Functional magnetic resonance imaging-based assessment of terlipressin vs. octreotide on renal function in cirrhotic patients with acute variceal bleeding (CHESS1903): study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled trial

The prognostic evaluation of ALBI score in endoscopic treatment of esophagogastric varices hemorrhage in liver cirrhosis

To analyze the independent risk factors for recurrent bleeding and death within 1 year after endoscopic treatment of esophagogastric varices hemorrhage (EGVB) in patients with liver cirrhosis, and to validate the predictive value of ALBI score for recurrent bleeding and death within 1 year after endoscopic treatment of EGVB in patients with liver cirrhosis. A total of 338 patients with EGVB who received endoscopic treatment for the first time in the Department of Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University from January 1, 2016 to March 1, 2020 were selected. A database was established to analyze the patients' demographic data, surgical variables and postoperative outcomes. All patients were contacted and followed up to verify the predictive value of ALBI score for recurrent bleeding and mortality. 130 patients had rebleeding within 1 year after surgery (38.5%). 66 patients died within 1 year after surgery (19.5%). Patients with ALBI grade 3 had significantly higher rebleeding and mortality rates than those with grades 1 and 2. The AUC was used to compare the predictive value of the four scores for rebleeding and mortality within one year after endoscopic surgery. Both ALBI scores had the largest AUC. The ALBI score has certain predictive value for rebleeding and mortality within 1 year after endoscopic therapy in patients with cirrhotic EGVB.

A New Scoring System for Predicting In-hospital Death in Patients Having Liver Cirrhosis With Esophageal Varices

Introduction: Liver cirrhosis is caused by the development of various acute and chronic liver diseases. Esophageal varices is a common and serious complication of liver cirrhosis during decompensation. Despite the development of various treatments, the prognosis for liver cirrhosis with esophageal varices (LCEV) remains poor. We aimed to establish and validate a nomogram for predicting in-hospital death in LCEV patients.

Methods: Data on LCEV patients were extracted from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III and IV (MIMIC-III and MIMIC-IV) database. The patients from MIMIC-III were randomly divided into training and validation cohorts. Training cohort was used for establishing the model, validation and MIMIC-IV cohorts were used for validation. The independent prognostic factors for LCEV patients were determined using the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method and forward stepwise logistic regression. We then constructed a nomogram to predict the in-hospital death of LCEV patients. Multiple indicators were used to validate the nomogram, including the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curve, Hosmer-Lemeshow test, integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), net reclassification index (NRI), and decision curve analysis (DCA).

Results: Nine independent prognostic factors were identified by using LASSO and stepwise regressions: age, Elixhauser score, anion gap, sodium, albumin, bilirubin, international normalized ratio, vasopressor use, and bleeding. The nomogram was then constructed and validated. The AUC value of the nomogram was 0.867 (95% CI = 0.832–0.904) in the training cohort, 0.846 (95% CI = 0.790–0.896) in the validation cohort and 0.840 (95% CI = 0.807–0.872) in the MIMIC-IV cohort. High AUC values indicated the good discriminative ability of the nomogram, while the calibration curves and the Hosmer-Lemeshow test results demonstrated that the nomogram was well-calibrated. Improvements in NRI and IDI values suggested that our nomogram was superior to MELD-Na, CAGIB, and OASIS scoring system. DCA curves indicated that the nomogram had good value in clinical applications.

Conclusion: We have established the first prognostic nomogram for predicting the in-hospital death of LCEV patients. The nomogram is easy to use, performs well, and can be used to guide clinical practice, but further external prospective validation is still required.

