Self-Expandable Metal Stents for Persisting Esophageal Variceal Bleeding after Band Ligation or Injection-Therapy: A Retrospective Study

Esophageal Stent in Acute Refractory Variceal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis

Background: Acute esophageal variceal bleeding accounts for up to 70% of upper-gastrointestinal bleeding in cirrhotic patients. About 10-20% of patients with acute variceal bleeding have refractory bleeding that is not controlled by medical or endoscopic therapy, and this condition can be life-threatening. Balloon tamponade is a long-standing therapy which is only effective temporarily and has several complications, while transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) and liver transplantation may not be readily available at some centers. The use of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) in refractory esophageal variceal bleeding has been studied for effectiveness and adverse events and has been recommended for use as a bridge to a more definitive treatment. Aim: To investigate the effectiveness and safety of SEMSs in managing refractory variceal bleeding. Methods: A systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases was performed from inception to October 2022 using the following terms: "esophageal stent", "self-expandable metal stents", "endoscopic hemostasis", "refractory esophageal varices", and "esophageal variceal bleeding". Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they met the following criteria: (1) patients' age older than 18 and (2) a study (or case series) that has at least 10 patients in the study. Exclusion criteria included (1) non-English publications, (2) in case of overlapping cohorts, data from the most recent and/or most appropriate comprehensive report were collected. DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis was performed using the meta package in R statistical software(version 4.2.2). Results: Twelve studies involving 225 patients with 228 stents were included in the analyses. The mean age and/or median age ranged from 49.4 to 69 years, with a male-to-female ratio of 4.4 to 1. The median follow-up period was 42 days. The mean SEMS dwell time was 9.4 days. The most common cause of acute refractory variceal bleeding in chronic liver disease patients included alcohol use followed by viral hepatitis. The pooled rate of immediate bleeding control was 91% (95% CI 82-95%, I2 = 0). The pooled rate of rebleeding was 17% (95% CI 8-32%, I2 = 69). The pooled rate of stent ulceration was 7% (95% CI 3-13%, I2 = 0), and the pooled rate of stent migration was 18% (95% CI 9-32%, I2 = 38). The pooled rate of all-cause mortality was 38% (95% CI 30-47%, I2 = 34). Conclusions: SEMSs should be primarily considered as salvage therapy when endoscopic band ligation and sclerotherapy fail and can be used as a bridge to emergent TIPS or definitive therapy, such as liver transplantation.

Purastat as an Adjunct Treatment Option in Acute Esophageal Varices Bleeding: A Case Report

Esophageal varices are dilated submucosal esophageal veins that connect the portal and systemic circulations. Bleeding esophageal varices is a well-recognized complication of liver cirrhosis.It is known that in active variceal bleeding, treatment needs to be started promptly. Treatments comprise band ligation, sclerotherapy, removable stent placement, balloon tamponade, and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).We report a case in which hemodynamic stability can be maintained with the use of Purastat to control bleeding.

Self-expanding metal stents versus TIPS in treatment of refractory bleeding esophageal varices: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Refractory and recurrent esophageal variceal (EV) bleeding can be life threatening. Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) have been used as a "bridge" therapy. However, their role in the treatment protocol is not established due to paucity in data. Methods  We searched multiple databases from inception through May 2019 to identify studies that reported on SEMS and TIPS in refractory EV hemorrhage. Our primary goals were to analyze and compare the pooled all-cause mortality, immediate bleeding control and rebleeding rates. Results  Five hundred forty-seven patients from 21 studies were analyzed (SEMS: 12 studies, 176 patients; TIPS: 9 studies, 398 patients). The pooled rate of all-cause mortality with SEMS was 43.6 % (95 % CI 28.6-59.8, I ²  = 38) and with TIPS was 27.9 % (95 % CI 16.3-43.6, I ²  = 91). The pooled rate of immediate bleeding control with SEMS was 84.5 % (95 % CI 74-91.2, I ²  = 40) and with TIPS was 97.9 % (95 % CI 87.7-99.7, I ²  = 0). The pooled rate of rebleeding with SEMS was 19.4 % (95 % CI 11.9-30.4, I ²  = 32) and with TIPS was 8.8 % (95 % CI 4.8-15.7, I ²  = 40). Conclusion  Use of SEMS in refractory EV hemorrhage demonstrates acceptable immediate bleeding control with good technical success rate. Mortality and rebleeding rates were lesser with TIPS, however, its superiority and/ or inferiority cannot be validated due to limitations in the comparison methodology.

