Risk Factors and On-site Rescue Treatments for Endoscopic Variceal Ligation Failure

Risk factors and predictive nomograms for bedside emergency endoscopic treatment following endotracheal intubation in cirrhotic patients with esophagogastric variceal bleeding

Data on emergency endoscopic treatment following endotracheal intubation in patients with esophagogastric variceal bleeding (EGVB) remain limited. This retrospective study aimed to explore the efficacy and risk factors of bedside emergency endoscopic treatment following endotracheal intubation in severe EGVB patients admitted in Intensive Care Unit. A total of 165 EGVB patients were enrolled and allocated to training and validation sets in a randomly stratified manner. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent risk factors to construct nomograms for predicting the prognosis related to endoscopic hemostasis failure rate and 6-week mortality. In result, white blood cell counts (p = 0.03), Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score (p = 0.001) and comorbid shock (p = 0.005) were selected as independent clinical predictors of endoscopic hemostasis failure. High CTP score (p = 0.003) and the presence of gastric varices (p = 0.009) were related to early rebleeding after emergency endoscopic treatment. Furthermore, the 6-week mortality was significantly associated with MELD scores (p = 0.002), the presence of hepatic encephalopathy (p = 0.045) and postoperative rebleeding (p < 0.001). Finally, we developed practical nomograms to discern the risk of the emergency endoscopic hemostasis failure and 6-week mortality for EGVB patients. In conclusion, our study may help identify severe EGVB patients with higher hemostasis failure rate or 6-week mortality for earlier implementation of salvage treatments.

Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of endoscopic band ligation in the treatment of bleeding from mild to moderate gastric varices type 1

BACKGROUND

According to practice guidelines, endoscopic band ligation (EBL) and endoscopic tissue adhesive injection (TAI) are recommended for treating bleeding from esophagogastric varices. However, EBL and TAI are known to cause serious complications, such as hemorrhage from dislodged ligature rings caused by EBL and hemorrhage from operation-related ulcers resulting from TAI. However, the optimal therapy for mild to moderate type 1 gastric variceal hemorrhage (GOV1) has not been determined. Therefore, the aim of this study was to discover an individualized treatment for mild to moderate GOV1.

AIM

To compare the efficacy, safety and costs of EBL and TAI for the treatment of mild and moderate GOV1.

METHODS

A clinical analysis of the data retrieved from patients with mild or moderate GOV1 gastric varices who were treated under endoscopy was also conducted. Patients were allocated to an EBL group or an endoscopic TAI group. The differences in the incidence of varicose relief, operative time, operation success rate, mortality rate within 6 wk, rebleeding rate, 6-wk operation-related ulcer healing rate, complication rate and average operation cost were compared between the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

The total effective rate of the two treatments was similar, but the efficacy of EBL (66.7%) was markedly better than that of TAI (39.2%) (P < 0.05). The operation success rate in both groups was 100%, and the 6-wk mortality rate in both groups was 0%. The average operative time (26 min) in the EBL group was significantly shorter than that in the TAI group (46 min) (P < 0.01). The rate of delayed postoperative rebleeding in the EBL group was significantly lower than that in the TAI group (11.8% vs 45.1%) (P < 0.01). At 6 wk after the operation, the healing rate of operation-related ulcers in the EBL group was 80.4%, which was significantly greater than that in the TAI group (35.3%) (P < 0.01). The incidence of postoperative complications in the two groups was similar. The average cost and other related economic factors were greater for the EBL than for the TAI (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

For mild to moderate GOV1, patients with EBL had a greater one-time varix eradication rate, a greater 6-wk operation-related ulcer healing rate, a lower delayed rebleeding rate and a lower cost than patients with TAI.

One in four patients with gastrointestinal bleeding develops shock or hemodynamic instability: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hemodynamic instability and shock are associated with untoward outcomes in gastrointestinal bleeding. However, there are no studies in the existing literature on the proportion of patients who developed these outcomes after gastrointestinal bleeding.

AIM

To determine the pooled event rates in the available literature and specify them based on the bleeding source.