Treatment for bleeding oesophageal varices in people with decompensated liver cirrhosis: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Approximately 40% to 95% of people with liver cirrhosis have oesophageal varices. About 15% to 20% of oesophageal varices bleed within about one to three years after diagnosis. Several different treatments are available, including, among others, endoscopic sclerotherapy, variceal band ligation, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, and balloon tamponade. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the individual and relative benefits and harms of these treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits and harms of different initial treatments for variceal bleeding from oesophageal varices in adults with decompensated liver cirrhosis, through a network meta-analysis; and to generate rankings of the different treatments for acute bleeding oesophageal varices, according to their benefits and harms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and trials registers until 17 December 2019, to identify randomised clinical trials (RCTs) in people with cirrhosis and acute bleeding from oesophageal varices.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only RCTs (irrespective of language, blinding, or status) in adults with cirrhosis and acutely bleeding oesophageal varices. We excluded RCTs in which participants had bleeding only from gastric varices, those who failed previous treatment (refractory bleeding), those in whom initial haemostasis was achieved before inclusion into the trial, and those who had previously undergone liver transplantation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We performed a network meta-analysis with OpenBUGS software, using Bayesian methods, and calculated the differences in treatments using odds ratios (OR) and rate ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrI) based on an available-case analysis, according to National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit guidance. We performed also the direct comparisons from RCTs using the same codes and the same technical details.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 52 RCTs (4580 participants) in the review. Forty-eight trials (4042 participants) were included in one or more comparisons in the review. The trials that provided the information included people with cirrhosis due to varied aetiologies and those with and without a previous history of bleeding. We included outcomes assessed up to six weeks. All trials were at high risk of bias. A total of 19 interventions were compared in the trials (sclerotherapy, somatostatin analogues, vasopressin analogues, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues, variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade, somatostatin analogues plus variceal band ligation, nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, no active intervention, sclerotherapy plus variceal band ligation, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy, balloon tamponade plus somatostatin analogues, balloon tamponade plus vasopressin analogues, variceal band ligation plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus nitrates plus vasopressin analogues, balloon tamponade plus variceal band ligation, portocaval shunt, sclerotherapy plus transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), and sclerotherapy plus vasopressin analogues). We have reported the effect estimates for the primary and secondary outcomes when there was evidence of differences between the interventions against the reference treatment of sclerotherapy, but reported the other results of the primary and secondary outcomes versus the reference treatment of sclerotherapy without the effect estimates when there was no evidence of differences in order to provide a concise summary of the results. Overall, 15.8% of the trial participants who received the reference treatment of sclerotherapy (chosen because this was the commonest treatment compared in the trials) died during the follow-up periods, which ranged from three days to six weeks. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.57, 95% CrI 1.04 to 2.41; network estimate; direct comparison: 4 trials; 353 participants) and vasopressin analogues alone had higher mortality than sclerotherapy (OR 1.70, 95% CrI 1.13 to 2.62; network estimate; direct comparison: 2 trials; 438 participants). None of the trials reported health-related quality of life. Based on low-certainty evidence, a higher proportion of people receiving balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy had more serious adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 4.23, 95% CrI 1.22 to 17.80; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 60 participants). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, people receiving vasopressin analogues alone and those receiving variceal band ligation had fewer adverse events than those receiving only sclerotherapy (rate ratio 0.59, 95% CrI 0.35 to 0.96; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 219 participants; and rate ratio 0.40, 95% CrI 0.21 to 0.74; network estimate; direct comparison: 1 RCT; 77 participants; respectively). Based on low-certainty evidence, the proportion of people who developed symptomatic rebleed was smaller in people who received sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues than those receiving only sclerotherapy (OR 0.21, 95% CrI 0.03 to 0.94; direct estimate; 1 RCT; 105 participants). The evidence suggests considerable uncertainty about the effect of the interventions in the remaining comparisons where sclerotherapy was the control intervention.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on moderate-certainty evidence, somatostatin analogues alone and vasopressin analogues alone (with supportive therapy) probably result in increased mortality, compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on moderate-certainty evidence, vasopressin analogues alone and band ligation alone probably result in fewer adverse events compared to endoscopic sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, balloon tamponade plus sclerotherapy may result in large increases in serious adverse events compared to sclerotherapy. Based on low-certainty evidence, sclerotherapy plus somatostatin analogues may result in large decreases in symptomatic rebleed compared to sclerotherapy. In the remaining comparisons, the evidence indicates considerable uncertainty about the effects of the interventions, compared to sclerotherapy.