Outcomes after placement of a SX-ELLA oesophageal stent for refractory variceal bleeding-A national multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines favour the use of bleeding stents over balloon tamponade (BT) for refractory variceal bleeding (VB) from oesophageal varices. However, data on the efficacy and safety of self-expandable metal SX-ELLA Danis stents (SEMS) are limited.

METHODS

Cirrhotic patients receiving SEMS for VB at four tertiary care centres were included in this retrospective multicentre study. Rates of failure-to-control bleeding (within 5 days) and bleeding-related mortality (6 weeks) were assessed.

RESULTS

SEMS controlled VB in 79.4% (27/34) of patients. In the rest of patients, other rescue treatments including endoscopic band ligation (EBL, n = 3), SEMS renewed (n = 2) or Linton (n = 2) were applied; however, VB was only controlled in one patient. Early rebleeding within six weeks occurred in 17.6% (6/34) patients. Median SEMS dwell time was three (IQR:6) days. Overall n = 13/34 (38.2%) patients died with SEMS in situ. After SEMS removal, rebleeding and bleeding-related death occurred in n = 7 (35%) and n = 5 (14.7%) patients respectively. Only 32.4% (10/34) patients did not experience any rebleeding within six weeks after SEMS removal. Bleeding-related mortality was 47.1% (n = 16/34) and the median survival after SEMS placement was 2.1 months. Notably, no patient received an early transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS). The most common adverse events were stent dislocations (n = 13; 38.2%), while ulcers/necrosis of the oesophageal mucosa was seen in only four (11.8%) patients.

CONCLUSION

SEMS controlled refractory VB in most patients. However, bleeding-related mortality remained high. While SEMS dislocations were frequent, ulcers/necrosis of the oesophagus was rare. Further studies should investigate whether the wider use of early TIPS reduces bleeding-related mortality after SEMS placement.

SX-Ella Stent Danis Effectively Controls Refractory Variceal Bleed in Patients with Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Almost 10% of bleeding episodes are refractory to combination of vasoactive agent and endotherapy, and are associated with a mortality up to 50%. Severity of liver disease and high portal pressure are mainly responsible for it. TIPS cannot be used in these patients due to high MELD score. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of self-expandable DE stents for control of refractory variceal bleeds in patients with ACLF.

METHODS

Acute-on-chronic liver failure patients (n = 88, mean age 47.3 ± 10.9 years) with refractory variceal bleeds received either DE stent (Gr. A, n = 35) or continued with repeat endotherapy and vasoactive drug (Gr.B, n = 53). Matching by propensity risk score (PRS) was done to avoid selection bias. Competing risk Cox regression analysis was done to identify event-specific, i.e., gastrointestinal bleed-related death.

RESULTS

Majority (78.4%) of patients were alcoholic with MELD score of 45.9 ± 20.1. Control of initial bleeding was significantly more in the DE stent group as compared to controls in both pre-match (89 vs. 37%; p < 0.001) and PRS-matched cohorts (73 vs. 32%; 0.007). Further, bleed-related death was also significantly lower in DE group as compared to controls in both pre-match (14 vs. 64%; p = 0.001) and PRS-matched cohorts (6 vs. 56%; p = 0.001). In a multivariate competing risk Cox model, patients who underwent DE stenting had reduced mortality in both pre-match (p = 0.04, HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.13-0.96) and PRS-matched cohorts (p < 0.001, HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.51).

CONCLUSIONS

Self-expandable DE stents are very effective in control of refractory variceal bleeding and reduced mortality in patients with severe liver failure.

Suboptimal Implementation of Evidence-based Therapy for Acute Variceal Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Gastroenterologists should strive to improve the outcomes associated with acute variceal hemorrhage (AVH) by optimizing care delivery and clinician preparedness through training. Unfortunately, data regarding contemporary outcomes and management of AVH are limited.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of cohort studies examining outcomes and management of AVH from January 1990 to September 2016. We pooled data on mortality and utilization of medical therapy, endoscopic interventions, balloon tamponade (BT), and salvage procedures (portal decompressive surgery or transjugular portosystemic shunt).

RESULTS

The pooled 6-week mortality rate after AVH was 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.4%-21.7%). Sclerotherapy was used in 18.7% of cases (95% CI, 9.2%-34.3%), and no endoscopic intervention was provided in 14.3% of patients (95% CI, 9.7%-20.6%). The overall rate of BT use was 10.8% (95% CI, 8.2%-14.1%). Salvage procedures were used in 5.7% (95% CI, 3.7%-8.6%), falling to 1.7% (95% CI, 0.7%-3.8%) among patients treated after 2000. Although pooled rates of timely endoscopy and vasoactive medication use were high (85.8% and 83.0%, respectively), only half of patients received prophylactic antibiotics (52.8%; 95% CI, 40.0%-66.2%). In studies that enrolled patients exclusively after 2000, 13.8% of patients (95% CI, 7.0%-25.4%) received sclerotherapy, salvage transjugular portosystemic shunt fell to 1.7% (95% CI, 0.7%-3.8%), BT use fell slightly to 8.7% (95% CI, 6.4%-11.6%), and vasoactive medication and prophylactic antibiotic use rose to 91.4% (95% CI, 86.0%-94.9%) and 62.7% (95% CI, 48.9%-74.9%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

AVH is associated with high mortality rates and suboptimal implementation of evidence-based therapies including prophylactic antibiotics and endoscopic interventions, suggesting a need for quality improvement. In addition, the frequent need for BT and sclerotherapy suggests that specific attention to these procedures in gastroenterology training curricula may be warranted.

Esophageal Stent for Refractory Variceal Bleeding: A Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. Preliminary studies suggest that covered self-expandable metal stents may be helpful in controlling esophageal variceal bleeding. Aims. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of esophageal stent in refractory variceal bleeding in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods. A comprehensive literature search was conducted on PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library covering the period from January 1970 to December 2015. Data were selected and abstracted from eligible studies and were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using I² test. Results. Five studies involving 80 patients were included in the analysis. The age of patients ranged from 18 to 91 years. The mean duration of follow-up was 46.8 d (range, 30–60 d). The success rate of stent deployment was 96.7% (95% CI: 91.6%–99.5%) and complete response to esophageal stenting was in 93.9% (95% CI: 82.2%–99.6%). The incidence of rebleeding was 13.2% (95% CI: 1.8%–32.8%) and the overall mortality was 34.5% (95% CI: 24.8%–44.8%). Most of patients (87.4%) died from hepatic or multiple organ failure, and only 12.6% of patients died from uncontrolled bleeding. There was no stent-related complication reported and the incidence of stent migration was 21.6% (95% CI: 4.7%–46.1%). Conclusion. Esophageal stent may be considered in patients with variceal bleeding refractory to conventional therapy.

Efficacy of Self-Expandable Metallic Stent Inserted for Refractory Hemorrhage of Duodenal Cancer

Because of advances in the technology of gastrointestinal endoscopy and improvements in the quality of stents, it has become routine to place a stent as palliative therapy for malignant gastrointestinal obstruction. On the other hand, stent placement for malignant gastrointestinal hemorrhage has scarcely been reported, although it may be performed for hemorrhage of the esophageal varicose vein. We recently experienced a patient with refractory hemorrhage from an unresectable duodenal cancer who underwent placement of a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) and thereafter had no recurrence of the hemorrhage. A 46-year-old man underwent laparotomy to radically resect a cancer in the third portion of the duodenum, which invaded widely to the superior mesenteric vein and its branches and was considered unresectable. After stomach-partitioning gastrojejunostomy was performed, chemotherapy was initiated according to the regimen of chemotherapy of far advanced gastric cancer. One year and 4 months after induction of chemotherapy, gastrointestinal hemorrhage occurred. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed the hemorrhage oozing from the duodenal cancer, and endoscopic hemostasis, such as injection of hypertonic saline epinephrine and argon plasma coagulation, was unsuccessful. Twenty days after emergence of the hemorrhage, an endoscopic covered SEMS was placed with confirmation by fluoroscopy. Immediately after placement of the stent, the tarry stool stopped and the anemia ceased to progress. The recurrence of the hemorrhage has not been confirmed without migration of the stent. SEMS is an effective hemostatic procedure for malignant refractory hemorrhage.