METHODS

The protocol was registered on PROSPERO in advance (CRD42021283258). A systematic search was performed in three databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL) on 14th October 2021. Pooled proportions with 95%CI were calculated with a random-effects model. A subgroup analysis was carried out based on the time of assessment (on admission or during hospital stay). Heterogeneity was assessed by Higgins and Thompson's I2 statistics. The Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool was used for the risk of bias assessment. The Reference Citation Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/) tool was applied to obtain the latest highlight articles.

RESULTS

We identified 11589 records, of which 220 studies were eligible for data extraction. The overall proportion of shock and hemodynamic instability in general gastrointestinal bleeding patients was 0.25 (95%CI: 0.17-0.36, I2 = 100%). In non-variceal bleeding, the proportion was 0.22 (95%CI: 0.14-0.31, I2 = 100%), whereas it was 0.25 (95%CI: 0.19-0.32, I2 = 100%) in variceal bleeding. The proportion of patients with colonic diverticular bleeding who developed shock or hemodynamic instability was 0.12 (95%CI: 0.06-0.22, I2 = 90%). The risk of bias was low, and heterogeneity was high in all analyses.

CONCLUSION

One in five, one in four, and one in eight patients develops shock or hemodynamic instability on admission or during hospitalization in the case of non-variceal, variceal, and colonic diverticular bleeding, respectively.

Risk factors for emergency endoscopic variceal ligation treatment failure of acute variceal bleeding

OBJECTIVE

To determine the risk factors for emergency endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) failure in acute variceal bleeding (AVB).

METHODS

Data from 161 cirrhosis patients with oesophageal variceal bleeding who underwent emergency EVL treatment at the Second Hospital of Hebei Medical University from January 2018 to May 2021 were retrospectively analysed. Enrolled patients were divided into a successful treatment group and a failed treatment group. The variables studied were demographic, clinical, imaging, laboratory, and endoscopic data from the enrolled patients.

RESULTS

Of the enrolled patients, 19 patients experienced emergency EVL failure. Of these patients, nine underwent emergency endoscopic treatment again, six patients were treated with a Sengstaken-Blakemore tube for haemostasis and endoscopic treatment, four patients received drug therapy. The presence of portal vein thrombosis (PVT) in the failure group was higher than that in the success group (p < .05). Active bleeding on endoscopy was associated with emergency EVL failure for patients with Child-Pugh class C (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Child-Pugh class C with active bleeding on endoscopy or the presence of PVT could increase the risk of emergency EVL failure. The patient's condition should be fully evaluated before emergency endoscopic treatment to reduce the risk of failure.

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.

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.

Clinical outcomes of sedation during emergency endoscopic band ligation for variceal bleeding: Multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Few studies have directly compared the efficacy of sedated- and un-sedated endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) for acute variceal bleeding. We aimed to determine whether sedation during EVL in patients with variceal bleeding is safe and effective.

METHODS

We analyzed data from patients who underwent EVL for acute variceal bleeding according to sedation in six hospitals of Hallym University Medical Center. The primary endpoint was treatment failure, defined as a failure to control bleeding, death during EVL, or rebleeding within 5 days. Secondary endpoints included the procedure time, adverse events, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Of 1,300 patients who were included, only 430 (33.1%) received sedation during EVL. Propofol alone was used for sedation in 85% of sedated-EVLs. The mean procedure time in the sedation group was shorter than that of the non-sedation group (12.4 ± 9.5 min versus 13.8 ± 9.4 min, P = 0.010). The proportion of treatment failure did not differ between the groups (7.4% versus 9.1%, P = 0.374). In the multivariable analysis, an AIMS65 score ≥2 and blood transfusion within 72 hours were associated with treatment failure of EVL; however, the use of sedation was not (odds ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.96 [0.60-1.51]). Adverse events during EVL and hepatic encephalopathy did not differ between the two groups. Sedation also did not affect the 30-day mortality (hazard ratio [95% CI] = 0.99 [0.66-1.47]).

CONCLUSION

Sedation reduced the procedure time of EVL. Sedation is safe to use during EVL for variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis.