Endoscopic management of acute esophageal variceal bleeding

Esophageal varices develop in the setting of portal hypertension, most commonly caused by cirrhosis. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy is considered the gold standard for both diagnosis and treatment of acute variceal bleeding. In this review, we highlight the management of both acute and refractory bleeding from esophageal varices, with an emphasis on endoscopic therapies, including injection sclerotherapy, band ligation, and esophageal stent placement.     

内镜治疗食管胃静脉曲张破裂出血及其长期管理

<正>食管胃静脉曲张是门静脉高压症的并发症,主要包括食管静脉曲张(EV)和胃静脉曲张(GOV)。门静脉高压主要指门静脉压力>14 mm Hg/20 cm H₂O(1.96 kPa),或肝门静脉压力梯度>5 mm Hg。主要由肝硬化导致,也可见于其他疾病。在我国,80%～85%门静脉压力升高是由肝硬化导致的。然而,无论何种原因所致的门静脉高压均可出现EV,严重时可致食管胃静脉曲张破裂出血(EVB),从而威胁患者生命。     

肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血序贯治疗的临床应用价值

目的 评价曲张静脉套扎术(EVL)+不同硬化剂曲张静脉硬化术(EVS)序贯治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血的疗效及安全性.方法 回顾性总结314例肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血内镜治疗患者的临床资料,包括单纯EVL治疗者112例(EVL组)、单纯鱼肝油酸钠硬化治疗者48例(EVS1组)、单纯聚桂醇硬化治疗者40例(EVS2组)、套扎+鱼肝油酸钠硬化序贯治疗者26例(EVLS1组)、套扎+聚桂醇硬化序贯治疗者88例(EVLS2组),统计各组曲张静脉治疗有效率、静脉曲张复发率、并发症发生率并进行对比分析.结果 EVL组、EVS1组、EVS2组、EVIS1组、EVLS2组曲张静脉治疗有效率比较差异均无统计学意义[85.7％ (96/112)、83.3％ (40/48)、92.5％ (37/40)、92.3％(24/26)、94.3％ (83/88),P＞0.05],但EVLS1组和EVLS2组曲张静脉完全消失率均明显高于其他3组[88.5％(23/26)和87.5％(77/88)比58.0％(65/112)、62.5％(30/48)、70.0％(28/40),P＜0.05],而EVLS1组与EVLS2组比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).EVS1组再出血率最高(18.8％,9/48) (P ＜0.05),其次是EVL组(11.6％,13/112),均高于EVS2组、EVLS1组和EVLS2组[7.5％(3/40)、7.7％ (2/26)、6.8％ (6/88),P＜0.05],后3组再出血率相似(P＞0.05).治疗后随访6 ～18个月,EVL组静脉曲张复发26例(23.2％,26/112),EVS1组复发8例(16.7％,8/48),EVS2组复发6例(15.0％,6/40),EVLS1组复发4例(15.4％,4/26),EVLS2组复发9例(10.2％,9/88);EVL组复发率最高(P＜0.05),EVLS2组复发率最低(P＜0.05),EVS1组、EVS2组和EVLS1组复发率相似(P＞0.05).EVS1组总体并发症发生率(32.2％,49/152)明显高于其他4组(P＜0.05),而EVL组(14.5％,32/220)、EVLS2组(19.6％,22/112)、EVLS1组(22.7％,25/110)、EVLS2组(15.8％,34/229)4组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 EVL+鱼肝油酸钠EVS或+聚桂醇EVS序贯治疗肝硬化食管静脉曲张破裂出血是安全而有效的,尤以EVL+聚桂醇EVS序贯治疗效果显著,有可能成为治疗食管静脉曲张出血并防止再出血的最佳选择.     

The management of variceal bleeding

Variceal bleeding has a high mortality, as the majority of patients have cirrhosis, with hepatic coma, renal failure, ascites and clotting deficiencies as complicating factors. Bleeding varices must therefore be treated as an emergency. Resuscitation, endoscopic diagnosis and haemostasis are the cornerstones of treatment.Once bleeding varices have been identified, attempts to stop the bleeding must be made at once as this will lessen the chances of hepatic failure developing. Endoscopic sclerotherapy at the time of diagnosis is the best available treatment at present, although profusely bleeding varices can be difficult to see and inject. In these circumstances the passage of a Sengstaken tube should stop the bleeding, allowing later sclerotherapy to be successful. If rebleeding recurs and cannot be controlled, oesophageal transection with a stapling gun may be life-saving, although the varices may later recur and long-term endoscopic follow-up will be necessary. Portacaval shunting and the distal splenorenal shunt involve arduous surgery and are followed by a significant incidence of hepatic encephalopathy; they should be reserved for those few cases when simpler measures have failed, although shunts do lead to permanent decompression of the portal system.The acute variceal bleed may also be dealt with pharmacologically. Vasopressin, used in combination with nitroglycerin to lessen the harmful side-effects, is cheaper and as effective as terlipressin or somatostatin and its synthetic analogue octreotide.Several courses of injection sclerotherapy will be required to eliminate oesophageal varices. Thereafter, long-term follow-up will be necessary to deal with any recurrence. The place of non-selective beta-blockers is still contentious, but they do reduce portal pressure and may lessen the chance of rebleeding. There is also a growing role for hepatic transplantation, which not only eliminates the varices but also restores liver function to normal and greatly reduces the risk of subsequent hepatoma development.     

Periprocedural management of acute variceal bleeding

Acute variceal hemorrhage is a life-threatening complication of cirrhosis and certain non-cirrhotic conditions. The incidence of esophagogastric varices ranges from 20%-80% among cirrhotic patients, establishing it as a well-known health concern. Management of variceal bleeding has advanced over the past 30 years but an overall mortality rate of 10%-20% remains. Patient death is often due to complications of hemodynamic instability, coagulopathy, infection, malnutrition, or subsequent rebleeding. Herein, we highlight the periprocedural management of variceal hemorrhage and its complications.     

经内镜栓塞术联合套扎术治疗食管胃底静脉曲张出血的疗效观察

目的探讨胃底静脉曲张栓塞术联合内镜下食管静脉曲张套扎术（EVL）治疗肝硬化上消化道出血的疗效。方法经急诊胃镜检查发现活动性胃底静脉曲张出血合并Ⅱ°以上食管静脉曲张且排除其他病因的上消化道出血患者共156例,分为治疗组和对照组,治疗组胃底静脉曲张组织粘合剂栓塞同时食管静脉EVL治疗;对照组胃底静脉曲张组织粘合剂栓塞治疗2个月后行食管静脉EVL。结果两组均未发生与治疗相关的并发症。止血成功率治疗组为96．3％（77／80）,对照组为97．4％（74／76）,（P〉0．05）;近期再出血率治疗组为6．4％（5／78）,对照组为21．3％（16／75）,两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）;两组患者随访6个月,再出血率分别为13．0％（9／69）、25．4％（17／67）,差异有统计学性意义（P〈0．05）。胃底静脉曲张改善总有效率治疗组和对照组分别为61．6％、59．1％,食管曲张静脉改善总有效率为74．0％、67．9％,差异均无统计学意义。结论胃底静脉曲张栓塞联合EVL是治疗肝硬化胃底静脉曲张出血并食管静脉曲张的安全有效方法,同时联合治疗更能降低再出血率。     

