Acute management and secondary prophylaxis of esophageal variceal bleeding: a western Canadian survey

Nationwide survey analysis of esophagogastric varices in portal hypertension based on endoscopic management in China

Aims

The endoscopic treatment of esophagogastric varices is challenging, and the nationwide application of endoscopic therapies for various types of esophagogastric varices and different clinical scenarios remains unclear. This study investigated the use of endoscopic therapy for portal hypertension in China.

Methods

This study used a questionnaire survey initiated by the Liver Health Consortium in China to investigate the use of endoscopic therapies for portal hypertension. Questionnaires were released online from January 30, 2023 to February 28, 2023 and filled out by chief physicians or senior instructors responsible for endoscopic therapies in participating hospitals across 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) in China. Comparisons of guideline adherence between primary and referral medical centers were performed using the chi‐square test or Fisher's exact test.

Results

In total, 836 hospitals participated in the survey. For primary and secondary prophylaxis of esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EGVB), adherence to the national guidelines was 72.5% (606/836) and 39.2% (328/836), respectively. Significant differences were observed in the rate of adherence between the primary and referral centers for primary (79.9% [111/139] vs. 71.0% [495/697], p = 0.033) and secondary prophylaxis (27.3% [38/139] vs. 41.6% [290/697], p = 0.002). Of the hospitals, 78.2% (654/836) preferred endoscopic therapies for acute EGVB, and the timing of endoscopy was usually within 12 h (48.5%, 317/654) and 12–24 h (36.9%, 241/654) after bleeding. Endoscopic therapy was more likely to be the first choice of treatment for acute EGVB in referral centers than in primary centers (82.6% [576/697] vs. 56.1% [78/139], p < 0.001). Regarding the management of gastroesophageal varices type 2 and isolated gastric varices type 1, the most prevalent procedures were cyanoacrylate injection combined with sclerotherapy (48.2% [403/836] and 29.9% [250/836], respectively); however, substantial hospitals preferred clip‐assisted therapies (12.4% [104/836] and 26.4% [221/836], respectively). Nonselective beta‐blockers were routinely used in 73.4% (614/836) of hospitals during the perioperative period of EGVB management, and propranolol (88.8%, 545/614) and carvedilol (37.5%, 230/614) were the most widely used nonselective beta‐blockers.

Conclusions

This survey clarified that various endoscopic procedures have been implemented nationwide in China. Participating hospitals have actively performed emergent endoscopy for acute EGVB; however, these hospitals do not adequately follow recommendations regarding primary and secondary prophylaxis of EGVB. In the future, standardizing the selection of endoscopic procedures and improving compliance with guidelines is crucial.

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

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

Perceptions on the management of varices and on the use of albumin in patients with cirrhosis among GI specialists in Austria

BACKGROUND

Portal hypertension (PH) causes severe complications in patients with liver cirrhosis, such as variceal bleeding and ascites; however, data on the knowledge and perceptions on guideline recommendations for the management of varices and the use of albumin is scarce.

METHODS

We designed two structured surveys on (i) the management of varices and (ii) the use of albumin for Austrian physicians of specialized Gastro-Intestinal (GI) centers. The interviewed physicians were confronted spontaneously and provided ad hoc responses to the questionnaire.

RESULTS

In total, 158 surveys were completed. Interestingly, many specialists (30%) would recommend a follow-up gastroscopy after 1 year in patients with compensated cirrhosis without varices (i.e., overtreatment). For small varices, 81.5% would use non-selective beta blockers (NSBB) for primary prophylaxis (PP). For PP in patients with large varices, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) plus NSBB was preferred by 51.4% (i.e., overtreatment). Knowledge on the indication criteria for early TIPS (transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt) was reported by 54.3%, but only 20% could report these criteria correctly. The majority (87.1%) correctly indicated a preference to use NSBB and EBL for secondary prophylaxis (SP). The majority of participating gastroenterologists reported no restrictions on the use of albumin (89.8%) in their hospitals. Of the interviewed specialists, 63.6% would use albumin in patients with SBP; however, only 11.4% would use the doses recommended by guidelines. The majority of specialists indicated using albumin at the recommended doses for hepatorenal syndrome (HRS-AKI, 86.4%) and for large volume paracentesis (LVP, 73.3%). The individual responses regarding albumin use for infections/sepsis, hyponatremia, renal impairment, and encephalopathy were heterogeneous.

