This cumulative meta-analysis was performed using calculating pooled proportions. Measured outcomes included technical success, clinical success, adverse events, and rate of rebleeding or reintervention. Comparative subgroup analyses were performed for three treatment cohorts (EUS-guided CYA injection, EUS-guided coil embolization + CYA injection, and EUS-guided coil injection alone). Heterogeneity was assessed with I² statistics. Eleven studies (n = 536 patients; 62.20% of males) were included. The mean age was 58.21 ± 4.15 years with an average follow-up of 12.93 ± 7.69 months. Overall technical success, clinical success, and adverse events for EUS treatments was 100% ([95% confidence interval [CI] 98–100]; I² = 30.54%), 97% ([95% CI 92–100]; I² = 59.99%), and 14% ([95% CI 6–23]; I² = 82.23%), respectively. On subgroup analysis, EUS-guided CYA + coil embolization resulted in a better technical and clinical success compared to CYA alone (100% vs. 97%; P < 0.001 and 98% vs. 96%; P < 0.001) and coil embolization alone (99% vs. 97%; P < 0.001 and 96% vs. 90%; P < 0.001). CYA + coil embolization also resulted in lower adverse event rates compared to CYA alone (10% vs. 21%; P < 0.001), and comparable rates to coil embolization alone (10% vs. 3%; P = 0.057). EUS-guided treatment overall appears to be an effective and safe modality for GV. Among a variety of EUS-therapies available, EUS combination therapy with coil embolization + CYA injection appears to be a preferred strategy for the treatment of GV over EUS-based monotherapy.

Gastric variceal bleeding

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are no well-established guidelines for the management of gastric variceal bleeding. Endoscopic management of acute gastric variceal bleeding has been premised on the injection of sclerosants and synthetic glue. However, these therapies are associated with various complications including systemic embolization and recurrent bleeding. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided interventions including coil injection have emerged as promising modalities with high technical and clinical success rates and low rates of recurrence.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review we discuss the classification, natural history, prognosis, and treatment options of gastric variceal. Discussion of treatment is further subdivided into primary and secondary prophylaxis and the management of acute gastric variceal bleeding with a focus on emerging endoscopic interventions.

SUMMARY

Cyanoacrylate injection may have a role in the primary and secondary prophylaxis of gastric variceal. Endoscopic band ligation should be considered for GOV1. EUS-guided injection of synthetic glues like cyanoacrylate is superior to direct injection. However, EUS-guided coil injections with or without cyanoacrylate should be considered first-line endoscopic treatment in all bleeding gastric variceal except for GOV1. Balloon retrograde transvenous obliteration (BRTO) and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunts (TIPS) remain important interventional radiologic therapeutic options as primary therapy in centers without EUS expertise or as salvage therapy.

Insights into the role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided vascular therapy

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

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided placement of coils and cyanoacrylate embolization in refractory gastric variceal bleeding: a pediatric case report

Background and study aims  Gastric variceal bleeding management is challenging, especially in the pediatric population. Endoscopic cyanoacrylate glue injection is considered the standard for management of gastric varices but it is associated with a high rebleeding rate. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided placement of coils with cyanoacrylate is a newly available technique with a lower rebleeding rate but there are no reported cases using this technique in pediatric patients. We report on a 12-year-old child with liver cirrhosis and gastric variceal hemorrhage who was refractory to the endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection and in whom hemostasis was achieved without rebleeding following EUS-guided coiling and cyanoacrylate injection. Neither rebleeding nor varix reappearance was noted on 12-month follow-up. EUS-guided coiling and cyanoacrylate injection is safe and feasible in pediatric patients and could be considered as rescue therapy for treatment of refractory gastric variceal bleeding.