Self-expanding metal stents for acute refractory esophageal variceal bleeding: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Esophageal variceal bleeding is a severe complication of portal hypertension with significant morbidity and mortality. A substantial portion of cirrhotics fail to respond to conventional medical therapy and band ligation, necessitating alternative treatments including self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement for acute refractory esophageal variceal bleeding. In the present study, we carried out a systematic review and structured meta-analysis of all eligible studies to evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, clinical efficacy, and survival advantage of SEMS placement for the treatment of of acute esophageal variceal bleeding.

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases were carried out through December 2015. Individual study proportions were transformed into a quantity using the Freeman-Tukey variant of the arcsine square root transformed proportion. Combined weighted proportions, and meta-regression were then determined.

RESULTS

The search yielded 12 studies involving n = 155 patients included in our meta-analysis. Pooled clinical success rate in achieving hemostasis within 24 h was 96% (95% CI, 0.90-1.00). Technical success for SEMS deployment endoscopically was achieved in 97% of patients (95% CI, 0.91-1.00). Total adverse events (including rebleeding after 48 h, ulceration, and stent migration) were shown in 36% of patients after SEMS placement (95% CI, 0.23-0.50). Pooled 30-day and 60-day survival rates were 68% (95% CI, 0.56-0.80) and 64% (95% CI, 0.48-0.78), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that esophageal SEMS placement is a technically feasible modality and highly efficacious in achieving hemostasis in acute esophageal variceal hemorrhage.

Hemostasis in uncontrolled esophageal variceal bleeding by self-expanding metal stents: a systematic review

AIM

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current reported efficacy and the mortality rate of SEMS treatment in uncontrolled bleeding patients.

BACKGROUND

Esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) represents a life threatening pathology. Despite the adequate pharmacologic and endoscopic treatment, continuous or recurrent bleeding, named as uncontrolled bleeding, occurs in 10-20% of cases. A new removable, covered, and self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) was proposed to control the variceal bleeding.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted according to the PRISMA statement. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (1989-present) and SCOPUS (1989-present) databases. The last search was run on 01 July 2015.

RESULTS

Nine studies (period range=2002-2015) met the inclusion criteria and were included in quantitative analysis. High rate of SEMS efficacy in controling acute bleeding was observed, with a reported percentage ranging from 77.7 to 100%. In 10% to 20% of patients, re-bleeding occurred with SEMS in situ. Stent deployment was successful in 77.8% to 100% of patients while 11 to 36.5% of patients experienced stent migration.

CONCLUSION

SEMS could be effective and safe in control EVB and can be proposed as a reliable option to ballon tamponed for patient stabilization and as a bridging to other therapeutic approach.

Systematic review with meta-analysis: self-expanding metal stents in patients with cirrhosis and severe or refractory oesophageal variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of patients with cirrhosis and acute variceal bleeding is very poor when the standard-of-care fails to control bleeding. New treatment modalities are needed in these patients.

AIM

To synthesise the available evidence on the efficacy of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in patients with cirrhosis and severe or refractory oesophageal variceal bleeding.

METHODS

Meta-analysis of trials evaluating SEMS in patients with cirrhosis and severe or refractory oesophageal variceal bleeding.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. The pooled estimate rates were 0.40 (95% confidence interval, CI = 0.31-0.49) for death, 0.41 (95% CI = 0.29-0.53) for liver-related death and 0.36 (95% CI = 0.26-0.47) for death at day 30, with low heterogeneity between studies. The pooled estimate rates were 0.12 (95% CI = 0.07-0.21) for mortality related to variceal bleeding, and 0.18 (95% CI = 0.11-0.29) for failure to control bleeding with SEMS, with no or low heterogeneity between studies. The pooled estimate rate were 0.16 (95% CI = 0.04-0.48) for rebleeding after stent removal and 0.28 (95% CI = 0.17-0.43) for stent migration, with high heterogeneity. A significant proportion of patients had access to liver transplantation or to TIPSS [pooled estimate rate 0.10 (95% CI = 0.04-0.21) and 0.26 (95% CI = 0.18-0.36), respectively].

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer than 40% of patients treated with SEMS were dead at 1 month. SEMS can be used as a bridge to TIPSS or to liver transplantation in a significant proportion of patients. Additional studies are required to identify potential risk factors leading to a poor prognosis in patients with acute variceal bleeding in whom the use of SEMS could be considered.