Endoscopic variceal ligation plus propranolol versus endoscopic variceal ligation alone in primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The role of propranolol in addition to EVL in the prevention of first variceal bleed has not been evaluated. This prospective randomized controlled trial compared endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) with propranolol and EVL alone in the prevention of first variceal bleed among patients with high-risk varices. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and forty-four consecutive patients with high-risk varices were randomly allocated to EVL plus propranolol (Gr I, n = 72) or EVL alone (Gr II, n = 72). EVL was done at 2-wk interval till obliteration of varices. In Gr I, incremental dosage of propranolol (sufficient to reduce heart rate to 55 beats/min or 25% reduction from baseline) was administered and continued after obliteration of varices. The endpoints of the study were bleeding and death. RESULTS: The two groups of patients had comparable baseline characteristics; follow-up (Gr I: 13.1 +/- 11.5 months, Gr II: 11.2 +/- 9.9 months), number of cirrhotic and noncirrhotic portal hypertension patients [Gr I 64 (88.6%) and 8 (11.4%), Gr II 63 (87.5%) and 9 (12.5%)], and frequency of Child's A (15 vs 18), B (38 vs 35), and C (19 vs 19). The mean daily propranolol dose achieved in Gr I was 95.6 +/- 38.6 mg. Eleven patients had bleeds, 5 in Gr I and 6 in Gr II. All patients bled before the obliteration of varices, the actuarial probability of first bleed at 20 months was 7% in Gr I and 11% in Gr II (p= 0.72). Six patients died in the combination and 8 in EVL group. All deaths in Gr I were due to nonbleed-related causes, while in Gr II, 2 deaths were bleed related, the actuarial probability of death at 20 months was 8% and 15%, respectively (p= 0.37). The probability of bleed-related death was comparable (p= 0.15). At the end of follow-up, 4 patients in Gr I and 11 in Gr II had recurrence of varices (p= 0.03). Side effects on propranolol were seen in 22% patients, in 8% it had to be stopped. There were no serious complications of EVL. CONCLUSIONS: Both EVL plus propranolol and EVL alone are effective in primary prophylaxis of bleed from high-risk varices. Addition of propranolol does not decrease the probability of first bleed or death in patients on EVL. However, the recurrence of varices is lower if propranolol is added to EVL.     

Endoscopic variceal band ligation compared with propranolol for prophylaxis of first variceal bleeding

Administration of nonselective beta-blockers in prophylaxis of first variceal bleeding is not suitable for all patients. Thus, we evaluated endoscopic variceal band ligation (EVBL) in primary prevention of bleeding in patients with cirrhosis and large esophageal varices. A total of 73 consecutive patients with liver cirrhosis and large esophageal varices without a history of gastrointestinal bleeding were randomized to receive either EVBL or propranolol and were followed for up to 18 months. Forty patients underwent EVBL and 33 patients received propranolol. Variceal bleeding occurred in 2 patients in the EVBL (5%) and in 2 patients in the propranolol group (6%, NS). The 18 month actuarial risk for first variceal bleed was 5% in the EVBL (95% CI, 0-12%) and 20% in the propranolol group (95% CI, 0-49%, NS). The actuarial probability of death at 18 months of follow-up was 5% (95% CI, 0-11%) in the EVBL group and 7% (95% CI, 0-17%, NS) in the propranolol arm. In conclusion, EVBL was an effective and safe alternative to propranolol in primary prophylaxis of bleeding in patients with large esophageal varices.     

Acute variceal bleeding: general management

TREATMENT STRATEGIES FOR ACUTE VARICEAL BLEEDING Backgound Acute variceal bleeding has a significant mortality which ranges form 5% to 50% in patients with cirrhosis[1].Overall survival is probably improving,because of new therapeutic approaches,and improved medical care.However,mortality is still closely related to failure to control hacmorrhage or carly rebleeding,which is a distinct characteristic of portal hypertensive bleeding and occures in as many as 50% of patients in the first days to 6 weeks after admission et al[2].     