CONCLUSION

The reported management of PH and varices is mostly adherent to guidelines, but endoscopic surveillance in patients without varices is too intense and EBL is overused in the setting of PP. Knowledge on the correct use of early TIPS must be improved among Austrian specialists. Albumin use is widely unrestricted in Austria; however, albumin is often underdosed in established indications.

Effects of Adjuvant Chinese Patent Medicine Therapy on Prevention of Variceal Rebleeding: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether adjuvant Chinese patent medicines (CPMs) to standard treatment could reduce recurrent bleeding after variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

This study retrospectively collected 555 consecutive patients who recovered from variceal bleeding. A population-based cohort study was established depending on if adjuvant CPMs were administered to prevent rebleeding. A total of 139 patients who had taken ⩾28 cumulative defined daily doses (cDDDs) of CPMs were included in the CPMs cohort, and 416 patients who used <28 cDDDs of CPMs were enrolled in the non-CPMs cohort. On evaluation of rebleeding incidence, 1:2 propensity score matched was used to estimate for reducing bias. Patients were followed for at least 12 months. The end-point of this study was clinically significant esophagogastric variceal rebleeding.

RESULTS

Following multivariate analysis, CPMs therapy was an independent factor for variceal rebleeding [adjusted hazard ratio (AHR)=0.657; 95% confidence interval=0.497-0.868; P=0.003]. After the 1:2 propensity score matching, a significant reduction (23.5%) in the incidence of variceal rebleeding in patients was observed, from 58.3% in the non-CPMs cohort to 44.6% in the CPMs cohort (modified log-rank test, P=0.002) within a year. The AHRs for rebleeding were 0.928, 0.553, and 0.105, for 28-90 cDDDs, 91-180 cDDDs, and >180 cDDDs of CPMs, respectively. The median rebleeding interval in the CPMs cohort was significantly larger compared with the non-CPMs cohort (113.5 vs. 93.0 days; P=0.008).

CONCLUSION

Adjuvant CPMs to standard therapy can significantly reduce the incidence of variceal rebleeding and delay the time to rebleeding.

Timing of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy does not influence short-term outcomes in patients with acute variceal bleeding

AIM

To examine the association between the timing of endoscopy and the short-term outcomes of acute variceal bleeding in cirrhotic patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 274 consecutive patients admitted with acute esophageal variceal bleeding of two tertiary hospitals in Korea. We adjusted confounding factors using the Cox proportional hazards model and the inverse probability weighting (IPW) method. The primary outcome was the mortality of patients within 6 wk.

RESULTS

A total of 173 patients received urgent endoscopy (i.e., ≤ 12 h after admission), and 101 patients received non-urgent endoscopy (> 12 h after admission). The 6-wk mortality rate was 22.5% in the urgent endoscopy group and 29.7% in the non-urgent endoscopy group, and there was no significant difference between the two groups before (P = 0.266) and after IPW (P = 0.639). The length of hospital stay was statistically different between the urgent group and non-urgent group (P = 0.033); however, there was no significant difference in the in-hospital mortality rate between the two groups (8.1% vs 7.9%, P = 0.960). In multivariate analyses, timing of endoscopy was not associated with 6-wk mortality (hazard ratio, 1.297; 95% confidence interval, 0.806-2.089; P = 0.284).

CONCLUSION

In cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding, the timing of endoscopy may be independent of short-term mortality.

A risk scoring system to predict in-hospital mortality in patients with cirrhosis presenting with upper gastrointestinal bleeding

GOALS

We aimed to develop a simple and practical risk scoring system to predict in-hospital mortality in cirrhotics presenting with upper gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding.

