Role of band ligation for secondary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding

Diagnosis and Management of Esophagogastric Varices

Acute variceal bleeding (AVB) is a potentially fatal complication of clinically significant portal hypertension and is one of the most common causes of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Thus, esophagogastric varices represent a major economic and population health issue. Patients with advanced chronic liver disease typically undergo an upper endoscopy to screen for esophagogastric varices. However, upper endoscopy is not recommended for patients with liver stiffness < 20 KPa and platelet count > 150 × 10⁹/L as there is a low probability of high-risk varices. Patients with high-risk varices should receive primary prophylaxis with either nonselective beta-blockers or endoscopic band ligation. In cases of AVB, patients should receive upper endoscopy within 12 h after resuscitation and hemodynamic stability, whereas endoscopy should be performed as soon as possible if patients are unstable. In cases of suspected variceal bleeding, starting vasoactive therapy as soon as possible in combination with endoscopic treatment is recommended. On the other hand, in cases of uncontrolled bleeding, balloon tamponade or self-expandable metal stents can be used as a bridge to more definitive therapy such as transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. This article aims to offer a comprehensive review of recommendations from international guidelines as well as recent updates on the management of esophagogastric varices.

Machine learning-based model for predicting the esophagogastric variceal bleeding risk in liver cirrhosis patients

BACKGROUND

Liver cirrhosis patients are at risk for esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EGVB). Herein, we aimed to estimate the EGVB risk in patients with liver cirrhosis using an artificial neural network (ANN).

METHODS

We included 999 liver cirrhosis patients hospitalized at the Beijing Ditan Hospital, Capital Medical University in the training cohort and 101 patients from Shuguang Hospital in the validation cohort. The factors independently affecting EGVB occurrence were determined via univariate analysis and used to develop an ANN model.

RESULTS

The 1-year cumulative EGVB incidence rates were 11.9 and 11.9% in the training and validation groups, respectively. A total of 12 independent risk factors, including gender, drinking and smoking history, decompensation, ascites, location and size of varices, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), γ-glutamyl transferase (GGT), hematocrit (HCT) and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) levels as well as red blood cell (RBC) count were evaluated and used to establish the ANN model, which estimated the 1-year EGVB risk. The ANN model had an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.959, which was significantly higher than the AUC for the North Italian Endoscopic Club (NIEC) (0.669) and revised North Italian Endoscopic Club (Rev-NIEC) indices (0.725) (all P <  0.001). Decision curve analyses revealed improved net benefits of the ANN compared to the NIEC and Rev-NIEC indices.

CONCLUSIONS

The ANN model accurately predicted the 1-year risk for EGVB in liver cirrhosis patients and might be used as a basis for risk-based EGVB surveillance strategies.

A novel prognostic model for predicting the risk of first variceal hemorrhage in patients with HBV-related cirrhosis

Background

Variceal hemorrhage (VH) is a life-threatening complication of cirrhosis. An accurate VH risk evaluation is critical to determine appropriate prevention strategies. We aimed to develop an individualized prediction model to predict the risk of first VH in hepatitis B virus (HBV)-related cirrhotic patients.

Methods

A nomogram was developed based on a retrospective analysis of 527 consecutive HBV-related cirrhotic patients with gastroesophageal varices (GEVs). The nomogram evaluation was performed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), concordance index (C-index), calibration plot, and decision curve analysis (DCA). The results were verified using an external cohort (n = 187).

Results

We developed a nomogram based on clinical and endoscopic features, including the size of varices, red wale marks, ascites, spleen thickness, γ-glutamyltransferase, and hematocrit. The C-index of the nomogram in the derivation and validation cohort was 0.806 and 0.820, respectively, and the calibration plot fitted well. Compared with those of the North Italian Endoscopic Club (NIEC) and revised NIEC indexes, the AUC (derivation cohort: 0.822 vs. 0.653 vs. 0.713; validation cohort: 0.846 vs. 0.685 vs. 0.747) and DCA curves of this nomogram were better. Further, based on the risk scores, patients were classified into low-, medium-, and high-risk groups, and significant differences were noted in VH incidence among the three risk groups (P <0.001 for each cohort).

Conclusions

An effective individualized nomogram to predict the risk of first VH in HBV-related GEV patients was established, which can assist clinicians in developing more appropriate prevention strategies.

Novel balloon compression-assisted endoscopic injection sclerotherapy and endoscopic variceal ligation in the treatment of esophageal varices: a prospective randomized study

Background

Herein, our group designed a novel technology, termed balloon compression-assisted endoscopic injection sclerotherapy (bc-EIS), which was applied to improve the efficiency of eradicating esophageal varices (EVs). The present study aimed to compare the rate of eradication and efficacy between bc-EIS and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) in the management of EVs.

Methods

Ninety-five patients with esophageal variceal bleeding (EVB) were randomly assigned to receive bc-EIS or ligation alone. Additional treatment sessions were held 1 month later and then at 3-month intervals until eradication of the varices was achieved. Endoscopic follow-up examinations were carried out at 6-month intervals in the absence of recurrence or immediately if there was any recurrent bleeding.