高位食管静脉曲张破裂出血患者内镜诊治经验:10年单中心回顾性分析

目的 探索高位食管静脉曲张破裂出血(SEVB)患者内镜诊治特点及预后。方法 2010年1月～2020年1月哈尔滨医科大学附属第二医院内镜中心行内镜诊治的食管胃静脉曲张(GEV)患者25539例,其中SEVB者12例(0.4‰),其中采用急诊内镜下止血5例,非急诊内镜下止血7例。结果 12例SEVB患者中,乙型肝炎肝硬化5例,丙型肝炎肝硬化4例,酒精性肝炎肝硬化2例,不明原因性肝硬化1例;11例有明显的呕血、黑便、便血或周围循环障碍临床表现;5例急诊内镜下即时止血均成功,7例非急诊内镜下即时止血成功6例,无统计学差异(P>0.05);9例单用食管静脉曲张套扎术(EVL)治疗,其他采取硬化剂注射、EVL联合组织胶注射、EVL联合硬化剂和组织胶注射各1例;术后发生不良反应7例;随访8例患者(31.0±28.5)个月,近期再出血1例,远期再出血5例。在7例全程随访患者中,择期行脾切除术者1例,脾切除术联合贲门周围血管离断术2例,全因病死率为42.9%。结论 对于SEVB患者多采用EVL治疗,即时止血效果好,但远期预后仍差。术后需联合其他方法治疗以长期控制门脉高压症,降低远期再出血和死亡风险。     

Nonendoscopic management of acute esophageal variceal bleeding

Acute esophageal variceal bleeding is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension in patients with liver cirrhosis. Its management has improved over the past several years, leading to a significant reduction in rebleeding episodes and in bleeding-related deaths. Although endoscopic therapy is an integral part in the management of the acute variceal bleeder, pharmacologic and radiologic therapies are important interventions, in addition to optimal supportive care. Herein, we highlight the nonendoscopic management of acute esophageal variceal bleeding.     

急诊内镜治疗食管贲门胃底静脉曲张活动出血200例

目的:探讨急诊内镜治疗食管贲门胃底静脉曲张活动出血的疗效. 方法:内镜下套扎、硬化和栓塞等治疗手段治疗200例食管贲门胃底静脉曲张活动出血.结果: 200例食管贲门胃底静脉曲张活动出血患者, 经急诊内镜治疗仅4例术中死亡, 止血成功率98%. 术后2 wk内因为各种原因死亡32例, 病死率16%. 结论:食管静脉破裂出血, 贲门静脉曲张破裂出血, 套扎效果好. 胃底静脉曲张出血应首选注射人体组织胶栓塞.     

Endoscopic sclerotherapy of gastric variceal bleeding with N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate

BACKGROUND: bleeding from gastric varices is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension. Fundal and isolated gastric varices are at high risk for variceal bleeding. In this study, we report our experience with n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate (BC) in patients with large gastric varices. STUDY: twenty-nine patients (15 male, 14 female) with large fundal varices (active bleed, 5; passive bleed after eradication of esophageal varices, 13; unbled fundal varices with red color sign, 11) underwent endoscopic sclerotherapy with BC. Cirrhosis was present in 13 patients; extrahepatic portal venous obstruction, in 13; and noncirrhotic portal fibrosis, in 3. N-Butyl-2-cyanoacrylate after mixing with lipiodol (1:1) was given to the initial 10 patients and was given in undiluted form to the remaining patients, followed by injection of 0.7 mL of distilled water to rinse the injection catheter. One to three injections (0.5-1 mL) were given until all gastric varices became hard. All patients were on long-term endoscopic sclerotherapy or variceal ligation programs for eradication of esophageal varices. RESULTS: acute variceal bleeding was controlled in all five patients with BC injections. Eradication of gastric varices was achieved in 27 (93.1%) patients (20 patients in 1 session, 4 patients in 2, and 3 patients in 3-6). Rebleeding occurred in three (10.3%) patients who responded to repeat BC injections. Complications related to the procedure occurred in two (6.9%) patients. In one patient, the needle became impacted into the tissue adhesive. This patient died 5 days later because of massive upper gastrointestinal bleeding. In the other patient, there was distal embolization. CONCLUSIONS: sclerotherapy of gastric varices with BC is a safe and an effective treatment for control of bleeding and eradication. The needle should be withdrawn immediately after the BC injection to prevent its impaction into the tissue adhesive.     

Endoscopic variceal ligation versus propranolol in prophylaxis of first variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis

BACKGROUND AND AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) with propranolol in prophylaxis on the rate of first esophageal variceal bleeding in patients with cirrhosis. METHODS: A prospective, randomized trial was conducted in 100 cirrhotic patients with no history of previous upper gastrointestinal bleeding and with esophageal varices endoscopically judged to be at high risk of hemorrhage. The end-points of the study were bleeding and death. RESULTS: Life-table curves showed that prophylactic EVL and propranolol were similarly effective for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding (11/50 [22%]vs 12/50 [24%]; P = 0.68) and overall mortality (14/50 [28%]vs 12/50 [24%]; P = 0.49). The 2-year cumulative bleeding rate was 18% (9/50) in the EVL group and 16% (8/50) in the propranolol group. The 2-year cumulative mortality rate was 28% (14/50) in the EVL group and 24% (12/50) in the propranolol group. Comparison of Kaplan-Meier estimates of the time to death of both groups showed no significant difference in mortality in both groups (P = 0.86). Patients undergoing EVL had few treatment failures and died mainly of hepatic failure. In the propranolol group, the mean daily dosage of the drug was 68.2 +/- 32.8 mg, which was sufficient to reduce the pulse rate by 25%. 20% of patients withdrew from propranolol treatment due to adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylaxis EVL is as effective and as safe as treatment with propranolol in decreasing the incidence of first variceal bleeding and death in cirrhotic patients with high-risk esophageal varices.     

Endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy as primary treatment for bleeding esophageal varices

In this study of 75 patients with bleeding esophageal varices we confirm not only the ability of endoscopic variceal sclerotherapy (EVS) to control acute bleeding episodes but to effect variceal obliteration that confers a significant survival advantage, regardless of initial Child's classification. Survival correlates directly with the degree of hepatic dysfunction, although all patients regardless of Child's status have a statistically significant survival advantage when treated until esophageal variceal obliteration is achieved. All patients treated with EVS should be followed for life, but virtually all follow-up can be done on an outpatient basis. Shunt surgery should be reserved for: (a) patients whose acute bleeding cannot be controlled with EVS at the time of index bleed; and (b) patients who rebleed repeatedly or uncontrollably from gastric or duodenal varices. EVS is more cost-effective than other available treatments. It also effectively stabilizes potential candidates for orthotopic liver transplantation. Despite a progressive increase in the admissions for bleeding varices at our institution, the introduction of EVS has been associated with a significant decline in portosystemic shunt therapy. We believe that EVS is now the first-line treatment for all patients with bleeding esophageal varices.     

Endoscopic ablation with cyanoacrylate glue for isolated gastric variceal bleeding

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ablation with cyanoacrylate glue may achieve gastric variceal obliteration. A prospective evaluation of its therapeutic effects on bleeding gastric varices was conducted, focusing on endoscopic features. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with bleeding gastric varices underwent endoscopic ablation with cyanoacrylate. RESULTS: Patients with localized-type gastric varices (n = 14) had a better clinical course in terms of recurrent bleeding, variceal eradication, and survival than those with diffuse-type gastric varices (n = 23) after endoscopic ablation with cyanoacrylate. These clinical effects were related to the vascular anatomy of the gastric varices as determined by varicography and 3-dimensional CT. Type 1 vascular anatomy (one varicose vessel without noticeable ramifications) was much more common (86%) in localized-type gastric varices, whereas type 2 vascular anatomy (multiple varicose vessels with complex connecting ramifications) was found almost exclusively (91%) in diffuse-type gastric varices. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ablation with cyanoacrylate is an effective and safe procedure for patients with bleeding gastric varices. Determination of variceal anatomy may be useful for improving treatment strategies for such patients.     

Cost assessments in the management of variceal bleeding

This article defines and reviews the methods for economic cost assessments in the management of variceal hemorrhage. It also presents and discusses the results of cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, and cost assessment studies on the management of variceal hemorrhage and proposes future directions for additional studies.