STUDY

Extensive clinical data were captured in patients with documented cirrhosis who underwent endoscopic evaluation for upper GI bleeding between January 1, 2003 and June 30, 2011 at Parkland Memorial Hospital. Predictors of mortality were identified by multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 884 patients with cirrhosis admitted for upper GI bleeding were identified; 809 patients survived and 75 died (8.4%). The etiology of bleeding was similar in both groups, with bleeding attributed to esophageal varices in 59% of survivors and 60% of non-survivors (ulcer disease and other etiologies of bleeding accounted for the other causes of bleeding). Mortality was 8.6% and 8.3% in patients with variceal bleeding and nonvariceal bleeding, respectively. While survivors and those who died were similarly matched with regard to gender, age, ethnicity and etiology of cirrhosis, patients who died had lower systolic blood pressures, higher pulse rates and lower mean arterial pressures at admission than patients who survived. Non-survivors were more likely to be Childs C (61% vs. 19%, P<0.001). Multivariate regression analysis identified the following 4 predictors of in-hospital mortality: use of vasoactive pressors, number of packed red blood cells transfused, model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) score, and serum albumin. A receiver operating characteristic curve including these 4 variables yielded an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve of 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 0.91-0.98). Classification and Regression Tree analysis yielded similar results, identifying vasoactive pressors and then MELD>21 as the most important decision nodes for predicting death. By comparison, using the Rockall scoring system in the same patients, the AUROC curve was 0.70 (95% confidence interval, 0.64-0.76 and the comparison of the University of Texas Southwestern model to the Rockall model revealed P<0.0001). A validation set comprised of 150 unique admissions between July 1, 2011 and July 31, 2012, had an AUROC of 0.92, and the outcomes of 97% of the subjects in this set were accurately predicted by the risk score model.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of vasoactive agents, packed red blood cell transfusion, albumin, and MELD score were highly predictive of in-hospital mortality in cirrhotics presenting with upper GI bleeding. These variables were used to formulate a clinical risk scoring system for in-hospital mortality, which is available at: http://medweb.musc.edu/LogisticModelPredictor.

Evaluation of the quality of clinical practice guidelines for the management of esophageal or gastric variceal bleeding

SETTING

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) should provide healthcare practitioners with the best possible evidence. Their quality, however, is often suboptimal. An evaluation of CPGs for the treatment of esophageal or gastric variceal bleeding (VB) has not been performed to date.

AIM

The aim of this study was to identify and evaluate the quality of CPGs for esophageal or gastric VB.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the scientific literature published up to July 2012 to identify and select CPGs related to the management of esophageal or gastric VB. Three independent reviewers assessed the eligible guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation II (AGREE II) instrument. Standardized scores were calculated for the six domains of each instrument, and the overall agreement among reviewers was assessed on the basis of the intraclass correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

Of a total of 23 CPGs identified, 10 were selected. Intraobserver agreement was good (overall intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.956, 95% confidence interval 0.958-0.973). The overall quality of the guidelines varied from low to moderate. Stratified by domains, the quality was good to acceptable in three domains: 'scope and purpose' (78.1%, median 82.3, range 46-100); 'clarity and presentation' (87.2%, median 91.6, range 67-98); and 'editorial independence' (64.1%, median 61.1, range 22-94), but with deficiencies in another three: 'rigor of development' (47.6%, range 28-94), 'stakeholder involvement' (47.5%, median 37, range 18-98) and 'applicability' (25.9% median 13.2, range 1-83). In the overall evaluation, two guidelines were considered 'highly recommended', three, 'recommended with modifications', and five, 'not recommended'. There was a significant improvement in quality over time.

CONCLUSION

The overall quality of CPGs for the management of esophageal or gastric VB has improved over time. Although the overall quality was not optimal, two guidelines achieved an excellent rating. A summary of recommendations is provided.

Potential preventability of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic prophylaxis can reduce the incidence of the first episode and recurrent episodes of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (SBP) in high-risk cirrhotic patients. However, recent data suggest that SBP prophylaxis may be underused. It is unclear how many cases of cirrhosis that develop SBP might actually be prevented with antibiotic prophylaxis.

AIMS

To determine the number of "preventable" cases of SBP and the adherence to standard guidelines for the use of antibiotic prophylaxis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of our patients diagnosed with SBP was performed. AASLD Guidelines (2004) for SBP prophylaxis include prior SBP, gastrointestinal (GI) hemorrhage, ascitic fluid (AF), protein ≤ 1 g/dl, or serum bilirubin ≥ 2.5 mg/dl. "Preventable (P) SBP" was defined as SBP occurring where prophylaxis was indicated but was not administered. "Non-preventable (NP) SBP" was defined as SBP that occurred despite proper adherence to the guidelines. "Inevitable (I) SBP" were those cases of SBP occurring in the absence of a documented indication for prophylaxis.