Results

The mean physical injection points per session were 2.89 ± 0.79, and the mean volume of lauromacrogol used per session was 17.74 ± 7.09 ml in the bc-EIS group. The mean band per session was 6.13 ± 0.86. The rate of eradication after one to three rounds of bc-EIS was obviously higher than that of the EVL group (89.36%, 97.87%, and 100% vs. 37.5%, 43.75%, and 47.92%, respectively). Retrosternal pain or discomfort in the bc-EIS group was slightly lower than that in the EVL group (23.4%, 11/47 vs. 31.25%, 15/48). Two and five patients showed mild abdominal bloating and distension between the bc-EIS and EVL groups, respectively (2/47, 4.26% vs. 5/48, 10.42% P > 0.05). Nausea and vomiting were reported in one patient (1/47, 2.13%) in the bc-EIS group and three patients (3/48, 6.25%) in the EVL group. However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups (P > 0.05). No fatal or severe complications, such as esophageal perforation, esophageal stricture or ectopic embolism, were observed.

Conclusion

The bc-EIS method was effective in eradicating EVs and was accompanied by fewer complications.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09412-6.

Endoscopic Treatment of Esophageal Varices

Acute variceal bleeding is a complication of portal hypertension, usually due to cirrhosis, with high morbidity and mortality. There are 3 scenarios for endoscopic treatment of esophageal varices: prevention of first variceal bleed, treatment of active variceal bleed, and prevention of rebleeding. Patients with cirrhosis should be screened for esophageal varices. Recommended endoscopic therapy for acute variceal bleeding is endoscopic variceal banding. Although banding is the first-choice treatment, sclerotherapy may have a role. Treatment with Sengstaken-Blakemore tube or self-expanding covered metallic esophageal stent can be used for acute variceal bleeding refractory to standard pharmacologic and endoscopic therapy.

Defining the advantages and exposing the limitations of endoscopic variceal ligation in controlling acute bleeding and achieving complete variceal eradication

BACKGROUND

Bleeding esophageal varices (BEV) is a potentially life-threatening complication in patients with portal hypertension with mortality rates as high as 25% within six weeks of the index variceal bleed. After control of the initial bleeding episode patients should enter a long-term surveillance program with endoscopic intervention combined with non-selective β-blockers to prevent further bleeding and eradicate EV.

AIM

To assess the efficacy of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) in controlling acute variceal bleeding, preventing variceal recurrence and rebleeding and achieving complete eradication of esophageal varices (EV) in patients who present with BEV.

METHODS

A prospectively documented single-center database was used to retrospectively identify all patients with BEV who were treated with EVL between 2000 and 2018. Control of acute bleeding, variceal recurrence, rebleeding, eradication and survival were analyzed using Baveno assessment criteria.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty patients (100 men, 40 women; mean age 50 years; range, 21–84 years; Child-Pugh grade A = 32; B = 48; C = 60) underwent 160 emergency and 298 elective EVL interventions during a total of 928 endoscopy sessions. One hundred and fourteen (81%) of the 140 patients had variceal bleeding that was effectively controlled during the index banding procedure and never bled again from EV, while 26 (19%) patients had complicated and refractory variceal bleeding. EVL controlled the acute sentinel variceal bleed during the first endoscopic intervention in 134 of 140 patients (95.7%). Six patients required balloon tamponade for control and 4 other patients rebled in hospital. Overall 5-d endoscopic failure to control variceal bleeding was 7.1% (n = 10) and four patients required a salvage transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt. Index admission mortality was 14.2% (n = 20). EV were completely eradicated in 50 of 111 patients (45%) who survived > 3 mo of whom 31 recurred and 3 rebled. Sixteen (13.3%) of 120 surviving patients subsequently had 21 EV rebleeding episodes and 10 patients bled from other sources after discharge from hospital. Overall rebleeding from all sources after 2 years was 21.7% (n = 26). Sixty-nine (49.3%) of the 140 patients died, mainly due to liver failure (n = 46) during follow-up. Cumulative survival for the 140 patients was 71.4% at 1 year, 65% at 3 years, 60% at 5 years and 52.1% at 10 years.

CONCLUSION

EVL was highly effective in controlling the sentinel variceal bleed with an overall 5-day failure to control bleeding of 7.1%. Although repeated EVL achieved complete variceal eradication in less than half of patients with BEV, of whom 62% recurred, there was a significant reduction in subsequent rebleeding.

Banana may be forbidden after endoscopic variceal ligation: a case report

Acute variceal hemorrhage (AVH) is a devastating complication of liver cirrhosis. Endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) is a useful endoscopic treatment for AVH with few complications. However, the issue regarding management of early re-bleeding after EVL still needs to be concerned. Furthermore, the dietary principle after EVL is unclear. There is no consensus regarding what food should be eaten after EVL. In this paper, we reported a patient who ate a banana after an EVL and then developed early re-bleeding episodes.