RESULTS

A total of 259 patients with cirrhosis underwent paracentesis; 29 had confirmed SBP. Eighteen of the 29 patients (62%) had "P-SBP", one (3%) had "NP-SBP", and ten (34%) had "I-SBP". In the P-SBP cases, the overlooked indications for prophylaxis were GI hemorrhage (n, %) (8, 44%), serum bilirubin ≥ 2.5 mg/dl (6, 33%), prior SBP (2, 11%) and AF protein ≤ 1 g/dl (2, 11%). Of the P-SBP, 78% were community-acquired; 22% were nosocomial. In-hospital mortality in the P-SBP was 16% (n = 3). Only one-third of patients who survived SBP received long-term outpatient prophylaxis after discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Many cases of SBP could be prevented by adhering to the AASLD guidelines. GI hemorrhage is the most frequently overlooked indication for SBP prophylaxis. Studies identifying the reasons for non-adherence to guidelines and developing interventions to increase utilization are warranted.

Adherence to guidelines in bleeding oesophageal varices and effects on outcome: comparison between a specialized unit and a community hospital

OBJECTIVES

Randomized controlled trials have shown beneficial effects of vasoactive drugs, endoscopic treatment and prophylactic antibiotics on the outcome of bleeding oesophageal varices (BOV). However, translating guidelines based on randomized controlled trials into clinical practice is difficult. Our aims were to compare adherence to evidence-based guidelines in BOV between a specialized unit and a community hospital, and to investigate whether differences in adherence affected the outcome.

METHODS

Two cohorts hospitalized during 2000-2007 with a first episode of BOV were retrospectively enrolled, one in a community hospital comprising 66 patients and one in a specialized unit comprising 111 patients. Data on treatment, rebleeding and mortality were collected from medical records according to the Baveno III/IV Criteria.

RESULTS

Treatments in the specialized unit versus the community hospital were: vasoactive drugs 79 vs. 66% (P = 0.06), prophylactic antibiotics 55 vs. 27% (P < 0.01), endoscopic treatment 86 vs. 74% (P= 0.04) and Sengstaken-Blakemore tube was used in 5 vs. 21% (P < 0.01). Secondary prophylaxis with pharmacological, endoscopic or transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt therapy was initiated in 91 vs. 74% (P < 0.01) (specialized vs. community). Six-week mortality was 17 vs. 24% (P = 0.25) with 5-day mortality of 6 vs. 3% (P = 0.34) and mortality day 6-42, 12 vs. 22% (P = 0.07) (specialized vs. community). Failure to control bleeding and failure to prevent rebleeding were not statistically different.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that patients with BOV are more likely to receive therapy according to guidelines when hospitalized in a specialized unit compared with a community hospital. This however did not affect mortality.

Systematic review: secondary prevention with band ligation, pharmacotherapy or combination therapy after bleeding from oesophageal varices

BACKGROUND

Variable methods are available for secondary prevention after oesophageal variceal bleeding (EVB).

AIM

To compare band ligation (BL), pharmacotherapy (PT) and BL+PT for EVB secondary prevention.

METHODS

A systematic search of databases, references and meeting abstracts was conducted for randomized trials of BL, PT or BL+PT. The outcomes were mortality, rebleeding and adverse events. A random-effects model was used for meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Twelve trials were included (6 BL vs. PT, 4 BL+PT vs. BL, 2 BL+PT vs. PT). All trials used beta-blockers +/- isosorbide mononitrate (ISMN) as PT. Mortality was not significantly different among trials. Rebleeding was not significantly different for BL vs. PT (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.73-1.37). BL reduced rebleeding compared with PT for trials with mean beta-blocker dose <80 mg/day (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.91). There were nonsignificant differences in rebleeding for BL+PT vs. BL (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31-1.08) and BL+PT vs. PT (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.03). There was no difference in adverse events between BL vs. PT, but was higher with BL+PT vs. BL.

CONCLUSION

Band ligation and PT alone are comparable for secondary prevention of rebleeding after EVB. Further trials with adequate PT dosing are required to determine the efficacy of combination BL+PT therapy.

Urgent vs. non-urgent endoscopy in stable acute variceal bleeding

OBJECTIVES

The optimal timing of endoscopy with acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between the timing of endoscopy and outcomes of stable AVB patients.

METHODS

Patients admitted at two tertiary-care centers with hemodynamically stable AVB from 1997 to 2006 were evaluated retrospectively. The primary outcome was mortality. Other recorded outcomes included stigmata at endoscopy, hemostasis, blood transfusions, rebleeding, renal function, hospitalization length, infection, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt use, and balloon tamponade use. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the association of time to endoscopy with mortality. Outcome comparisons were also performed for three different urgency times (< or = vs. > 4 h, < or = vs. > 8 h, and < or = vs. > 12 h).

RESULTS

There were 210 patients with stable AVB, accounting for 52% of the total number of AVB patients. The mean (+/- s.d.) age was 55 (+/- 12) years. The mean presenting systolic blood pressure and heart rate were 121 (+/- 16) mm Hg and 98 (+/- 20) bpm, respectively. Esophageal varices accounted for 91% (n = 191) of variceal bleeding. The mean time to endoscopy was 12 (+/- 12) h. The overall hemostasis rate after endoscopy was 97% (n = 203). The mortality rate was 9.5% (n = 20). There was no significant association of time to endoscopy with mortality (odds ratio, OR, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.92-1.08; P = 0.91). Significant independent predictors for mortality were lower albumin (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.73-0.93; P = 0.001), infection during admission (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 2.5-31.6; P < 0.001), and higher model end-stage liver disease (MELD) (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.06-1.29; P = 0.002). There was no difference in outcomes with different urgency times.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients who present with hemodynamically stable variceal bleeding, hemostasis after endoscopy is high, and the time to endoscopy does not appear to be associated with mortality.

Vapreotide acetate for the treatment of esophageal variceal bleeding

Variceal bleeding is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. The recommended treatment includes the early administration of a vasoactive drug. Vapreotide is a somatostatin analogue with a different receptor affinity to octreotide. It decreases portal pressure and blood flow of collateral circulation in rats with cirrhosis. The pivotal study of early administration of vapreotide in patients with cirrhosis and variceal bleeding has shown a significant improvement in bleeding control and, in the subset of patients with significant bleeding, a significant reduction in mortality. In addition, a meta-analysis of four randomized studies has shown a significant improvement in bleeding control. Vapreotide administrated via the intravenous route is simple to use, with practically no contraindications and few, usually minor, side effects.

Diagnosis and therapy of esophageal vascular disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The most relevant studies concerning the diagnosis of esophageal varices, primary and secondary prophylaxis and treatment of variceal bleeding published in the last year are reported.

RECENT FINDINGS

The specific areas reviewed are those that refer to studies on the noninvasive or minimally invasive diagnosis of the presence of esophageal varices, the prevention of the formation and of the progression of varices from small to large, the prevention of the first variceal haemorrhage, the treatment of the acute bleeding episode, and the prevention of rebleeding.

SUMMARY

Relevant studies are reviewed regarding the validation of noninvasive indices for the presence of varices, the use of the esophageal videocapsule to diagnose varices, the comparison of methods to prevent the first variceal haemorrhage, the use of the hepatic vein pressure measurement to monitor the haemodynamic response to beta-blockers, the long-term protection from bleeding by beta-blockers, the use of a double dose of somatostatin to control bleeding, the evaluation of the best endoscopic method to treat variceal bleeding in addition to vasoactive drugs, and the identification of prognostic factors for early and late mortality after a variceal bleed.

Racial disparities in the management of hospitalized patients with cirrhosis and complications of portal hypertension: a national study

Having complications of portal hypertension is a harbinger of decompensated cirrhosis and warrants consideration for liver transplantation (LT). Racial disparities in LT have been reported. We sought to characterize disparities in the performing of surgical and endoscopic procedures among hospitalized patients with complications of portal hypertension. We queried the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1998 to 2003 to identify patients with cirrhosis and complications of portal hypertension. Logistic regression controlling for confounders was used to evaluate race as a predictor of undergoing a portosystemic shunt and LT and of dying in the hospital. Compared to whites, the adjusted odds ratios of receiving a portosystemic shunt were 0.37 (95% CI: 0.27-0.51) and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.54-0.88) for African Americans (AAs) and Hispanics, respectively. AAs with variceal bleeding were more likely to have endoscopic variceal hemostasis delayed more than 24 hours after admission than were whites (OR 1.6; 95% CI: 1.2-2.1). The adjusted odds ratios of undergoing LT were 0.32 (95% CI:0.20-0.52) and 0.46 (95% CI: 0.25-0.83) for AAs and Hispanics, respectively. Compared to whites, AAs experienced higher in-hospital mortality (OR 1.12; 95% CI: 1.01-1.24), whereas Hispanics had a lower risk of death (OR 0.83; 95% CI: 0.75-0.92). Among variceal bleeders, the odds ratio of death for AAs was 1.7 (95% CI: 1.2-2.4) compared to whites.

CONCLUSION

AAs and Hispanics hospitalized for complications of portal hypertension were less likely to undergo a palliative shunt or LT than whites, which may contribute to the higher in-hospital mortality of AAs. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the mechanisms of these exploratory findings.